Discussion:
Lower Berth Baggage
marcrail1-H+0wwilmMs3R7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-09-30 15:46:57 UTC
Permalink
The VIA information on baggage says you can take one item (21.5 x 15.5 x 9 in.). I read this to mean that a bag can only be 9" deep. The carry on bag I normally use is 11" deep and meets airline standards. It has been many years since I traveled in a lower berth and it was before today's airline carry on bags. Since your bag must fit below the seat the distance between the bottom of the seat and the floor is critical. Can anyone provide some information on this issue.

Ira Silverman
Rockville MD
jshron-YqRVrQajj0gP6ugs0E69NA@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-09-30 15:55:20 UTC
Permalink
You won't have to worry. They are not too strict about it. From my talking with people at VIA, the baggage policy is there to deter people from taking massive bags on board. A couple of inches here or there are not the issue.

You occasionally get a headcase who wants to enforce things to the letter, but I have never had one on The Canadian.

11" should be fine.

-Jason
Tom Box tbox-7i5HoP2kWQc@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-09-30 23:00:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by jshron-***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
The VIA information on baggage says you can take one item
(21.5 x 15.5 x 9 in.).
Actually it says you can take two bags of that size.
<http://www.viarail.ca/en/travel-info/baggage/carry-baggage>
Post by jshron-***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
I read this to mean that a bag can only be 9" deep. The
carry on bag I normally use is 11" deep and meets airline
standards. It has been many years since I traveled in a
lower berth
My most recent berth trip was last April, when I reached the
100-night mark for open-section travel. Unfortunately, I didn't
know this question was going to come up, and I didn't measure
the height of the space under the seat.
Post by jshron-***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
and it was before today's airline carry on bags.
Since your bag must fit below the seat the distance between
the bottom of the seat and the floor is critical. Can
anyone provide some information on this issue.
You won't have to worry. They are not too strict about it.
That's true, but the real concern is not whether an officious VIA
employee with a tape measure will hassle Ira. As Jason says,
that's unlikely. The question is whether the bag will physically
fit under the seat. On a couple of occasions, I've shared an
open section with a passenger whose bag would not fit under the
seat. Instead, it sat on the floor between the seats, where our
feet should have been, and was a nuisance to both of us. In
that case, it would have been a good thing if VIA had cracked
down and insisted that the bag be checked, but they didn't.
That was a few years ago, before the rules cited above were
introduced.

I think an 11-inch thick bag will probably fit under a berth
seat, but I can't say with absolute certainty. It would be nice
to have confirmation from somebody who can say for sure.

Tom Box
tbox at ncf dot ca
Port Hope, ON, Canada


------------------------------------
Posted by: Tom Box <tbox-***@public.gmane.org>
------------------------------------

For help, send an email to Canadian-Passenger-Rail-help-***@public.gmane.org
jshron-YqRVrQajj0gP6ugs0E69NA@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-01 00:04:08 UTC
Permalink
Based on the rough Manor blueprint I have, you should have at least 12 or 13 inches below the seat.

I have precise roomette seat measurements but alas not precise section seat measurements.

-Jason
marcrail1-H+0wwilmMs3R7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-01 13:50:12 UTC
Permalink
Thanks for the information. I don't leave until October 14 so if anyone is on the Canadian between now and then and can take a measurement it would be appreciated.

Ira Silverman
Rockville MD 20850
gopullman-YDxpq3io04c@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-01 16:28:20 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 10/1/2014 9:50:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org writes:

Thanks for the information. I don't leave until October 14 so if anyone
is on the Canadian between now and then and can take a measurement it would
be appreciated.

Ira Silverman
Rockville MD 20850
================================================
Ira, may I ask how you intend to get to Toronto? (or back from there).

Amtrak has thrown up multiple obstacles for those trying to reach Canada
from the DC area, almost to the point where they appear to have been done on
purpose.

I lived in Rockville in the same zip code from 1991-1999

In February 2001, I had already moved to southwestern Virginia. I saw an
incredible deal on Via for Montreal-Halifax that I couldn't pass up. But my
only choice was to fly to Montreal, as it would have been if I'd still
lived in the Washington area. Fortunately, that was before 9/11. I've not flown
since then, and I'd prefer not to.

Tom Hoffman
Pearisburg VA
marcrail1-H+0wwilmMs3R7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-02 14:44:52 UTC
Permalink
For the past 5 or 6 years I've ridden #2. I used to take a Megabus or Greyhound leaving Toronto around noon to Buffalo Airport where I've connected with Southwest. Pretty much all day but relatively cheap. This time I'm taking #1 and there is only one good bus connection from Buffalo so I lose the whole day and Southwest has raised their fares so it's not as much a bargain. The good news is that with Porter flying Dulles to Toronto the air fares have been driven down. My son and I are flying an Air Canada non stop for $92@ (US).

This summer was the 50th Anniversary of my first trip on the Canadian. I want my son to see the trains of my life, not Superliners or Viewliners. Besides the condition of the equipment and the quality of the service is consistently better on the Canadian. We'll have a stop at Jasper with a detour down to Banff and the Spiral tunnels.

