Rated fifteenth in the point score of the top twenty canadian
tives is CNR class U-l-f, 4-8-2 road
numbers 6060 to 6079 represented here
by No. 6064 in pool train service at
the cross-over from the CPR line to
CN at Dorval, Qu~bec on August 8,
1948. Photo from the CRHA Archives,
E. A. Toohey Collection.
Rated No. 1 in the overall point score
is CPRs famous SELKIRK series
road numbers 5930 -5935 and represented here
by the last in the series.
5935 was the last steam locomotive
built for the Canadian Pacific Rail
way, and is presently on display at
the CANADIAN RAIL~JAY MUSEUM in St. Constant,
Quebec. Photo courtesy
Canadian Pacific Railway.
ISSN 0008 -4875
Published monthly by The Canadian
Railroad Historical Association
P.O. Box 22, Station B
Montreal Quebec Canada H3B 3J5
EDITOR: M. Peter Murphy
EDITOR EMERITUS: S. S. Worthen
BUSINESS CAR: John Welsh
LAYOUT: Joe Smith
CALGARY & SOUTH WESTERN
L. M. Unwin, Secretary
1727 23rd Ave. N.W., Calgary Alberta
D. E. Stoltz, Secretary
P. O. Box 141, Station A, Ottawa, Ontario
R. Keillor, Secretary
P. O. Box 1006, Station A, Vancouver
British Columbia V6C 2Pl
C. K. Hatcher, Secretary
P. O. Box 6102, Station C, Ed~onton
Al berta T5B 2ND
TORONTO & YORK DIVISION
J. C. Kyle, Secretary
P. O. Box 5849, Terminal A, Toronto Ontario
R. Ballard, Sr., Secretary
300 Cabana Road East, Windsor,
Ontario N9G lA2
During and after the age of the
steam locomotive on Canadas
railways, one question has per
sisted and has not, to date,
been answered satisfactorily:
which was Canadas largest
On the surface, this seems to
be an easy question to answer,
until you begin to examine it
in a little more detail and,
in the process, become a little
more specific. Largest in
w hat sen s e ? To ta 1 wei g h tin
working order? Weight on driv
ers? Starting tractive effort?
Or just horsepower?
CANADIAN 198 R A I L
An evaluation and answer based on any of these factors
will yield a different response and thus the original question
still remain unanswered.
As a mechanical engineer specializing in motive power for Can-
adian National Railways, I have had occasion to calculate the per-
formance of steam locomotives, the information being required to
rate the Companys remaining steam engines for purposes of scheduling
and tonnage capacity. These calculations have interested me in fur
ther independent research on steam locomotive technology.
One fundamental conclusion can be drawn from this research: the
best mechanical engineers of the steam era were never able to pre
dict precisely the ultimate performance for a particular locomotive,
because there were a myriad of factors affecting its performance.
Chief amongst these was the manner in which the air supply was
conducted into and through the firebox, boiler and smokebox. This
drafting was, obviously, critical to the production of steam. To the
end of the steam era, this remained a black art, which could only
be perfected to its highest degree by testing, ideally in a station
ary test plant. Significant increases in locomotive horsepower capa
bility could be realized simply by making small adjustments, one
after another (fiddling), with smokebox and blastpipe arrangements
until the maximum evaporation rate of the boiler was achieved.Occas
ionally, on older engines, these improvements were frustrated by the
diameter and stroke of the cylinders and pistons, which could not
make use of all of the steam produced by the boiler.
In spite of this problem, towards the end of the steam age meth
ods were developed for determining the average maximum performance
of a steam locomotive. W.F.Kiesel, Motive Power Officer, Pennsylvania
Railroad, working with extensive test data from the Companys sta
tionary test plant at Altoona, Pa., developed a formula,subsequently
named for him, which accounted for most of the factors essential to
the computing of the horsepower of a reciprocating steam locomotive.
An excellent treatment of this whole subject of steam locomotive
technology, including this most important aspect, may be found in
The Steam Locomotive by R.P.Johnson, Chief Engineer, Baldwin Loco
motive Works, Eddystone, Pa.,U.S.A.(1944).
