Re: (erielack) The F5

[Robert John Davis <trains_@_robertjohndavis.com>]

On 5/30/02 1:00 AM, "Kevin DeGroff" <kdegroff_@_starpower.net> wrote:

> What hard sources from company records identify them as F5s, or is this
> persistant classification strictly an ignorant railfan thing, where we
> see this mixture of F3 and F7 features and incorrectly call it an F5??


I don't know how "ignorant" it is if designations like "F-5" or even "F-2"
(B&M had them, too) are confined to helping buffs and modelers. Just like
the phase designations, which are largely an invention of buffs, they have
meaning and use in our circles.

The trick is to be able to speak the languages of the buff and the railroad
to fully decipher the subject of your research.

All unit designations are generalizations to some extent, aren't they. I
mean, you can tell you me you saw a GP-7, which gives me an idea of the
mechanics inside and the overall appearance, but nothing further. If I am a
buff and you tell me it was a Phase II GP-7 without dynamics and had a
chopped short hood, I'd call that smart rather than ignorant.

Then, of course, there are always ways to get in trouble, like the Reading's
RS-3's, which were class RS-1!

Rob


 





 

------------------------------