Picasa Web Albums - Ira Silverman - Across Canada... https://picasaweb.google.com/107478393786789439802/AcrossCanada1964?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCI2mmdPv2NrToAE&feat=directlink

https://picasaweb.google.com/107478393786789439802/AcrossCanada1964?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCI2mmdPv2NrToAE&feat=directlink

Picasa Web Albums - Ira Silverman - Across Canada... https://picasaweb.google.com/107478393786789439802/AcrossCanada1964?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCI2mmdPv2NrToAE&feat=directlink Photos by Ira Silverman, May 18, 2008 - Across Canada and back: The Laurentian, Panorama, Caribou Dayliner, Canadian



View on picasaweb.google.com https://picasaweb.google.com/107478393786789439802/AcrossCanada1964?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCI2mmdPv2NrToAE&feat=directlink
Preview by Yahoo





Ira Silverman
Rockville MD
Christian Base christian.base-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-02 14:59:47 UTC
Permalink
WOW! That's an incredible photo album Ira!

Thanks,
Christian.
|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|=|
base.christian | @christianbase

"When a train pulls into a great city I am reminded of the closing moments
of an overture." - Graham Greene
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
For the past 5 or 6 years I've ridden #2. I used to take a Megabus or
Greyhound leaving Toronto around noon to Buffalo Airport where I've
connected with Southwest. Pretty much all day but relatively cheap. This
time I'm taking #1 and there is only one good bus connection from Buffalo
so I lose the whole day and Southwest has raised their fares so it's not as
much a bargain. The good news is that with Porter flying Dulles to Toronto
the air fares have been driven down. My son and I are flying an Air Canada
This summer was the 50th Anniversary of my first trip on the Canadian. I
want my son to see the trains of my life, not Superliners or Viewliners.
Besides the condition of the equipment and the quality of the service is
consistently better on the Canadian. We'll have a stop at Jasper with a
detour down to Banff and the Spiral tunnels.
Picasa Web Albums - Ira Silverman - Across Canada...
<https://picasaweb.google.com/107478393786789439802/AcrossCanada1964?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCI2mmdPv2NrToAE&feat=directlink>
[image: image]
<https://picasaweb.google.com/107478393786789439802/AcrossCanada1964?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCI2mmdPv2NrToAE&feat=directlink>
Picasa Web Albums - Ira Silverman - Across Canada...
<https://picasaweb.google.com/107478393786789439802/AcrossCanada1964?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCI2mmdPv2NrToAE&feat=directlink>
Photos by Ira Silverman, May 18, 2008 - Across Canada and back: The
Laurentian, Panorama, Caribou Dayliner, Canadian
View on picasaweb.google.com
<https://picasaweb.google.com/107478393786789439802/AcrossCanada1964?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCI2mmdPv2NrToAE&feat=directlink>
Preview by Yahoo
Ira Silverman
Rockville MD
charles.barrett25-FFYn/CNdgSA@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-03 13:20:14 UTC
Permalink
Ira.


Yes indeed, great photos which bring back a lot of memories.


I have a question about the CP equipment on the garden tracks at Banff.


Can you remember what the equipment was behind the road switcher? It looks like a heavyweight sleeper followed by a Grove class 10-5, another lightweight, and a heavyweight.


Do you know if this equipment was going east on the Dominion?


By way of background in July 1964 I rode the Canadian from Toronto to Vancouver with an overnight stop in Banff. I returned east via CP to Calgary, then the Dayliner to Edmonton with a stopover to visit relatives in Red Deer, and finally the Super Continental back to Toronto,


I remember seeing a cut of red CPR cars on the garden tracks late in the afternoon during the westbound Banff stopover. As I recall the cut included a heavyweight sleeper, a Grove and an A class heavyweight diner. I distinctly remember the latter being set up to serve dinner as I walked by, and seeing the steward putting Skyline coffee shop menus on the tables. For that reason I suspect these were US tour cars were heading out on #8 to Winnipeg then on the Winnipegger to St. Paul.


Unfortunately I do not have a photo.


Charles Barrett
Ottawa
'Don Thomas' thomasd-fVOoFLC7IWo@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 04:22:16 UTC
Permalink
The first car is a T series 12-1 sleeper, rebuilt with wide berth windows. The second car is a Grove 10-5 sleeper. The third car may be another Grove facing in the opposite direction. The presence of the switcher means at least some of the cars on this track will probably be placed on the Dominion.



Don Thomas



From: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org]
Sent: October-03-14 7:20 AM
To: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [CanPassRail] Re: Lower Berth Baggage





Ira.



Yes indeed, great photos which bring back a lot of memories.



I have a question about the CP equipment on the garden tracks at Banff.



Can you remember what the equipment was behind the road switcher? It looks like a heavyweight sleeper followed by a Grove class 10-5, another lightweight, and a heavyweight.



Do you know if this equipment was going east on the Dominion?



By way of background in July 1964 I rode the Canadian from Toronto to Vancouver with an overnight stop in Banff. I returned east via CP to Calgary, then the Dayliner to Edmonton with a stopover to visit relatives in Red Deer, and finally the Super Continental back to Toronto,



I remember seeing a cut of red CPR cars on the garden tracks late in the afternoon during the westbound Banff stopover. As I recall the cut included a heavyweight sleepe r, a Grove and an A class heavyweight diner. I distinctly remember the latter being set up to serve dinner as I walked by, and seeing the steward putting Skyline coffee shop menus on the tables. For that reason I suspect these were US tour cars were heading out on #8 to Winnipeg then on the Winnipegger to St. Paul.



