Lockwood, MO Lockwood, MO depot. Photograph dated 1955. Lockwood, MO coaling trestle and Teddy Roosevelt on the rear platform of a train. See also Coaling Towers.
Lockwood, MO Lockwood depot with water tower, beyond is the coaling bins and trestle view. Photograph dated 9/26/1911.
Thanks to who ever found and posted these photographs of the Lockwood, MO Frisco depot. For two years about 1958 or 1959, I transported the mail to the Lockwood depot for the noon train and the mail back to the post office. My father hung the night mail for the express train. In all that time we never took a photograph of the depot. Was just a job I guess. The water tower and coal chute were still beside the tracks when we moved to Lockwood in 1948. Do not remember if they were still in use or not. Am now writing our family history and these fill a spot that was empty.
I am thinking about changing Elwood on my layout to Lockwood. Were the two elevators still there at 1980? Were there any other industries in Lockwood not shown in the Sanborn Map? Thanks in advance for your help.
Rick, I like your choice for Lockwood; spent lots of time there. The "modern" arrangement is different than what the Sanborn maps show. There was a concrete MFA grain elevator, an MFA fertilizer plant, and a lumber yard. The local usually had work. As indicated, during steam there was a large coal dock and water tank. I am in St. Louis at the moment, but will post some further information later. KEB
Lockwood marked the transition from the Ozarks to the plains of western Missouri and eastern Kansas. It was located about the mid point between Ft Scott and Springfield, and therefore a large Underwood pocket - type coaling facility was maintained. A water tank was also located at Lockwood. The coaling facility took up a lot of real estate and was nearly 720 long. During 1946, it was replaced by a smaller 50 ton concrete tower. The concrete foundations from all three structures remained through the early 1970s. The city took over the water well, and used it to supply municipal needs. The pump house also remains. The 1902 built depot underwent many changes during its existence, and it was pared-back in size numerous times and finally "remodeled" with cementitious siding and new sashes. During the 1950s the lower quadrant train order signal was located across the main line from the depot. By the early 1960s it had been moved to the platform in front of the depot. The Frisco didn't put CTC on the Ash Grove Sub until 1976 or 1977, and so the Ash Grove Sub operated by Timetable and Train Orders. Consequently the depot lasted until the advent of CTC. One mile south (RR) of town, the Frisco served a small quarry. By the 1940s it was no longer listed in the ETT's. On the north(RR) end of town the Frisco served the MFA Fertilizer Plant and Von Stroh Gas. The fertilizer was delivered in covered hoppers and the LPG came via tank cars. The MFA Farmers Exchange received bagged seed in box cars, and loaded box cars and covered hoppers with soy beans, wheat, and corn. There was a hatchery in town, and when passenger trains called on Lockwood, chicks went to KC via REA. The Frisco served the lumber yard, and depending upon the era, loads came in box cars or on flats or on bulkhead flats. A small wood grain elevator was located on the south (RR) end of town and it too loaded soy beans, wheat and corn into box cars or covered hoppers. I believe that it lasted until the early 1970s. The stock pens lasted until the mid 1950s. Depending upon the time of year, locals 142 and 143 usually stopped to perform a little work in town.
Karl, This is great information! This is like waking up on Christmas morning. I don't have a lot of space so I will have to select the best of the industries for Lockwood. Thank you for the research and the information you provided.
Rick, I went through there on a trip with Phil several years ago. There was a large building on west end of town and an apparently unused siding that had a string of miscellaneous cars stored on it. I also got a few pictures downtown. I will poke around and see if I can locate them. Good for your later period, at least. Maybe a little help for the elevator/mill/whatever downtown. Also got some photographs in Greenfield, which you could compress into the activity perhaps.