Armed with the data generated by my research work, I have de
cided to risk incurring the wrath of the proponents of the various
lalgest Canadian steam locomotives by rating the latter on a
scientific basis, taking into account the various dimensional and
performance factors which suggest their candidacy for the title of
the largest steam locomotive in Canada.
Table I, which follows, sets forth the statistical data for ~y
top twenty steam locomotives in Canada. A word of clarification 1S
necessary regarding the engines which have been included.Locomotives
belonging to United States railroad companies, occasionally running
in Canada, such as those of the Delaware & Hudson and SOO Line, have
not been included, although the direct U.S. subsidiaries of Canadian
National Railways (Central Vermont Railway and Grand Trunk Western
Railroad) have been included, since their engines did run in Canada
for considerable distances. Canadian Pacific Railway Companys class
T-4-a, 2-10-4 Number 8000, has been excluded because it was an ex
perimental locomotive whose features did not lend themselves to a
CANADIAN 199 R A I L
direct comparison with conventional steam locomotives. Where engines
of various subclasses existed, the one with the highest evaporative
boiler capacity and horsepower has been selected. Locomotive length
over couplers has been dismissed as a rating factor, being essential
ly meaningless in the evaluation.
The following is a brief explanation of the rating system for
the factors selected. For each factor chosen for comparison, the
largest engine in that category has been given 100 points. All the
other locomotives being compared were then given points proporcional
to the ratio of their factor to the largest in that factor-category.
In all, seven factors were selected for comparison, to determine the
largest locomotive; hence, 700 points would be the maximum possible
Now for the group of seven:
1. Total engine weight:
While the heaviest engine is not necessaiily the largest,
weight is one measure of size.
2. Percent of total weight on drivers:
The greater the proportion of the locomotives weight on her
drivers, the better she does the basic job of producing trac
tion; thus, the better the rating score for thi~ factor.
3. Nominal tractive effort:
The low-speed, drag-hauling capacity of the engine is one
important measure of largeness. Tests often showed a TE
greater than the nominal, which was based on 85% of the
boiler pressure. However, since all locomotives have been
rated on the same basis, the relative ranking should be suf
ficiently accurate. In this respect, the older, pre-1925 lo
comotives are given a slight advantage by this method, as
advances in steam porting and passage design in the valves
and cylinders in the 1930 and 40 engines have been excluded.
4. Firebox grote-area:
The firebox grote-area is a good measure of the ability of
the steam locomotive to sustain the combustion process and
thus the production of steam in the boiler, to maintain a
constant, high-horsepower output.
5. Calculated maximum sustained boiler evaporation rate:
Each word in this rother long expression is important. The
rapid, sustained production of steam by the boiler is essen
tial optimum operation of the engine. The formula used for
this calculation is a relatively conservative one,recommend
ed by the Baldwin Locomotive Works. This formula takes into
account the firebox and tube-heating areas, with an allow
ance for a feedwater heater and a deduction for auxiliaries.
Once again, tests showed that locomotive boilers were able
to produce steam in excess of the nominal rating, always at
the expense of pity fully low thermal efficiencies. For com
parison purposes, the use of a formula with consistent co
efficients of heat transfer will yield accurate relative re
CNR CPR CNR CNR AC&HB
S-4-b P-2-h T-4-a K-5-a
1936 1943 1929 1930 1929
339 339 348 356
59.6 59.9 78.4 62.1 78.7 51.2
58.8 66.6 69.9 73.3 73.3 52.9 73.3
69.6 52.5 65.9 57.3(B) 53.3(B) 64.5 54.5 52.3 60.6 57.5 70.5(B) 53.3(B) 60.3
84.3 84.4 76.3 73.6 74.2 80.8 81.5 77.3 70.3 70.2
70.3 70.3 66.8 73.6 66.7
68970 66200 66770 59510 56930
58950 58820 59380 58410 57370 56150 54030 55050 54820 54990
3170 3020 2795 2750 2355 2780 2650 2490 2655 2610 2600 2480 2325 2575
73 73 57 77 58 75
79 57 68 73 63 63 57
() l> 2 l> o l> Z
III ~ o o III
)J l> r
CANADIAN 201 R A I L
6. Calculated maximum sustained drawbar horsepower:
Tractive effort at speed is produced by horsepower and thus
the latter represents an index of the speed to which a train
of known tonnage can be accelerated. The elements utilized
in the calculation of drawbar horsepower are the steam pro
duction capacity of the boiler, the boiler pressure, the
cylinder volume, the drag resistance of the engine and tender
and the speed of the train.