Unfortunately I do not have a photo.



Charles Barrett

Ottawa
'Don Thomas' thomasd-fVOoFLC7IWo@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 04:40:09 UTC
Permalink
Charles, if the A class diner you saw was attached to the Grove car and a CP heavyweight sleeper, then it may have been going to Montreal or Toronto. In 1964 CP sleepers (and leased NYC sleepers) ran on the regular St. Paul-Vancouver lines, but extra tour cars to or from St. Paul were usually Pullmans belonging to various U.S. roads. CP usually used its own sleepers as extra cars for Montreal and Toronto. CP diners would accompany U.S. cars as far as Thief River Falls MN.



Don Thomas



From: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org]
Sent: October-03-14 7:20 AM
To: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [CanPassRail] Re: Lower Berth Baggage





Ira.



Yes indeed, great photos which bring back a lot of memories.



I have a question about the CP equipment on the garden tracks at Banff.



Can you remember what the equipment was behind the road switcher? It looks like a heavyweight sleeper followed by a Grove class 10-5, another lightweight, and a heavyweight.



Do you know if this equipment was going east on the Dominion?



By way of background in July 1964 I rode the Canadian from Toronto to Vancouver with an overnight stop in Banff. I returned east via CP to Calgary, then the Dayliner to Edmonton with a stopover to visit relatives in Red Deer, and finally the Super Continental back to Toronto,



I remember seeing a cut of red CPR cars on the garden tracks late in the afternoon during the westbound Banff stopover. As I recall the cut included a heavyweight sleepe r, a Grove and an A class heavyweight diner. I distinctly remember the latter being set up to serve dinner as I walked by, and seeing the steward putting Skyline coffee shop menus on the tables. For that reason I suspect these were US tour cars were heading out on #8 to Winnipeg then on the Winnipegger to St. Paul.



Unfortunately I do not have a photo.



Charles Barrett

Ottawa
charles.barrett25-FFYn/CNdgSA@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 10:30:53 UTC
Permalink
Hi Don.


<The first car is a T series 12-1 sleeper, rebuilt with wide berth windows. The second car is a Grove 10-5 sleeper. The third car may be another Grove facing in the opposite direction. The presence of the switcher means at least some of the cars on this track will probably be placed on the Dominion. >


Yes, the first car appears to be a T-class sleeper judging by the number and size of the windows, and the third car may also be a Grove with the vestibule end towards the camera.


<Charles, if the A class diner you saw was attached to the Grove car and a CP heavyweight sleeper, then it may have been going to Montreal or Toronto. In 1964 CP sleepers (and leased NYC sleepers) ran on the regular St. Paul-Vancouver lines, but extra tour cars to or from St. Paul were usually Pullmans belonging to various U.S. roads. CP usually used its own sleepers as extra cars for Montreal and Toronto. CP diners would accompany U.S. cars as far as Thief River Falls MN.>


I agree the cars I saw may have been set outs going all the way east on the Dominion, as the special cars in tour service typically were from US roads.


According to the table in Douglas Smith's article on roomette cars the Canadian Passenger train review #2, there were no Grove cars regularly assigned to the St. Paul-Vancouver route in July 1964. That would make 1964 the only year between 1959 and 1965 when that was the case. Were lightweight cars leased that year for the Soo-Dominion route? If so it would mean there were plenty of Grove cars available as extras. .


My understanding is that from 1962 through the end in 1965 the St. Paul cars were routed through Winnipeg. The Mountaineer was discontinued at the end of August 1960 (the summer of my first-ever trip west on the Canadian). In the summer of 1961 the through cars continued to be routed through Portal on the Soo Dominion, but starting the following year they went via the Winnipegger after the St. Paul to Moose Jaw trains came off.

One reason for my thinking the cars were in tour service was the use of the Skyline coffee shop menu, which as I mentioned was a detail that has stuck in my mind for some reason. CP might have needed additional capacity for serving popular priced menus on summer Dominion consists.


I know that in the summer of 1964 the forward dining car on the Canadian served both the full and the coffee shop menus, At that time there were thirteen sleepers in service including three tourist cars. Under the Faresaver Plan tourist passengers ate in the coffee shop. By the summer of 1969, hiowever, when there were only first class sleepers left, both diners only servied the full menu. I also recall having seen an extra A class diner in service on the Canadian between Toronto and Sudbury on busy summer weekends during this time period, presumably to serve what was left of the Muskoka cottage traffic of earlier years. It served the Skyline menu as I recall.


Charles Barrett
Ottawa ON
tbox-7i5HoP2kWQc@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 14:54:29 UTC
Permalink
My understanding is that from 1962 through the end in 1965 the
St. Paul cars were routed through Winnipeg. The Mountaineer
was discontinued at the end of August 1960 (the summer of my
first-ever trip west on the Canadian). In the summer of 1961
the through cars continued to be routed through Portal on the
Soo Dominion, but starting the following year they went via
the Winnipegger after the St. Paul to Moose Jaw trains came off.
The April 1960 public timetable says that the Mountaineer was
to end on Aug 23 westward and Aug 26 eastward. Was it known in
April that it was ending forever, or was it just the usual end
of the summer-only service?

