Nostalgia & History > A Very Pretty Business Car, GN A28

I took this photograph of her on the evening of June 14, 1964 near the Depot in St. Paul, MN. She was GN business car A28, a Pullman Standard lightweight open-end observation car. Here is what I gleaned about her in the online "Great Northern Railway Co., Classification and Numbering of Locomotives and Equipment, List No.34", January 1, 1954." A28 is/was of solid steel construction, had a Waukesha Enginator (diesel-fueled electricity generator), was air conditioned (Waukesha), and had roller bearings and electro-pneumatic brakes. She is a big girl with a length over her buffers of 85 ft., 0 in. Eleven other business cars were listed.

A28 was renumbered to A4 in 1969 and became BN Kootenai River (see: http://www.fobnr.org/bncarlist/passenger/bnpa8a.jpg ) and without a name change is now in the BNSF fleet (see: http://www.qstation.org/BNSF_Biz_Cars/jpeg/BNSF_car_82.jpg ).

BTW, The Minnesota Transportation Museum has GN A11 operating on their railroad in Wisconsin.

I always call locomotives "she". I think this is the first time I've called a passenger car a "she". Look at the picture with the evening sun-light reflecting off her. Yes, she was very pretty.


Enjoy,
Marty Bernard

---

Nice pic, Marty
The old GN A-28 is still on the property
but did undergo a name swap before the BNSF merger
with a heavyweight ex-SLSF business car, becoming
the "Canadian River."
Nowadays, the "Canadian River" is one of the cars
stuffed and mounted at BNSF world headquarters
while the new "Kootenai River" ( actually a much
older car ) has kept its name but has been demoted
to test car service.

So BNSF should bring her back as a heritage unPOit!

Here it is, in its latest incarnation. Hard to believe it's the same car

---

I have a hard time believing that is the same car.
1)Why would they add corrugations to a smooth side?
2)Where are the two large windows in the lounge area?
3)Removing all that paint would make the stainless dull.

BTW Marty's shot is beautiful.



Uncle Joe,Seffner,Fl.

retcsxcfm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have a hard time believing that is the same
> car.

You are right. You'd never know that this is the former GN A-28.

> 1)Why would they add corrugations to a smooth side?

The BNSF has done very odd things to their biz car fleet over the last 15 years. They actually ordered-brand new reproduction PS/ACF fluting to apply to formerly smooth-sided cars to make them match existing fluted equipment. Note that even the roof on the A-28 has been sheathed in stainless.

> 2)Where are the two large windows in the lounge area?

Those large end windows were reduced in size presumably to make all the windows uniform. Why even bother doing that? Who knows? Maybe that's what Matt Rose wanted done. It doesn't matter anyway since BNSF ran a bulldozer through the interior of this once fine example of the carbuilders art and it is now basically just one big room with large tables for meetings.

> 3)Removing all that paint would make the stainless dull.

That is a commonly held myth that isn't true. Stainless cars that were painted only had to have a very good grade of self-etching primer for the paint to adhere to the stainless. Think former UP "Pacific" series sleepers that were stripped to natural stainless by Amtrak. The stainless shined like brand-new after the paint was removed.

The 4 wheel trucks almost seem odd in the NP version. Sure looks like it would do best with 6 wheel trucks. But yet 4 wheel looks fine in BNSF version.

Tominde Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The 4 wheel trucks almost seem odd in the NP
> version. Sure looks like it would do best with 6
> wheel trucks. But yet 4 wheel looks fine in BNSF
> version.

This car was on the heavy side as built, but not heavy enough to require 6 wheel trucks. Some RR's added 6 wheel trucks to lightweight biz cars just for the perceived ride quality but not due to the weight.

Looks as if the A-28 is being put onto or removed from the "Gopher"
or "Badger" the Duluth-St. Paul train. The car ahead appears to
be the 'Twin Ports' or the 'Twin Cities' the two heavyweight
parlor cars used in that service. Note the built in markers and
the roof mounted radio antenna on the parlor car.

Topfuel Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tominde Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The 4 wheel trucks almost seem odd in the NP
> > version. Sure looks like it would do best with
> 6
> > wheel trucks. But yet 4 wheel looks fine in
> BNSF
> > version.
>
> This car was on the heavy side as built, but not
> heavy enough to require 6 wheel trucks. Some RR's
> added 6 wheel trucks to lightweight biz cars just
> for the perceived ride quality but not due to the
> weight.

Ask anyone who had ridden on a biz car. The six wheel
truck DOES provide a superior ride, that is why Santa
Fe had car 50 built with four wheel trucks, but the
subsequent cars were built with six wheel GSI OSH
trucks. It is not just "perceived".

the Santa Fe's two beautiful Budd-built business cars, the Topeka and the Santa Fe were built with
6-wheel OSH trucks but sometime in the late pre-BNSF days, they were retrucked by Topeka shops
with 4-wheel OSH trucks
Reason as it was explained to me by the guy in charge of the business car fleet was they were "overbuilt"

SR2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Ask anyone who had ridden on a biz car. The six
> wheel
> truck DOES provide a superior ride, that is why
> Santa
> Fe had car 50 built with four wheel trucks, but
> the
> subsequent cars were built with six wheel GSI OSH
> trucks. It is not just "perceived".

I take exception to that statement, but we are all entitled to our opinions.

Ride depends on the truck, the car weight and the way the suspension is set up.

Former UP Biz car 105 originally had 6 wheel trucks. When it was sold and rebuilt as a Private Car the trucks had been appropriated by the UP for use under another car. 4 wheel, dome car, trucks were applied and the car rides better than almost any car I have ever ridden on.

px320 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ride depends on the truck, the car weight and the
> way the suspension is set up.

Stan's correct. These factors, among others, are very important to a proper riding car - not so much whether the car has 4 or 6 wheel trucks. And often overlooked in the discussion, but perhaps most important is the condition of the track. If the track is perfect, most cars will ride quite well, as one would expect. If the track is rough, even a car that is considered to be quite smooth riding will ride poorly.