7. Driving-wheel diameter:
While small driver size does not necessarily prevent high-
speed operation, it can generally be taken as an index of
the maximum permissible operating speed of a locomotive. In
addition, at a given speed, larger diameter driving wheels
result in a lower rpm of the engine and less pressure loss
in the steam supply to the cylinders, through the piston val
ves and cylinder-saddle passages.
In sum, therefore, these seven factors, evaluated on a
rating system, should produce an accurate definition of the
Canadian steam locomotive.
Table II, which follows, presents the point-ratings for each
candidate locomotive and the latter are presented in the order of
their overall score. The following additional comments are offered:
1. Canadian Pacific Railway 2-10-4 class T-1-c:
At the top of the list are the last steam locomotives built
for a Canadian railway. The earlier classes, T-1-a and T-1-b,
would receive similar but slightly lower ratings. The T-4-a
multipressure derivative of these units would probably out
score all the other contestants. However, as a single, short
lived, low mileage, experimental locomotive is the only rep
resentative, any comparison would be unfair.
2. Canadian Pacific Railway 4-8-4 class K-1-a:
The CPRs two-only 4-8-4 locomotives are second in the rating
primarily on account of their boiler size, which is identical
to the class T-1-a 2-10-4 locomotives. Stories of poor steam
ing of these engines probably arose from the fact that the
fireboxes were of a large size, there being no similar en
gines on CPRs eastern lines; thus, firemen, except on the
Montreal-Toronto night runs, were generally unfamiliar with
the best methods of firing these engines. It is possible that
the conversion of these engines to oil firing in their latter
years in western Canada disproved this unfortunate rumour.
3. Canadian National Railways 2-10-2 class 5-2-0:
One look at these locomotives would confirm that they were
designed for low-speed freight transfer, drag and helper
duty. While they had the highest tractive effort rating of
any class of steam engine in Canada, they lose out in the
rating due to smaller grate-area, draw bar horsepower and
driving-wheel diameter, the latter severely limiting their
· ~ .• .;>. ~
While the top two spots were awarded to CP steam power, CNR earned
the N~. 3 position with their 4100 class 2-10-2 s. 4100 boasted
of 91~700 lbs. tractive effort and was photographed in Toronto
probably soon after being received from her builders in Kingston,
Ontario. Photo courtesy CN.
CANADIAN 203 R A I L
4. Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway 2-8-4 class As:
It is a surprise to find these locomotives appearing fourth
in the ratings, as they are virtually unknown contestants,
being the Montreal Locomotive Works-built sisters of the
Boston and Albany (New York Central) Railroads class A-1
Berkshires. The two locomotives built for the TH&B, then
jointly controlled by the NYC and the CPR, had the highest
power-to-weight ratio of the score of engines rated and rer
resented the closest approximation to the Super-Power of
the Lima Locomotive Works (USA) to be found in Canada.
5. Central Vermont Railway 2-10-4 class T-3-a:
The Central Vermonts Texas-type 2-10-4 locomotives were
fifth in the rating. These were the largest steam engines in
New England, although they were probably the smallest 2-10-4s
in the United States.
6. Grand Trunk Western Railroad 4-8-4 class U-3-a:
The United States-built version of the basic Northern de
sign of Canadian National Railways was a larger locomotive
than the Canadian unit, but the overall ratings scored by
the two classes were close because the GTW class U-3-a was
not equipped with a booster.
7. Canadian National Railways 4-8-4 class U-2-a:
Locomotives in the original group of 155 CNR U-2 class 4-8-4s
were also the largest dimensionally. The addition of a boos
ter increased the overall score for these engines by about
8. Canadian National Railways 2-10-2 class T-3-a:
These engines were of United States Railroad Administration
light 2-10-2 design, built in the United States by ALCO
(Brooks) in 1919 for the Boston and Albany Railroad (New
York CentralS ystem) as Numbers 1100-1109, class Z-l-a. They
were purchased by the CNR in August 1928. The author has an
undated diagram sheet of the Grand Trunk Railway for these
locomotives. Since the Grand Trunk was absorbed into the
Canadian National Railway Company in 1923, there is some
uncertainty as to when these engines were actually acquired.