That same April 1960 timetable shows the Soo-Dominion resuming
service via Portal after the Mountaineer stopped, and combining
with The Dominion at Moose Jaw. The equipment table for the
Soo-Dominion lists "Coach - St. Paul-Moose Jaw; Moose Jaw-Vancouver,
8 Sec., D.R., 2 Cpts. - St. Paul - Portal, Dining-Club Lounge -
St. Paul - Portal", so there was no through sleeper, and it
looks like coach passengers may have had to change cars in Moose
Jaw, too.

The October 1960 timetable shows the Soo-Dominion as running via
Noyes and Winnipeg, on the same schedule as The Winnipeger. The
equipment table lists St. Paul - Winnipeg and Winnipeg - Vancouver
coaches, a St. Paul - Winnipeg sleeper, and a St. Paul - Winnipeg
dining club lounge. It appears that there were no through cars at
all, and the winter Soo-Dominion was really just a connection
between the Winnipeger and The Dominion.

The October 1960 does show a local North Portal - Moose Jaw train,
but says that its last run would be on Dec 31. There's no sign
of any St. Paul - Portal service, but coverage of Soo Line service
was limited in the CPR timetables, so I wouldn't assume there was
none.

I don't have a summer 1961 timetable. Can someone confirm that
the Soo-Dominion did resume running via Portal?

October 1961 no longer shows the Soo-Dominion at all in the
actual timetables, unlike in October 1960. It is listed in the
equipment table, showing "Coach - St. Paul-Winnipeg, Winnipeg-
Vancouver; Bedrooms, Standard Berths - St. Paul-Winnipeg". As
in the previous winter, it appears the so-called Soo-Dominion was
just a connection between The Winnipeger and The Dominion, with
no through cars. The index says that Estevan and Weyburn, on
the former Soo-Dominion route, had only bus and mixed train service,
while North Portal doesn't appear at all.

The April 1965 timetable does show "Bedrooms, Roomettes (July
and August) - St. Paul-Vancouver; Dining Car (July and August) -
Thief River Falls-Vancouver", but they are listed for The
Winnipeger, and the Soo-Dominion name doesn't appear at all.

Were through St. Paul - Vancouver sleeping cars a summer-only
thing from 1961 to 1965?

Tom Box
tbox at ncf dot ca
Port Hope, ON, Canada
charles.barrett25-FFYn/CNdgSA@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 20:01:32 UTC
Permalink
The Mountaineer was a summer only operation, running from about July 1st to late August each year, with through cars form St. Paul to Vancouver. Before about 1950 the train operated from Chicago to Vancouver via a CNW connection at the Twin Cities. After the Mountaineer was discontinued at the end of the 1960 season there continued to be through St. Paul to Vancouver sleepers in July and August until 1965, but not styled as the Mountaineer.


The year round train operating via Portal was called the Soo Dominion, but I think that off season through car operations were limited even before 1961. For example, according to the CPR 1955 summer timetable reproduced in From Abby to Zorra via Bagdad, the St. Paul sleeper went as far as Calgary in May and October, extended to Field in June and September. I also have a copy of the October 1959 CPR system folder, the final winter season that the Dominion operated as a full service train. It shows the Soo line sleeper and diner operating only as far as Portal, with a through St. Paul to Moose Jaw coach connecting with the Dominion.


The switch of the summer only through sleepers from the Portal routing to the Winnipegger was necessitated by the discontinuance of the Soo line trains to Portal, My source for the statement that the 1961 summer operation was the Soo Dominion was Art Dubin's 1964 Some Class Trains, which included a chapter on the Mountaineer. Dubin says that the Winnipeg routing was effective in 1962. I know that the through cars went via Winnipeg from 1963 through 1965 as I have these timetables in my collection.


Charles Barrett
Ottawa
tbox-7i5HoP2kWQc@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 22:34:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles.barrett25-FFYn/***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
The Mountaineer was a summer only operation, running from about
July 1st to late August each year, with through cars from
St. Paul to Vancouver. Before about 1950 the train operated
from Chicago to Vancouver via a CNW connection at the Twin Cities.
The August 1927 timetable shows it running on Soo Line all the way
from Chicago to Portal, with through Chicago - Vancouver coaches
and sleepers and a Chicago - Banff sleeper.

The September 1934 timetable shows Soo-Dominion cars running on
Chicago & North Western between Chicago and St. Paul, as part of
C&NW's The Viking. There was a through Chicago - Vancouver sleeper
and a Chicago - Moose Jaw Solarium Lounge, but it appears that
coach passengers had to change cars in both St. Paul and Moose Jaw.
The timetable advertises "Every Day in the Year".

There was still Soo Line passenger service between Chicago and
St. Paul in 1934, but it was much slower than the C&NW train
used by the Soo-Dominion.

The April 1948 timetable shows through Chicago-Vancouver cars on
the summer Mountaineer (June 29 to Sept 3) on C&NW between
Chicago and St. Paul, but for the off-season Soo-Dominion, there
were no through cars from Chicago. There were still through
St. Paul - Vancouver cars on the Soo-Dominion, at least for the
period covered by the timetable (I presume April to October).

The April 1952 timetable does not show any through Chicago -
Vancouver service either for the Mountaineer or the Soo-Dominion,
just St. Paul - Vancouver.

