In my email this morning, from Paul Giblin of the Flying Yankee Restoration Group:

"One of the more interesting things which has taken place recently is the technicians have found CB&Q markings on the truck frames! We’re not sure what this means yet, but as you know, the first of the three Zephyr-style trains, known as the Pioneer Zephyr, was purchased by the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad (CB&Q) and operated out of Chicago. The Flying Yankee was the second of the three Zephyr-style trains manufactured and it was purchased by the Boston & Maine Railroad and operated out of Boston’s famous North Station. So, it’s very possible that the truck frames underneath the Flying Yankee were built initially for the Pioneer Zephyr but never used. Needless to say, we’ll be looking into this further as time permits."

This particular image happens to be from the the trailer truck under the tail of the Flying Yankee's Observation Car.

More info at www.flyingyankee.com

The tiny folding steps for roof access on the sides of the Philadelphia & West Chester Traction Brill Master Units built about 1930 are marked B(rooklyn) & Q(ueens) T(ransit). Are these both depression era examples of reusing old casting molds?
Can somebody go to the Chicago Museum of Science & Industry to read the letters under the Pioneer Zephyr, in case there was a long distance truck swap, possibly in 1957?

This is most likely a case of re-using a pattern that was identified when made with an order for another railroad, just like the rocking bearings at the back of the trailing truck on Pere Marquette 1225. They carry the bold letters, "NKP."

The trucks on our diner are cast C&O. The Erie bought them second hand from the C&O in 1949. And a good thing too since they are roller bear trucks.

The patterns for most larger castings of parts used in railroad applications usually have some form of identification letters or numbers, or an identification tag, permanently attached to them since painted identification would tend to get worn off with the contact with the casting sand. In the case of truck frame patterns in this time period, use of brass numbers or letters screwed to the pattern was common. In the case of mass produced parts that are assigned part numbers, such as components for diesel engines, the casting pattern number often causes confusion, since it is generally different from the part number of the machined assembly. With cast parts it is quite common for the identification for the first customer or order to get carried through the entire production run. This is also true of many drawings of parts, and many EMD drawings have a small box labeled "first used on" with the customer or order number as part of the information panel.

The February 28 newsletter posting on the FYRG website advises that they have been having a very difficult time obtaining comprehensive technical information on the train's original GE traction motors, even from GE, and asks that anyone with information please contact them, see paragraphs 3 and 4 of the newsletter:

http://www.flyingyankee.com/press.html#1

Doesn't anyone else find the circumstances under which this project has been undertaken to be odd ????

To be succinct-shouldn't the choice of traction motors (and power unit) have been dialed in before the group began to pass the collection plate ?

In contrast, the eminently reasonable decision by VMT to dispose of a piece outside the scope of their collection ( accepted museum practice) seems to have inspired a thread with a life of its' own.

One has to wonder if the FY won't end up as a (rather expensive) static display.

Dave

Things do seem to have taken an odd turn here and there. Not too long ago, the Flying Yankee group was looking into a modern, fully supportable prime mover and main generator (or alternator). Now they are looking for information on old GE traction motors, so old that GE can't even supply the needed information. It seems to me that they should be looking for motors, again, off the shelf and supportable.

If there is a space limitation, I would suspect that there are some transit car motors out there that would fit the application. I doubt that D-77s or 752s would fit in that particular envelope. I also hope they don't go for some odd high speed gearing. The 65 MPH that 62:15 or 74:18 allow (albeit with 40" wheels) should be fast enough for today's track and operating conditions.