Karl or others, Do you know what the "No NWF" on the train order represents, where the Train Number designation is usually placed? Fascinating documents, history and background. Thanks very much for sharing. Best Regards,
Chris, Quick note on the train order. The "No NWF" refers to scheduled train Number (No) North West Forwarder (NWF). The abbreviation No - for number was a standard permitted in train orders by rule 223. It also specified that the words "Extra", "North", "East", "South" or "West" must not be abbreviated. In this case the dispatcher issued a Train Order using a form E or Time Order. This amend the published timetable schedule for regular trains which normally governed train movement on this subdivision. Why? Although several additional rules apply, it basically comes down to the Superiority of Trains (rules 71 to 73). Rule 71. A train is superior to another train by right, class or direction. Right is conferred by train order; class and direction by time table. Right is superior to class or direction. Direction is superior to trains of the same class. Rule 72. Trains of the first class are superior to those of the second; trains of the second class are superior to those of the third; and so on. Rule 73. Extra trains are inferior to regular trains. Now, let's look at this case. Both trains are regular trains of the same class (Second Class). How do we know? They are listed in the timetable, under the column heading "Second Class". Therefore they are referred to by their train numbers, No NWF and No 235. This is opposed to having been referred to as an Extra (example Extra 706 South or Extra 916 North). Being that both trains are of the same class, no right by class is inferred. Using our knowledge of the rules and the time table (after all we are required to have a copy while on duty), we can determine the trains directions. Rules indicate even number regular trains travel north and east, and odd numbered regular trains move south and west. Therefore, No 235 (odd number) must be a regular schedule train south bound. But what about NWF? We need the time table here. It is listed under the "North" column on the right hand side. Therefore, Number NWF is superior by direction (North) to Number 235 a south direction train. However, in this case the dispatcher has chosen to amend the timetable to expedite movements of the regular scheduled trains. He has given the right of movement by issuing a train order. By doing so he amended the time table and its schedule. The order gave the right of movement to the inferior train by direction (southward) against the normally superior train (northward). Further, he modified the right for a specified time between the designated station. After the specified time, 9:35 a.m., NWF regains its "right" of movement by direction. So what does this all mean or do? It permits train number 235 to move south against the normally superior direction train to the station at Dix until 9:35 a.m. NWF must have been delayed in route and the dispatched wanted to expedite the movement of train 235 south to Springfield. Otherwise the south bound train would have been delayed at a station further north while waiting for NWF. Also, it permits NWF to proceed northward after 9:35 a.m. in the event train 235 is delayed. This is a sign of a good, experienced dispatcher who knows his craft well. As an alternative, the dispatcher could have issued a form A, Fixing Meeting Points for Opposing Trains, train order. But this could have resulted in unnecessary delay to train number NWF if train number 235 was delayed in getting to Dix. By not fixing a meeting point the dispatcher allowed both trains to move as fast and as far as possible. The best alternative was selected given the circumstances. Just another example of the superior service afforded by Frisco Faster Freight! Hope this helps. Thanks! Mark
Here are the two pages from Eastern Division Employee Time Table (ETT) 48, Feb 2, 1969. This covered movements over the Ash Grove Sub at the time that the TO was issued. Given the times at which the orders were completed at Lockwood and Arcadia, it would seem that both trains were in the bag by about 2 hours, give or take. NWF was due out of Springfield Yard at 6:00 AM and No 235 was due out of Ft. Scott at the same time. The scheduled meet was at Dix at 7:18 AM. Given the lateness of both trains, it's likely that they met at their scheduled location, Dix "The order gave the right of movement to the inferior train by direction (southward) against the normally superior train (northward). " Mark, One question, did the order convey rights to 235 over NWF? I would have thought that a Form C order would have been necessary, such as No 235 has right over NWF Arcadia to Dix.