Tom Box
tbox at ncf dot ca
Port Hope, ON, Canada
Steve Ellis meadowbrookdairy-/E1597aS9LQAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 22:54:01 UTC
Permalink
Now that I think about it, now that I think about it, I am wondering if this train that I am thinking aboutran St. Paul east to Montreal (believe S.S.M., I think), and then on to Boston. I know it crossed theborders twice, and it may have originated and terminated in the U.S. rather than in Canada. I know,whatever railroads operated it, it ended such a service very early, maybe around 1920. It may not have been associated with the Soo Line at all.
Post by charles.barrett25-FFYn/***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
The Mountaineer was a summer only operation, running from about
July 1st to late August each year, with through cars from
St. Paul to Vancouver.  Before about 1950 the train operated
from Chicago to Vancouver via a CNW connection at the Twin Cities.
The August 1927 timetable shows it running on Soo Line all the way
from Chicago to Portal, with through Chicago - Vancouver coaches
and sleepers and a Chicago - Banff sleeper.

The September 1934 timetable shows Soo-Dominion cars running on
Chicago & North Western between Chicago and St. Paul, as part of
C&NW's The Viking.  There was a through Chicago - Vancouver sleeper
and a Chicago - Moose Jaw Solarium Lounge, but it appears that
coach passengers had to change cars in both St. Paul and Moose Jaw.
The timetable advertises "Every Day in the Year".

There was still Soo Line passenger service between Chicago and
St. Paul in 1934, but it was much slower than the C&NW train
used by the Soo-Dominion.

The April 1948 timetable shows through Chicago-Vancouver cars on
the summer Mountaineer (June 29 to Sept 3) on C&NW between
Chicago and St. Paul, but for the off-season Soo-Dominion, there
were no through cars from Chicago.  There were still through
St. Paul - Vancouver cars on the Soo-Dominion, at least for the
period covered by the timetable (I presume April to October).

The April 1952 timetable does not show any through Chicago -
Vancouver service either for the Mountaineer or the Soo-Dominion,
just St. Paul - Vancouver.

Tom Box
tbox at ncf dot ca
Port Hope, ON, Canada

#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543 -- #yiv9130023543ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mkp #yiv9130023543hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mkp #yiv9130023543ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mkp .yiv9130023543ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mkp .yiv9130023543ad p {margin:0;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mkp .yiv9130023543ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-sponsor #yiv9130023543ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-sponsor #yiv9130023543ygrp-lc #yiv9130023543hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-sponsor #yiv9130023543ygrp-lc .yiv9130023543ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543activity span .yiv9130023543underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv9130023543 .yiv9130023543attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv9130023543 .yiv9130023543attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9130023543 .yiv9130023543attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv9130023543 .yiv9130023543attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv9130023543 .yiv9130023543attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9130023543 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv9130023543 .yiv9130023543bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv9130023543 .yiv9130023543bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9130023543 dd.yiv9130023543last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv9130023543 dd.yiv9130023543last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv9130023543 dd.yiv9130023543last p span.yiv9130023543yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv9130023543 div.yiv9130023543attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9130023543 div.yiv9130023543attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv9130023543 div.yiv9130023543file-title a, #yiv9130023543 div.yiv9130023543file-title a:active, #yiv9130023543 div.yiv9130023543file-title a:hover, #yiv9130023543 div.yiv9130023543file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9130023543 div.yiv9130023543photo-title a, #yiv9130023543 div.yiv9130023543photo-title a:active, #yiv9130023543 div.yiv9130023543photo-title a:hover, #yiv9130023543 div.yiv9130023543photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9130023543 div#yiv9130023543ygrp-mlmsg #yiv9130023543ygrp-msg p a span.yiv9130023543yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv9130023543 .yiv9130023543green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv9130023543 .yiv9130023543MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv9130023543 o {font-size:0;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv9130023543 .yiv9130023543replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv9130023543 input, #yiv9130023543 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv9130023543 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-mlmsg #yiv9130023543logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-msg p#yiv9130023543attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-reco #yiv9130023543reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-sponsor #yiv9130023543ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-sponsor #yiv9130023543ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-sponsor #yiv9130023543ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv9130023543 #yiv9130023543ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv9130023543
G Burridge gburridge-/wvCPmv6SvYTjfjEsPSlEQ@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-06 00:36:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Ellis meadowbrookdairy-/***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
Now that I think about it, now that I think about it, I am wondering
if this train that I am thinking about
ran St. Paul east to Montreal (believe S.S.M., I think), and then on
to Boston. I know it crossed the
borders twice, and it may have originated and terminated in the U.S.
rather than in Canada. I know,
whatever railroads operated it, it ended such a service very early,
maybe around 1920. It may not
have been associated with the Soo Line at all.
Do not recall the source, but i remember mention was made in
a publication of a train carrying the name _SOO-Atlantic_, late 19th
century, St Paul to Boston, with cars to New York City and
Portland(the Atlantic Ocean one).
Given tne route and distance I'd strongly suggest that, if a
train unto itself, it surely would have had Montreal, at best, as the
eastern end point, with the name being used as an umbrella for all
and any cars that continued eastward. In fact SOO-Atlantic could more
likely have been a service name, for cars that did run between St
Paul , SSM, Montreal(and Toronto?), and the Atlantic, but included in
any number of discrete trains over succeeding segments of the route
between St Paul and the Atlantic.
There was a westward train the SOO-Pacific(maybe Don Thomas
has the operating years) running St paul-Vancouver/Seattle; creating
a SOO-Atlantic(service name or actual train) would indicate, for the
public, a nicely balanced operation. And, in Canada at the same time,
there was the Atlantic Express(ewd) and Pacific Express(wwd) between
Vancouver and Montreal , so ...
Separating through car services that a railway has graced
with a name from a fixed number train and name running between set
end-points can get tricky!
Post by Steve Ellis meadowbrookdairy-/***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
----------
----------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Trace history of Canadian Pacific Sleeping Dining & Parlor Cars:
<http://pages.globetrotter.net/burridge/CPR_SDP_HistTrace.ods>
Railways of Quebec City and South-Eastern Quebec:
<http://pages.globetrotter.net/burridge/index.htm>
Gerry Burridge - P.O. Box 152 - Pte.Claire, Que. - H9R 4N9 - CANADA
=====================================================================