9. Canadian National Railways 4-8-4 class U-4-a:
The CNRs streamlined 4-8-4s were significantly smaller than
the non-streamlined U-2 class, although the visual impres
sion suggests that the former were larger.
10. Canadian Pacific Railway 2-10-2 class 5-2-0:
Tenth in the rating are the drag
built by the Canadian Pacific just
service on the heavy grades in the
after World War I,
mountains of Alberta
11. Canadian Pacific Railway 4-6-4 class H-1-b:
12. Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway 4-6-4 class NYC J1d:
These two hudson-type locomotive classes tied for eleventh
R K S H
T Y P E • C LAS S A
~ ~ . 0)
CANADIAN 205 R A I L
and twelfth places, although the edge should be given to the
CPR 4-6-4 for having a higher calculated drawbar horsepower.
Incidentally, tests conducted on the New York Central Rail
roads J1 class (the TH&B engines were formerly J1 d-class
locomotives from the NYC) showed peak evaporation rates and
drawbar horsepower greater than that calculated; however, on a
relative basis, the CPR 4-6-4 would still have a slight
14. Temiskaming & Northern Ontario/Ontario Northland Railway:
These locomotives were built as 4-8-4s simply. because it was
necessary to distribute their total weight over four axles,
so that they could operate on the lighter track of the T&NO/
ONR. Power considerations would have necessitated only a
4-6-4 type of engine.
15. Canadian National Railways 4-8-2 class U-1-f:
One engine of this class, the last steam locomotives to be
delivered to Canadian National Railways, remains in service.
Her power ou~put at the drawbar ranks her as equal to a
3000 hpJ 4-axle diesel-electric locomotive. However, Can-
adian National has conservatively reduced this equivalence
to equal the horsepower of a GP 35 (2500 hp for traction).
It should be noted that the nominal diesel-electric unit
traction horsepower rating drops considerably on a drawbar
16. Canadian Notional Railways 2-8-2 class S-4-b:
These engines were built for use in the hard-water districts
of western Canada and generous boiler proportions were pro
vided to allow for the build-up of scale.
17. Canadian Pacific Railway 2-8-2 class P-2-h:
The final development of the mikado-type locomotive on the
Canadian Pacific Railway, these engines were representative
of the standard heavy 2-8-2, used in most mainline freight
18. Canadian National Railways 2-10-2 class T-4-a:
That these engines with such modest dimensions were built
as late as 1929 attests to the requirement for five coupled
axles for weight distribution, rather than for tractive ef
19. Canadian National Railways 4-6-4 class K-5-a:
In next to last place in the rating are CNR s only hudson
type locomotives, whose main claim to fame resides in the
fact that their driving wheels were 80 inches in diameter~
Rated No.4 is TH&Bs Nos. 201 and 202 the diagram of which is
pr&sented here through the courtesy of the Ontario Society of
H.O. Model Engineers.
CANADIAN 206 R A I L
20. Algoma Central & Hudson Bay Railway 2-10-2s:
These locomotives were, for practical purposes, duplicates
of Canadian National Railways class T-4-a engines (Number
18 in the rating). The absence of a booster on the AC&HB
engines lowered their position in the rating.
From Table II, it can be seen that Canadian Pacific Railways
class T-1-c 2-10-4 Selkirk-type locomotives are the overall win
ners of the title largest Canadian steam locomotives, with 650
points scored out of a possible 700.
To put this score in the proper perspective, however, similar
calculations for the largest United States articulated locomotives
were made, based on a comparison with the maximum Canadian engine in
each category. Thus, scores of over 100 points in any single cate
gory were possible.
The Union Pacific Railroads 4-8-8-4 Big Boy and the
peake and Ohio Railroads 2-6-6-6 each score over 950 points.
largest British steam locomotive, the Duchess class of the
don, Midland and Scottish Railway, a 4-6-2 type, scored only
points, well below the twentieth-ranked Canadian engine.