Karl, The form E order used permitted the most flexibility in this case. The issued time order gave the right to train number 235 to work against number NWF as qualified by the time constraint. It also permitted number NWF to move after the specified time beyond the designated station. As long as the time constraint was met, number NWF could move on, even if number 235 had not made it to Dix. In contrast, a train order Form C as specified would give an absolute right to number 235 at the designated station. The example would not permit NWF to proceed against the specified train beyond the specified station until number 235 arrived at Dix. This would in effect fix a meeting point at the specified station. This could possibly delay train number NWF, otherwise superior by direction, if train number 235 was delayed. That is one of the great and interesting things about train orders. They were flexible and there was often more than one way to get the job done. Really good dispatchers would use the most flexible train order form to permit the crews the maximum latitude to execute and operate effectively. Hope this helps. Thanks! Mark
Great explanation and insight, Karl and Mark! I'm not too familiar with the Frisco's "alphabet soup" freight trains, but I was pretty sure that "NWF" was not a Frisco train. Timetable and Train Order operation seems infinitely more interesting to model from an operational standpoint when one reads descriptions like this. Best Regards,
There was an "NWF" and some other "symbol" freights in that period. Don't know if it was a "Frisco" train per se, but I used to hear "NWF" on the railroad radio channels. Tom
My apologies Mark, I need to clarify my question. I should have asked, would not a Form C Order in combination with the Form E Order been necessary to change the superiority of trains as you suggest? I agree that a Form C order by itself would not have accomplished what the dispatcher wanted to do. Even though the order was addressed to C&E of NWF, and also given to the C&E of 235 at Arcadia, the order is for the benefit of No 235. Via Form E, the dispatcher has created a new time table that maintains the normal superiority of things, i.e. NWF is still superior by direction to No 235. The TO lets the C&E of No 235 know where NWF is, so that the crew of 235 will know where and when to get out of the way of NWF. It would seem that since both trains were late by about the same amount of time, the meet probably took place at Dix, which was the scheduled meeting point. However, if for example train 235 was delayed at the KCS crossing for a KCS train, the crew of 235 may have decided to clear for NWF at Liberal or Lamar. As you state, the Form E provides greater flexibility for the crew of train 235 to determine where to clear for the superior NWF. A straight meet order such as “No 235 meet No NWF at Dix” could have delayed both trains. Restated, the TO restricts NWF at DIX in the same way that the ETT restricts trains by time and location without changing the superiority. I do not have my Rule Book at work, but I believe that a Form N Order would be required to advance a train past a point were it is restricted. Chris, you are right, train order operation is fascinating. Keeping things fluid without “lapping” things up was an art for the dispatchers and train crews. As I recall the Frisco required that all train orders must be handwritten, and one will note the lack of punctuation. NWF was a Frisco “run-through” that pooled power with the UP and the SCL(?). Other alphabet trains of this era were FSE, Frisco Southeast (Frisco Slow Express), which pooled power with the UP & SCL. Of course, QLA, Quanah-Los Angeles (The Queen Lady); QSF; OBX, Oklahoma-Birmingham Express, CTB…..others?
In the last operating session at Rick McClellan's, the Northwest Forwarder was a train that ran. Rick's attention to detail would make me feel certain that his consist of all UP engines was prototypical for this train. The train was a UP train that ran through on Frisco trackage, under Frisco Dispatch control.
Keith and Tom, The joint, or pool, operation trains were each respective railroad's trains. Thus, NWF, FSE QLA, CTB, etc were Frisco trains on its railroad, a UP, ATSF or SCL train on their respective railroads. The trains were operated by the respective railroad's crews on their line. The joint operation agreements were made to promote near seamless operation for the customer, simplify marketing, promote single billing for the haul and expedite movements. The joint train agreements also specified the pooling arrangements for power and cabooses. Some lines even marked cabooses with a large "P" for Pool service. The agreements typically specified that each participating line provide equipment to the joint pool in proportion to a percentage of the train mileage on each respective railroad. Again this expedited movements by reducing the delay associated with exchanging equipment. Often there was a simple direct hand off of the entire train set at terminals, with no switching, power or caboose exchange or interchange type movements. This was unlike some of today's agreements, typically the result of the mega mergers, where one railroad gains competitive access to long haul route(s) over another carrier's line. In these deals railroad A operates its trains, with its crews and equipment over specified routes of railroad B, a competing line. Some are haulage or running rights only, while others permit access to solicit business from the other carrier's customers also. Just a couple of today's examples include: 1) BNSF access to petro-chemical industries in Louisiana. 2) KCS access to Mexico. In these cases both were the direct result of merger conditions associated with the UP/SP merger. The basis of the conditions were to help maintain competition and permit direct customer options for access to other carriers. In the Frisco days, there was less concern from shippers and surviving railroads about competition between railroads. Today, with the mega railroads customers are very concerned about a perceived lack of competition. Thus, the merger agreements are laced with heritage and new conditions for line haul and possibly solicitation rights. Hope this helps. Thanks! Mark