------------------------------------
Posted by: G Burridge <gburridge-/***@public.gmane.org>
------------------------------------

For help, send an email to Canadian-Passenger-Rail-help-***@public.gmane.org
'Don Thomas' thomasd-fVOoFLC7IWo@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-06 04:52:30 UTC
Permalink
The service from Minneapolis through SSM to Montreal was never part of the transcontinental service through western Canada. By 1890 CP controlled a through line from Saint John NB to Minneapolis and the original Atlantic Limited was Soo Line’s way of advertising service to the east bypassing Chicago. It wasn’t actually a through train but was advertised as a connecting service with change of train in Montreal. Boston could also be reached from Minneapolis the same way.



Don



From: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org]
Sent: October-05-14 4:54 PM
To: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [CanPassRail] Re: Soo-Dominion (was Re: Lower Berth Baggage)





Now that I think about it, now that I think about it, I am wondering if this train that I am thinking about

ran St. Paul east to Montreal (believe S.S.M., I think), and then on to Boston. I know it crossed the

borders twice, and it may have originated and terminated in the U.S. rather than in Canada. I know,

whatever railroads operated it, it ended such a service very early, maybe around 1920. It may not

have been associated with the Soo Line at all.
Post by charles.barrett25-FFYn/***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
The Mountaineer was a summer only operation, running from about
July 1st to late August each year, with through cars from
St. Paul to Vancouver. Before about 1950 the train operated
from Chicago to Vancouver via a CNW connection at the Twin Cities.
The August 1927 timetable shows it running on Soo Line all the way
from Chicago to Portal, with through Chicago - Vancouver coaches
and sleepers and a Chicago - Banff sleeper.

The September 1934 timetable shows Soo-Dominion cars running on
Chicago & North Western between Chicago and St. Paul, as part of
C&NW's The Viking. There was a through Chicago - Vancouver sleeper
and a Chicago - Moose Jaw Solarium Lounge, but it appears that
coach passengers had to change cars in both St. Paul and Moose Jaw.
The timetable advertises "Every Day in the Year".

There was still Soo Line passenger service between Chicago and
St. Paul in 1934, but it was much slower than the C&NW train
used by the Soo-Dominion.

The April 1948 timetable shows through Chicago-Vancouver cars on
the summer Mountaineer (June 29 to Sept 3) on C&NW between
Chicago and St. Paul, but for the off-season Soo-Dominion, there
were no through cars from Chicago. There were still through
St. Paul - Vancouver cars on the Soo-Dominion, at least for the
period covered by the timetable (I presume April to October).

The April 1952 timetable does not show any through Chicago -
Vancouver service either for the M ountaineer or the Soo-Dominion,
just St. Paul - Vancouver.

Tom Box
tbox at ncf dot ca
Port Hope, ON, Canada
'Mark W. Walton' mark.walton-rieW9WUcm8FFJ04o6PK0Fg@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-06 00:44:43 UTC
Permalink
That probably referred to the full range of CP’s operations beyond railways, back when it liked to brag that it was the “World’s Most Complete Transportation System
serving you in so many ways”. CN, through various subsidiaries, was also in much of those same fields.

Mark Walton
<mailto:mark.walton-***@public.gmane.org> mark.walton-***@public.gmane.org

From: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org]
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 4:02 PM
To: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: [CanPassRail] Re: Soo-Dominion (was Re: Lower Berth Baggage)
<snip>
The year round train operating via Portal was called the Soo Dominion, but I think that off season through car operations were limited even before 1961. For example, according to the CPR 1955 summer timetable reproduced in From Abby to Zorra via Bagdad, the St. Paul sleeper went as far as Calgary in May and October, extended to Field in June and September. I also have a copy of the October 1959 CPR system folder, the final winter season that the Dominion operated as a full service train. It shows the Soo line sleeper and diner operating only as far as Portal, with a through St. Paul to Moose Jaw coach connecting with the Dominion.
<snip>
Charles Barrett
Ottawa
_____

Posted by: charles.barrett25-FFYn/***@public.gmane.org
_____
'Don Thomas' thomasd-fVOoFLC7IWo@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-06 06:12:39 UTC
Permalink
When the summer 1960 timetable was printed it had probably not yet been decided that the 1961 service would not use the Mountaineer name. That would depend on whether it would operate as a separate train every day during the summer. However it may already been known that off-season service through Portal would soon be canceled.