It is the optimistic view of the author that this article will
resolve some old arguments about this contentious question. However,
knowing the determined nature of students of steam locomotive tech
nology, he suspects that this method of measuring largeness will
only add fuel to the fire of argument.
Rated No.5 and our first US representative of a Canadian Road
is Central Vermonts closs T-3-A , 2-10-4 represented here by
probably at St.Albans vermont. Photo courtesy CN.
94 79 650 2
94 635 3
88 95 99 79 627 5
93 85 97 84 96 90 75 620
84 95 94
78 98 76 76 92 83
85 78 57 73 82 82
74 79 70 73 547
82 64 62
82 94 546 12
79 99 546 13
79 83 57 70 79
76 87 66 70
79 532 17
63 70 75 74 79 529 18
67 76 69
73 76 76 528 20
76 92 66 67 76 69
Rated No.6 is Grand Tr.u.nk Westerns ·630Q c1a~s -Northerns and
pic t.u red_-~ere Is No .6306, photogra ph courtesy. GN. – .
Back in September 1927 CNR was represented at the Fair of
Horse by the 6100 which is pictured here steaming past the
stand in her moment of glory. The 6100 class was rated 7th.
overall point score. Photograph courtesy CN.
CNRs T-3-a class, road numbers 4200-4209 rated 8th. in the overall
point score. Purchased from the Boston & Albany in 1928 the photo
of 4207 is reproduced through the courtesy of CN.
Rated 9th. is CNRs streamlined Northerns road numbers 6400-6404
Built in 1936 by MLW three of the giants are pictured here side
by side probably at Pointe St. Charles Shops soon after delivery.
Photo courtesy CN.
Lucky No. 10 is none other than CPRs class S-2-A, 2-10-2 road
numbers 5800-5813 and represented here by 5802. Photo courtesy CPo
CN MARINE -THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS SAID TO BE ALARMED AT THE
rise in water-transport subsidies, according to the Globe
& Mails Albert Sigurdson (May 12/77). The sinkhole has been
the Newfoundland services, operated by CN Marine, which had a 1976
deficit of more than $72.8 million. Canadian National loses
another $25 million in operating the Newfoundland railway. The
railways share of freight into the island has dropped from 87 per
cent in 1972 to 61 percent in 1976, highwaY haulers being the
gainers. A four-man commission, set up by the federal government
to study transportation in Newfoundland, is now outlining its plans.
The chairman, Arthur Sullivan of Memorial University, said it was
possible that the commission could recommend abandonment of the
railway. But it will be weighing the social impact of changes as
~el1 and it may well decide that it is cheaper to employ 700 men at
Port-aux-Basques by an inefficient railway than to change to a sys
tem that would put them on the dole. Findings are to be presented
to the federal government by next March 31.
VIA UPDATE -TRANSPORT MINISTER OTTO LANG SAYS THAT THE FEDERAL
government is moving toward assuming part of the cost
of benefits for railway employees affected by changes in
the rail passenger system. Regulations allowing Ottawa to take
this step are being drafted in consulation with the railways and
the labor unions. Government aid will apply to federally-ordered
changes in the rail passenger system, such as route abandonments and
the recent creation of Via Rail Canada Inc. Terms and condi
tions of existing job security arrangements will be honored.
(Globe & Mail, May 13/77)
VIA PRESIDENT FRANK ROBERTS, INTERVIEWED FOR THE MONTREAL STAR
(May 14/77) expects Montreal headquarters staff to total
about 150. Overall, VIA will employ up to 4,000 people.
If the CTCs preferred plan for transcontinental service is put
into effect, some construction will have to be undertaken at CNs
Central Station in Montreal to accommodate CP Rails dome cars that
will be using that terminus. Also, both railways will have to make
changes at North Bay, to permit CN-operated trains to change to/
from CP tracks.
Mr. Roberts to1 d the Toronto Globe & Ma i 1 (May 10/77)
that VIA will take over the marketing of all rail passenger ser
vices from CN/CP in June 1977.
