Will's treatise on Lackawanna's avoiding articulateds was excellent, and I'd
like to add a couple of thoughts. First was a physical issue: Mallets had
monster boilers, and Lackawanna still had 90-foot turntables in Scranton and
elsewhere. All of DL&W's larger 8-coupled locomotives were limited with short
tenders for primarily this reason.
Also, historians should always consider what went on at 140 Cedar Street in
Manhattan, Lackawanna's corporate headquarters. That neighborhood around
today's World Trade Center footprint was the fiscal home to a great many big
railroads and railroad suppliers. It was the true railroad capital of the world. It
was from that neighborhood where the D&H was formed to somehow get coal into
Manhattan to heat Wall Street offices, and where Ed Harriman saw that some
strange stock called Union Pacific was trading cheaply and that it owned a lot of
land. Take a look through an older Official Guide and count how many were on
Church Street, including the Erie and Alco. So many alliances and deals were
arranged and built over lunch- and sidewalk- and elevator- and
ferryboat-friendships. You'd be surprised how many major decisions in the railroad industry
are made over seemingly casual social interactions, even today.
Beginning in the Tuesdale years, Lackawanna execs had allied with New York
Central and Alco execs, among others, in Lower Manhattan. There were common
directors on both railroad's boards, among other boards of directors.
To asnwer the articulated question, though, Alco didn't push the articulated
concept until very late in the game, but instead promoted three-cylinder
power, which the Lackawanna subscribed to. DL&W designers worked together with
Alco engineers to create among the finest, most powerful or highest t.e. of the
modern wheel arrangements on any railroad. DL&W's Poconos, Hudsons and 4-6-2s
would have been much more famous engines on a larger road. DL&W had a hand it
its three-cylinder power.
I got to be friends with DL&W president Perry Shoemaker in the years before
he died, and while at Railway Age I worked with Luther Miller and Robert Lewis.
Miller started in the 1950s when Age was a weekly, and he often lunched with
Perry and several other railroad managers. Luther called him "Perry the
Shoe." Perry acknowledged the nickname with light laughter when he heard it again,
and remembered the young Luther, who recalled that Perry was quite a bit the
social center of the railroad community around Church Street. When Railway
Age published something in error about the Illinois Central, over lunch it was
decided that Perry would oversee anything Age writes about the IC, which Perry
did for a few years 'till things calmed down. Luther's stories about the execs
of that era were numerous.
Perry did explain to me over the phone one night his side of the EL merger,
and the genesis of things like Erie's use of Hoboken Terminal and the
consolidation of the main lines west of Binghamton occured at these Church Street
socials. The decision to outright merge with the Erie, Perry recalled, was done on
a handshake there in Lower Manhattan. Of course, papers were signed later,
but Perry's ethic relied more on trust and integrity than penmanship.
Perry Shoemaker's involvement in the railroad community continued traditions
from predecessor William White, who also knew everyone. He was a railfan.
Among his many railfan interests, White collected tail signs and prevailed upon
his Manhattan counterparts for examples. White's collection resides at the New
York Society of Model Engineers' building in Carlestadt, and I'm not aware of a
finer collection in the world. The model club's passion is the model
railroad, so the tail signs are mere decorations, but they are authentic and are
awesome in their casual presentation. White helped found the New York Society...,
whose first location was in the Hoboken Terminal.
....Mike Del Vecchio
In a message dated 9/6/04 6:04:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
wshultz1_@_twcny.rr.com writes:
> Rick,
>
> Keep in mind that by the time the compound articulateds became a proven
> concept, the Lackawanna was already looking at two alternatives; the
> three cylinder freight Mountains and electrification. The Mountains came
> in 1925-1927 and requests for proposals for electrification of the
> mainline around Scranton were put out before and after that time.
>
> In the trade magazines of the era, there was much debate about a
> compound being too slow and boiler capacity too restrictive for anything
> but pusher or mine run service. The feeling was that as a mainline
> engine they were too complicated, expensive and slow except in a few
> special cases like the N&W and Virginian. Simple articulateds really
> didn't come into their own until UP's Challenger design in the 1930's,
> after which the concept and the appliances to support it allowed it to
> really take off.
>
> Don't underestimate the 2100 series Mikados either, they were rated at
> over 67,000 pounds tractive effort. By any estimation they were BIG,
> powerful Mikados!
>
> Electrification may well have become a reality except for one overriding
> factor: The Depression. By then, the mainline locomotive fleet was
> relatively modern and with declining traffic there was an excess of
> mainline motive power. With reduced traffic, the success of the Poconos
> and an excess of power, there really wasn't much motivation or reason to
> pursue an articulated design.
>
> As was pointed out, neighboring D&H was in a much different position,
> it's freight fleet consisted mainly of Consolidations. BIG
> Consolidations, but slow, powerful, drag coal train engines.
>
> World War II and the D&H's strategic position being a vital link to
> Canada changed the way the D&H had to run, speed became important. Keep
> in mind too that the locomotives chosen to fill that role were proven,
> modern designs, arguably some of the best available at the time.
> Otherwise the D&H might well have continued on using its Consolidations
> as it's primary power until dieselization. In fact it did, but in a
> diminished role after the Northerns and Challengers arrived.
>
> Regards,
>
> Will Shultz
>
> RJFlei_@_aol.com wrote:
>
> >List,
> > I know the Lackawanna had a large fleet of Poconos, Mountains, and
> >Mikados. I was just wondering why, considering the heavy grades of this
> railroad,
> >that they never invested in articulated locomotives like the D&H's
> >Challengers for mountain territory? Anyone out there have an idea? Did
they
> ever have
> >one on the drawing board?
> >
> >Rick Fleischer
> >Cortland, Oh.
> >ELHS # 1426
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------
End of EL List Daily V3 #1423
*****************************
This HTML page is © 2000-2008 Blue Moon Online System and The Railfan Network
This page and the data contained therein may not be reproduced
for any form of commercial use without the explicit permission
of J. Henry Priebe Jr. or his duly authorized agent.