To back up a bit, it should be noted that the Mountaineer name was only used officially during summer, and only when it was scheduled as a separate train from CP’s regular transcontinental train west of Moose Jaw every day. The “Soo-Pacific” was the St Paul-Vancouver through train from before the first world war, which was combined with a transcontinental west of Moose Jaw but ran separately on a similar schedule during summer. During the summers of 1923 to 1927 the train was called Soo-Pacific when it was combined with the Imperial Limited west of Moose Jaw off season, and Mountaineer when it ran separately during the summer. During these years the Mountaineer was also extended east of St Paul to Chicago on Soo Line.



In 1928 and 1929 the Soo-Pacific continued to run through the summer (west of St Paul) and ran separately from the Imperial west of Moose Jaw, with the Mountaineer as an additional summer-only train also serving Chicago. In 1930 and 1931 the former pattern of 1923-27 returned, except that on the westbound leg the Soo-Pacific was combined with the Dominion, due to changes made to CP’s transcontinental schedule when the Toronto and Vancouver Expresses were renamed the Dominion and speeded up in late 1929.



In 1932 and 1933 there was not enough business to justify the Mountaineer as a separate train every day. Also, CP’s transcontinental Imperial Limited was downgraded and most through business transferred to the Dominion in both directions. The Soo-Pacific was renamed Soo-Dominion, and it operated year round during 1932 and 1933. On days when volume of business warranted, the Soo-Dominion section would operate as a separate section on the CP mainline west of Moose Jaw. Depending on the level of business this might operate only to Banff, say, rather than all the way through to Vancouver.



The Mountaineer returned as a daily through Chicago-Vancouver train in the summer of 1934. The Chicago-St Paul service was now provided by Chicago & North Western, which had a much faster line than Soo’s. This routing apparently made it possible to operate the service with one fewer consist. During the summers of 1942 to 1946 the Mountaineer did not run and the Soo-Dominion operated all year. Again, when there was sufficient traffic it would nevertheless operate separately from the Dominion west of Moose Jaw.



The Mountaineer returned in 1947 and operated as a Chicago train through the 1949 season. From 1950 it was a St Paul train only, with tour cars operating east of St Paul on other railroads.



In 1959 and 1960 the Mountaineer was a bid of a hybrid. Eastbound it ran as train 14 from Vancouver through Moose Jaw, separate from the Dominion. Westbound however it operated as train 13 only to Moose Jaw, and then became train 7, the Dominion’s number. There are photos of the Mountaineer running as Second train 7 so it is likely that it operated as a separate section most days, but not every day.



In 1961 there would be no separate summer train every day, so the Mountaineer name was not used. Summer service was provided as the Soo-Dominion running through Portal but there was no off-season through or connecting service on the route. Off-season connections had to be made between trains at Winnipeg. The Soo-Dominion was transferred to the Winnipeg route for the summers of 1962 to 1965, running as part of the Winnipeger and the Dominion, or as a separate section of these trains, depending on the volume of business each day.



Through car service from St Paul to points west of Moose Jaw ceased to operate outside the summer season after the 1960 season. This is consistent with the fact that through car service on the off-season Dominion similarly ceased after September 1960.



The name Soo-Dominion is confusing because it referred to both a train and a service. Initially the name referred only to the off-season service, although during the depression in 1932-33 and wartime 1942-46 it ran year-round. From 1961 to 1965 it was a summer-only service. During all these times the name Soo-Dominion represented a through service between St Paul and Vancouver.



As the name of an actual train however, the Soo-Dominion was more limited. From 1932 to 1960 the Soo-Dominion was the name of a train operating between St Paul and Moose Jaw, interrupted only during the summers of 1934-41 and 1949-60 when the name changed to Mountaineer. Officially, even when the Soo-Dominion ran as a separate section on the CP main line it was part of the Dominion, with no hyphen. In practice though, when it was operated as a separate section it often seems to have been referred to as the Soo-Dominion even on CP’s main line. Confusingly, during the 1960s some staff and perhaps also passengers continued to refer to the service as the Mountaineer, and tothe Mountaineer section when it operated separately.



A long and complicated answer I’m afraid, but it seemed the best way to get the big picture.



Don Thomas





From: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org]
Sent: October-05-14 8:54 AM
To: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: [CanPassRail] Soo-Dominion (was Re: Lower Berth Baggage)
My understanding is that from 1962 through the end in 1965 the
St. Paul cars were routed through Winnipeg. The Mountaineer
was discontinued at the end of August 1960 (the summer of my
first-ever trip west on the Canadian). In the summer of 1961
the through cars continued to be routed through Portal on the
Soo Dominion, but starting the following year they went via
the Winnipegger after the St. Paul to Moose Jaw trains came off.
The April 1960 public timetable says that the Mountaineer was
to end on Aug 23 westward and Aug 26 eastward. Was it known in
April that it was ending forever, or was it just the usual end
of the summer-only service?

That same April 1960 timetable shows the Soo-Dominion resuming
service via Portal after the Mountaineer stopped, and combining
with The Dominion at Moose Jaw. The equipment table for the
Soo-D ominion lists "Coach - St. Paul-Moose Jaw; Moose Jaw-Vancouver,
8 Sec., D.R., 2 Cpts. - St. Paul - Portal, Dining-Club Lounge -
St. Paul - Portal", so there was no through sleeper, and it
looks like coach passengers may have had to change cars in Moose
Jaw, too.