CANADIAN 215 R AI L
Queried by Canadian Rail, Transport Minister Otto Lang wrote
(May 6/77) that thus far, only VIAs relationships with the
Canadian National and CP Rail have been considered. No considera
tion has been given to a take-over of the services currently pro
vided by three of the railway companies you identified (Editors
Note: Algoma Central, Ontario Northland, British Columbia Railway).
An exception is the T.H. and B. company which operates from Hamilton
to Fort Erie and currently receives a subsidy as it is a subsidiary
of the CPR. The other lines are either owned or regulated by the
provinces. There is nothing to prevent VIAs entering into con
tracts with such companies, although the terms of such contracts
would reflect, no doubt, the responsibilities of the owners for the
service and would have to be carefully considered.
BRITISH RAIL RAN ONE OF ITS HIGH-SPEED TRAINS WITH 380 PASSENGERS
from Bristol to London (Paddington) in 68 minutes, 20
seconds, May 7/77 -117 3/4 miles at an average speed of
103.5 m.p.h. This is claimed to be a world record, reports The
Daily Telegraph (London).
BRITISH COLUMBIA RAILWAY MAY HAVE A NEW $140-MILLION LINK WITH A
northeastern coal development, providing a vital service
route from Prince George. Provincial Economic Development
Minister Donald Phillips says that engineering studies will
begin immediately on construction of a 70-mile link from Tumbler Ridge, 100
miles northeast of Prince George, to Anzac, 70 miles
north of Prince Georqe. Actual construction go-ahead depends on
when markets favor develooment of coal deposits havinq the poten
tial to produce eight million tons a year. Coal would come by
B.C. Rail to Prince George and then be transported west by CN to
the port at Prince Rupert.
Meanwhile, a royal commission of enquiry into the affairs
of the provincial railway heard a submission from the White Pass &
Yukon suggesting that two major rail lines be scrapped, the Fort
St. John-Fort Nelson line and the Dease Lake extension. It also
recommended that British Columbia Railway consolidate its existing
lines and switch emphasis from north-south to east-west. Work on
the Dease Lake line has been halted until the enquiry is completed.
(Globe & Mail, May 28/77)
CP RAIL IS CONSIDERING A $90-MILLION TUNNEL PROJECT IN THE SELKIRK
Mountains to increase tract capacity for the 1980s. The
tunnel project would be the second phase of a double
tracking program the railway is to be~in this year to improve main
line track Vancouver-Calgary at a cost of $45-mi11ion.
The first phase calls for construction of 4.5 miles of
track w~st of Revelstoke, 11 miles west of Salmon Arm, and 6 to
9 miles between Lake Louise and Stephen.
The tunnel phase would involve construction of some 19
miles of new track in the ~eaver River valley east of Rogers Pass.
An eight-mile tunnel would extend under the present Connaught Tunnel
in the Roqers Pass area and would be used for westbound traffic
while the Connaught Tunnel would be used for eastbound traffic.
of proposed second
Double tracking: Diagram shows location of proposed improvements to the mainline. The project Is
heduled for completion by 1980.
CP Rail is also glvlnQ consideration to providing double
track between Field and Golden, which could require the boring of
a seven-mile tunnel through the Beaverfoot Range, by passing the
Kicking Horse River gorge with its extreme curves and heavy grades.
This tunnel would extend from the vicinity of Leanchoil to McMurdo.
In a study of the project, mention is made of possibly diverting
the Kicking Horse River to provide additional space for a second
track along the gorge. With such a diversion, hydro power could be
With CP Rail called on to handle a larger volume of
freight through the mountain area, especially coal, potash and
sulphur to west coast points, line improvements are sought to per
mit increased train capacity with the same (or reduced) motive power.
(GLOBE & MAIL, May 21/77)
B.C. HYDRO TRANSPORTATION IS COLLECTING ARTIFACTS RELATING TO THE
history of the Greater Vancouver transit system for dis
play in a public museum. A historical committee, working
to set up the museum, is appealing to transit users for such items
as old tickets, tokens, pictures, fareboxes, copies of The Buzzer and
(The Buzzer, April 7/77)
IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA THE TITLES OF ENGINE DRIVER AND FIREMAN HAVE
been abolished in favor of a new structure incorporating
grades of trainee enginemen and six classes of enginemen.
