Does anyone know details about caboose operations in the 1940s-the merger? I believe that cabooses were assigned a specific crew and a specific subdivision early and later that changed. I would be interested to know more about the caboose/crew assignments and the approximate time that practice changed. Thanks in advance for the help. Ship IT on the Frisco! Rick
My grandpa, who was a conductor for the Frisco working out of the Cherokee Yard, told me that once upon a time each conductor had his own assigned car, but then, by the time he worked his way up from fireman to conductor it had changed so that conductors weren't given a specific caboose.
Rick, I'll be interested in hearing if others have information. This one's crossed my mind a few times. Assuming that cabooses stayed with their SL-SF crews in my operating era (c. 1943) it adds a WHOLE new element to yard operations. Model Railroad Planning 1996 has a great article on NKP yard ops in Frankfort, Indiana in this era; from its description, yard crews stayed quite busy shifting the cabooses around so that they'd stay with their crews. It sounds like great fun to me! Best Regards,
I know the 1100 series Santa Fe style cabooses (they actually came from the Santa Fe) were used in local service and lots of them were stenciled "Local Use Only". The local on the old Oklahoma sub that ran from OKC to Tulsa had the 1145 until it met an untimely end from a fire. The 1400 series cabooses did not have radios and were mostly used in local service at least in the late 70s. The 1200s were the cadillacs with the high speed special trucks and were used on through freights. The 1700s both wide vision and bay window were built from box cars in Springfield and even though I remember the new paint smell from the bay window cabooses in '79 the crews didn't like their ride near as much as the 1200s. After the BN merger the 1200s were the first Frisco cabooses to leave the roster due to their special trucks and higher voltage generator and battery system. I think it was like 86 volts but it has been 30 years so don't hold me to that exact number. They didn't match the BN's 12 volt systems. I recall seeing some red and white renumbered cabooses as late as '86 but not long after that they all went away. Hope this helps. I'm sitting at East Degroat on the Cherokee sub waiting on a train as usual to make sure a track indication doesn't come back in. The concrete CTC house here has a Frisco emblem cast into the floor! I miss the Frisco!! |-| Steve
Steve, In 1979 the Frisco's Consolidated Freight Car Shops (West Shops) built 10 new bay window cabooses SLSF 1726-1735. These cabooses were constructed from the ground up using all new components. This series of cabooses were not rebuilt form former boxcars. Most major components were fabricated from scratch in the shops including the cushioned underframe, wood floors, sides, ends, bays, handrails and seat cushions. New commercial components were used for the trucks, brake systems, x-panel roofs, windows, lights, radios, stoves, etc. Construction was done using fabrication jugs in an assembly line process. The cabooses were built in the shops on track three. Hope this helps. Thanks! Mark
Steve, You raise an interesting question concerning the caboose electrical system voltage. Given the industry standardization of batteries, light bulbs and radios, I wonder if anyone can confirm the electrical system voltage? The 1200 series cabooses were early retirement candidates due more to their age than the electrical system. These cabooses were built in 1957 (SLSF 1200-1274 (numbered SLSF 200-274 before the renumbering in 1968)), 1968 (SLSF 1275-1284) and 1969 (SLSF 1285-1292). The successor railroad had purchased a large fleet of similar new wide-vision cabooses prior to the merger in the late 1970's. As the need and expense of cabooses or other equipment became an increasing issue, the oldest items were often the first to be removed from service. Railroads phased out cabooses rapidly as they did not produce revenue. They were considered an expense only item including capital investment, maintenance, taxes, handling (switching, storage between runs) and dead weight (horsepower and fuel expense) to haul around. Additional factors that prompted caboose removal included improved technology (hot box detectors, end of train devices), newer equipment (elimination of friction bearing trucks in interchange service), safety (injury to crews from slack action, falls from height, etc.), new union agreements (pay in exchange for crew size reductions) and changes in laws (crew sizes). Hope this helps. Thanks! Mark
I can't confirm based on first-hand factual knowledge other than what I observed. The cabooses that I saw which had truck driven alternators driven by drive belts, had what appeared to be standard automotive-type 12 volt alternators.
I have a picture of the caboose in Columbus Ks. It is the 1701. I took several Photos of it and one of the Generator mounted directly on one of the trucks. I can make out some of the words on the tag that is on the generator including 60 HZ. If I am over that way in the near future I will ge t a closer look at it. I can't make out the voltage from my photo. If it is on there the paint has it hidden. Bob Wintle
Living here in Wichita, by what I observed in the '70's I don't think there were specific cabooses assigned to specific crews at that time. The daily train would come from Springfield (Monett) and change crews at Neodesha. It seemed about every day there was a different caboose, but I may be wrong. Bob Hoover FriscoFriend
Friendly reminder that the intent of this thread was to find out how the cabooses were used in the day-to-day operation of the railroad. Would like to know the way the crews were assigned in the early days (40s-50s?), when the crew assignment stopped, how cabooses were selected and used in pool service (60s-70s), and other caboose operation related information. Ship IT on the Frisco! Rick
Okay the voltage on the 1200 cabooses was 74 volts, not 86 or whatever I said at 4 AM this morning. I spoke to my Frisco engineer friend who hired out in 1977. He wasn't aware of any caboose assignements to crews or trains. Steve.|-|
Rick, I believe the caboose assignments were a union thing. In the early 50’s when steel cabooses were introduced the union rules were changed allowing for ‘pool’ cabooses in ‘pool’ service. Thus, cabooses could run through terminals with out being changed. However, if the train needed switching at a major terminal, then the caboose was usually sent to the caboose track for cleaning and servicing. What ever was first out or available was used. Most assigned local and road switchers had assigned cabooses. An example was given of the Oklahoma Sub local which did have an assigned caboose. When the local had two assigned crews they worked east and highballed west on train #537. Most of the time 537 had a pool caboose and the local caboose went along for the ride. (Oklahoma City was a smaller terminal and they needed the extra caboose for 2nd 30). After QLA was rerouted via Avard, only one crew protected the Oklahoma Sub local working both ways with the assigned caboose. If the caboose was BO then a pool caboose was used. Local service west out of Oklahoma City was in pool service (at least from the 60’s on) so pool cabooses were used. Cabooses were never assigned like power. They were always used according to what was available and serviced. (Except for assigned jobs) Hope this helps, Jerome
Its my understanding that in the early years engineers were often assigned to a particular locomotive. This made sense, I guess, because of the terribly long hours that crews worked. I skimmed through my copy of Frisco Folks (Bain) thinking that I had seen a reference to cabooses assigned to the crew (conductor) at the same time, but didn't find it. He did state that locomotives were still sometimes assigned to an engineer in the early 1920's but the practice was dying out at that time. It may be that the practice of assigning cabooses died out at roughly the same time the practice of assigning engines did, killed, as the post above stated, by union contracts and ultimately the 8 hour day laws?
