• Did FL-9's Ever MU w/ Other Engines/Motors ?

  • Discussion relating to the NH and its subsidiaries (NYW&B, Union Freight Railroad, Connecticut Company, steamship lines, etc.). up until its 1969 inclusion into the Penn Central merger. This forum is also for the discussion of efforts to preserve former New Haven equipment, artifacts and its history. You may also wish to visit www.nhrhta.org for more information.
Discussion relating to the NH and its subsidiaries (NYW&B, Union Freight Railroad, Connecticut Company, steamship lines, etc.). up until its 1969 inclusion into the Penn Central merger. This forum is also for the discussion of efforts to preserve former New Haven equipment, artifacts and its history. You may also wish to visit www.nhrhta.org for more information.
  by 3rdrail
 
Hi - Anybody know if NH's Fl-9's ever MU'd with engines other than a second FL-9 ? I wondered if the dual capabilities of the FL-9 prevented their pairing up with either a straight Diesel or Electric. Would you ever see a combo like an FL-9/GP-9 or an FL-9/EP-5, etc ?
  by Statkowski
 
North and east of New Haven it would not have been uncommon to see an FL9 MUed with a GP9. It wasn't common, but it was possible. The FL9s could MU with the GP9s, RS-11s and "Baby Trainmaster" H-16-44s. On occasion, three FL9s would be MUed together (as long as the middle unit was an EDER-5 and not an EDER-5a).

EP-5s could not MU with anything. A late evening run that existed for a while was a light engine move from Grand Central Terminal to Oak Point Yard. Two FL9s pulled an EP-5 to New Rochelle (Old Yard), where they uncoupled and ran around the EP-5. Then then pulled the EP-5 down the Harlem River Branch to Oak Point Yard.

The FL9s remained at Oak Point as emergency power, and the EP-5 either went to Harlem River as the power for HB-8, the Trailiner, or went to Sunnyside for No. 98, a mail & express train (I can't remember which).
  by DutchRailnut
 
A FL-9 could be MUed with any locomotive with the 27 point MU jumper, offcouse it would only work in diesel unless it was lead locomotive.
MNCR MUed the FL9's with the B23-7's and later with Genesis and BL20gh units
  by DutchRailnut
 
Next to track 4 east of CP217 (these days) the new yard is of hellgate tracks
  by Noel Weaver
 
DutchRailnut wrote:A FL-9 could be MUed with any locomotive with the 27 point MU jumper, offcouse it would only work in diesel unless it was lead locomotive.
MNCR MUed the FL9's with the B23-7's and later with Genesis and BL20gh units
The FL-9's could MU with any New Haven locomotive with a 27 point jumper BUT the rebuilt RS-3's (500's) that had both 21
and 27 point jumper possibilities had to be the lead unit when operated with an FL-9 because the rebuilt RS-3's did not have
automatic transition and the FL-9's have no provision for advancing transition on trailing units. This did hapen a few times
in years past, many years past that is.
Noel Weaver
  by Statkowski
 
New Rochelle "Old Yard" is/was located east of the passenger station. It was, at one time, considerably bigger, and had facilities for turning and servicing steam engines (they may have been Forney 2-4-4s, but they were steam engines).

New Rochelle "New Yard" is/was located west of New Rochelle Junction on the Harlem River Branch. This was home to the Wire Train.
  by TomNelligan
 
For a short time after the Penn Central takeover, around spring/summer 1969, I remember occasionally seeing FL9s coming into Boston MU'd with one of the ex-PRR E8's that PC moved to NH territory.
  by Noel Weaver
 
TomNelligan wrote:For a short time after the Penn Central takeover, around spring/summer 1969, I remember occasionally seeing FL9s coming into Boston MU'd with one of the ex-PRR E8's that PC moved to NH territory.
This is so, Tom, I remember when I was firing on 3002 and the night job which I think at the time was 177. We would have
almost anything for power but usually 2 E-8's. We did have them occasionally with an FL-9 and also we had GP-9's a few
times.
Noel Weaver
  by Statkowski
 
Thinking back on the FL-9/EP-5 light engine move, I do believe it was two EP-5s being pulled by two FL-9s. One EP-5 ran light to Sunnyside Junction, and the other ran light down Track 8 to the vicinity of the old Port Morris station to tie on to HB-8's cars, already sitting on Track 8.
  by Otto Vondrak
 
davidp wrote:Metro North occasionally paired an FL-9 with an ex-MBTA FP-10.
I remember that. I may even have a photo somewhere. The F10's were numbered 400-series so they would NOT be assigned to Grand Central trains, like the 2000-series FL9's. Though I remember in the early 1990s, some consists of FL9+F10 and F10+F10 would sneak into Grand Central. Heck, I have a photo somewhere of an FL9 paired up with a leased ex-CNW F7! Now I have to dig them out... Of course, this was in the Metro-North days, I don't know if the FL9's capability to MU was changed with subsequent rebuilds after 1969...

-otto-
  by DutchRailnut
 
davidp wrote:Metro North occasionally paired an FL-9 with an ex-MBTA FP-10.
Those would be F-10's as FP-10 is a wrong designation, a FP unit would be 4 feet longer than a straight F unit, and the F-10's were standard 51 foot long.
A FP unit would have been 55 foot long
A FL unit is 59 foot long
  by TomNelligan
 
DutchRailnut wrote: Those would be F-10's as FP-10 is a wrong designation, a FP unit would be 4 feet longer than a straight F unit, and the F-10's were standard 51 foot long.
That's correct with respect to EMD practice, however when the rebuilt ex-GM&O F3s arrived in Boston from Paducah their ICG builder's plates identified them as FP-10s, and that was their MBTA class as well.
  by DutchRailnut
 
The FP designation was done by MBTA. not Paducha schop, MBTA was wrong. as has been proven by late Rick Gladulich of MNCR and a few others.