Men are to be recruited directly into locomotive driving positions.
(Australian Railway Historical
Society Bulletin, March/77)
CANADIAN 217 R A I L
ONTARIO HYDRO ORDERS FOR 432 100-TON ROTARY DUMP GONDOLA CARS
and 20 diesel locomotives have been placed by Canadian
National acting on behalf of Ontario-Hydro. The equip
ment, operated by CN, will be used in the movement of coal from
western Canada to Ontario Hydro plants.
The gondola car order, worth more than $14 million, was
awarded to National Steel Car Corporation of Hamilton, while the
locomotives, total cost over $14 million, will be produced by
General Motors of Canada in London. Del ivery of both kind of
equipment will start in July 1978, with the locomotive order com
pleted by September and the car order by October the same year.
Shipments of western coal to Ontario Hydro are scheduled
to begiri in the latter half of 1978 and are expected to reach plan
ned capacity by mid 1979. Over the next 15 years 30 million tons
of coal from western Canada will be shipped to Ontario Hydro over
JAPAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS, PLAGUED WITH FINANCIAL PROBLEMS, HAS DE
vised a business scheme it hopes will eat irrto years of
accumulated losses -the breeding of earthworms for fish
bait, chicken feed and fertilizer. (JNR loses about £4 million a day
and has been ordered by the government to balance its books
every year from 1979.) The idea is to turn over the strip of land
under the elevated tracks of the Bulletin train to private firms
who will be invited to bid for JNR earthworm breeding contracts.
Experts are divided in opinion about whether the earthworm, in its
formative weeks, can withstand the noise and vibrations of express
trains passing overhead.
(The Guardian, May 24/77)
RAILROAD RADIO IS REPORTED ON IN THE SEMAPHORE (WINDSOR-ESSEX DIV
ision, CRHA) of April/J7. Comments on suitable monitor
radios are followed by a complete, detailed list of fre
quencies for the eleven Windsor-Detroit area railroads. A new 16-page
list giving radio frequencies usp.d by Canadas Class I rail
roads, short lines and industrials is published as the Canadian Railway Radio Guide and can
be ordered from Gansel Publications,
124 William Street, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Onto LOS lJO ($3.00 post
paid in Canada).
A REPORT THAT THE LONG ISLAND RAILROAD IS FAST BECOMING AN EMD
line as since the first of March 1977 they have re
ceived 8 SW 100s Nos. 100 to 107, 6 GP38-2s Nos. 272
to 277 and 23 MP15ACs Nos. 150 to 172. These 37 EMDs join the
22 GP38-2s Nos. 250 to 271 the L.I. received in February and
March 1976. The L.I. now has 59 EMD diesels, only 8 ALCO C-420s
Nos. 222 to 229 will remain on the roster. All leased EMDs will
be returned to their owners within two months (3 to the Bangor and
Arrostook and 9 to the Precision Corp.). The new GP38-2 No.
277 has been named after the Long Islands Late President WALTER
L. SCHLAGER Jr. and will carry his name under both cab windows.
Our thanks to Bob Choo-Choo Gayer (the railroading bus driver)
of Flushing, N.Y. for the report.
CANADIAN 218 R A I L
CP RAIL IS PRESERVING FOUR VETERAN DIESELS FOR HISTORICAL PUR
poses. Units 4065, 8000, 8554 and 8905 are the sole
survivors in each class still in operational condition
and will be used by the company for various historical displays
of or for special loan to museums. The units have been offi
cially preserved as static exhibits and there is no possibility
at the moment to use them for amateur excursions. No permanent
home has been established for the units as yet. CP Rail intends
to select a Montreal locomotive Works A and B unit to add to the
collection. Naturally we cant preserve one of every class but
we do intend to try and put together a collection of the more
significant designs of motive power that will best represent the
company fleet over the years, said Dennis Peters, Public Rela
tions Department -Special Projects. (Editors Note: In ad
dition, CP Rail is holding a Trainmaster in the 8900 series to
be allocated to the CRHA on permanent loan for exhibition at the
Canadian Railway Museum.)
(CP RAIL NEWS, April 20/77)
C-liner 4065, originally named The City of Kingston and used as a
demonstrator for the Canadian Locomotive Company, worked in
western Canada until retired and is a distinctive addition to
CP Rails collection of preserved diesels.
CLC road switcher 8554 hauled CP Rail freight until March 1975 and
now represents its class among the companys preserved die
BALDWIN 8000 served (with 11 others) on CP Rail lines on Vancouver
Island and has now been saved from scrapping for preservation.
CANADIAN 220 R A I L
A SOUTH AFRICAN RAILWAYS 2 FT. GAUGE 2-6-2+2-6-2 GARRAT HAS
been acquired by a Texas firm for operation on a
wildlife ranch in the vicinity of Hempstead. It is
due to arrive sometime in April.
(Pacific News, quoted in
the 470, May/77)
MONTREAL -WASHINGTON DAILY FREIGHT SERVICE HAS BEEN IMPROVED
with establishment of The Washingtonian (southbound)
and Le Montr~alais (northbound) by CN/CV/B&M/Conrail.
on the following schedules:
The Washingtonian Le Montr~alais
0300 r~on . dep. Montreal Yard arr. 1830 ~Ied .
Mon. dep. St. Albans dep. 1400 Y/ed.
2100 Mon. dep. White River Jct. dep. 0430 ~Jed •
Tues. dep. Springfield dep. 1930 Tues.
1815 l1ed. a rr. Potomac Ya rd dep. 0230 Mon.
(eN mo vi n • Jan.-Feb./77)
MALCOLM S. PEACOCK, CRHA MEMBER IN RIVERVIEW, N.~., SENDS THE
above photo of his rail car collection. He rescued
both cars (less trucks) from the scrap yard. CN
caboose 78509 was purchased in September 1974 and the cook
dinerobunk car, CN 72499, in June 1976. The M and N seen on
the cars are the first initials of the proud owner and his
wife. Exteriors and interiors of both cars are close to the
original, except for some extra railroad artifacts which have been
added, Mr. Peacock reports. The cars are used as a year
round cottage and are located on route 955, N.B. approximately
10 miles from Cape Tormentine, terminal for CN ferries to and from
Prince Edward Island. CRHA-ers have a standing invitation
to drop by and say hello.
CP LIMITED HAS COMPLETED PURCHASE OF THE TORONTO, HAMILTON AND
Buffalo Railway. CP previously held a 27 percent in
terest and bou9ht the remaining 73 percent from Penn
Central. Michigan Central and Canada Southern for $6.5 million.
In the lead article of our February issue titled THE
MYSTERIOUS EIGHT WHEELERS Sandy Worthen reported that former
Canadian Northern No. 50 went to the KEY VALLEY RAILWAY. Alas Dale Wilson
of Sudbury. Ontario has come across two rare photos
belonging to Mr. John Tolonen. owner of the LOST CHANNEL LODGE.
While the origin of the photos is unknown they came with the
property when the lodge was acquired by Mr. Tolonen. and are
the only KEY VALLEY photos known to exist.
The railway operated between a junction with the CPR
at Pakesley (some 50 miles south of Sudbury) to Lost Channel along a
route that generally followed the Key River Valley. One
source says that ~nly one regular steam engine worked to KEY
VALLEY there being one other vehicle a jitney of sorts to take
men from the mill to Pakesley -presumeably so they could catch
the CPR to some nearby point having a hotel!
For anyone interested in a little summer railway ar
cheology expedition access to the area is from Highway 69 at the
road going to Grundy Lake Provincial Park. From Pakesley the
old right of way is covered with a road as far as Lost Channel. This
route has been undergoing several up-grading operations
over the past few years and by now perhaps it has become a pro
vincial second class highway into the Lake Nipissing area. Our
thanks to Dale Wilson for the information and to John Tolonen for
6060 after her recent winter shop~ing at Montreals Pointe Saint
Charles Shops is once again oft and running on the excursion
trail. Pictured here In her new coat of green and black. 6060
was caught at Dorval Station as she was heading west to Toronto
on May 7, 1977 with an excursion sponsored hy the St. lawrence
Valley Railway Society. Peter Murphy photo.