The October 1960 timetable shows the Soo-Dominion as running via
Noyes and Winnipeg, on the same schedule as The Winnipeger. The
equipment table lists St. Paul - Winnipeg and Winnipeg - Vancouver
coaches, a St. Paul - Winnipeg sleeper, and a St. Paul - Winnipeg
dining club lounge. It appears that there were no through cars at
all, and the winter Soo-Dominion was really just a connection
between the Winnipeger and The Dominion.

The October 1960 does show a local North Portal - Moose Jaw train,
but says that its last run would be on Dec 31. There's no sign
of any St. Paul - Portal service, but coverage of Soo Line service
was limited in the CPR timetables, so I wouldn't assume there was
none.

I don't have a summer 1961 timetable. Can someone confirm that
the Soo-Dominion did resume running via Portal?

October 1961 no longer shows the Soo-Dominion at all in the
actual timetables, unlike in October 1960. It is listed in the
equipment table, showing "Coach - St. Paul-Winnipeg, Winnipeg-
Vancouver; Bedrooms, Standard Berths - St. Paul-Winnipeg". As
in the previous winter, it appears the so-called Soo-Dominion was
just a connection between The Winnipeger and The Dominion, with
no through cars. The index says that Estevan and Weyburn, on
the former Soo-Dominion route, had only bus and mixed train service,
while North Portal doesn't appear at all.

The April 1965 timetable does show "Bedrooms, Roomettes (July
and August) - St. Paul-Vancouver; Dining Car (July and August) -
Thief River Falls-Vancouver ", but they are listed for The
Winnipeger, and the Soo-Dominion name doesn't appear at all.

Were through St. Paul - Vancouver sleeping cars a summer-only
thing from 1961 to 1965?

Tom Box
tbox at ncf dot ca
Port Hope, ON, Canada
'Don Thomas' thomasd-fVOoFLC7IWo@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 19:01:12 UTC
Permalink
Yes, New York Central 10-6 cars were leased and appear in the Assignment of Space circular for 1964. That would free up more Groves for extra service. Of course extra Groves could operate to either St Paul or to eastern Canada, but sending them to the east is much more probable on any given day. Many of the cars going to St Paul were tour cars carrying on further, and CP would want to keep its own cars close to home to protect extra service on the system. Pullman cars normally handled extra business to the Soo Line and beyond.



The diner you saw could have been assigned, in part, to serve tour passengers on the attached sleepers who were on a budget meal plan. It would likely become the forward diner serving other cars already in the train, including some from tourist cars or coaches. It might also offer the full menu. This might depend on how many other sleepers were on the train, and how many passengers were on budget meal plans.



This could get quite complicated because some tours ran with their own cars, some had passengers assigned to various places throughout the train in coach and various types of sleeper space, and some had space in both regular and extra cars. Some tours offered a choice of meal plans. So the number, placement and level of service on the diners could change from day to day.



CP was quite stretched for diners in 1964. Due to rising costs of major overhauls of heavyweight cars, some diners due for overhaul after the summer of 1962 had been retired from service, though retained in storage. This meant there had not been enough full diners for the Dominion east of Winnipeg in summer 1963 and the café cars substituted for them were not adequate during heavy traffic. This had led to complaints of poor service. Some stored diners were overhauled in time for 1964 but the supply was still quite tight. Any time that a diner could be turned around short of Vancouver undoubtedly increased the flexibility to handle heavy extra traffic originating at Banff on busy days.



Incidentally the increasing cost of maintaining older cars in satisfactory condition was being recognized at this time as making them uneconomic to use, and with them, the services which depended on using them. This was the reason for CP’s decision in late summer 1964 to discontinue heavy overhauls for most of the older cars. This would allow the Dominion to operate for one or two more summers before the older cars wore out. By the spring of 1965 it had been determined that 1965 would be the final season. Thereafter CP reduced its passenger business to services which could be handled by lightweight equipment, largely stainless steel, although it took several years before the last heavyweights were removed from regular service.



Don



From: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org]
Sent: October-05-14 4:31 AM
To: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: RE: [CanPassRail] Re: Lower Berth Baggage







Hi Don.



<The first car is a T series 12-1 sleeper, rebuilt with wide berth windows. The second car is a Grove 10-5 sleeper. The third car may be another Grove facing in the opposite direction. The presence of the switcher means at least some of the cars on this track will probably be placed on the Dominion. >



Yes, the first car appears to be a T-class sleeper judging by the number and size of the windows, and the third car may also be a Grove with the vestibule end towards the camera.



<Charles, if the A class diner you saw was attached to the Grove car and a CP heavyweight sleeper, then it may have been going to Montreal or Toronto. In 1964 CP sleepers (and leased NYC sleepers) ran on the regular St. Paul-Vancouver lines, but extra tour cars to or from St. Paul were usually Pullmans belonging to various U.S. roads. CP usually used its own sleepers as extra cars for Montreal and Toronto. CP diners would accompany U.S. cars as far as Thief River Falls MN.>



I agree the cars I saw may have been set outs going all the way east on the Dominion, as the special cars in tour service typically were from US roads.



According to the table in Douglas Smith's article on roomette cars the Canadian Passenger train review #2, there were no Grove cars regularly assigned to the St. Paul-Vancouver route in July 1964. That would make 1964 the only year between 1959 and 1965 when that was the case. Were lightweight cars leased that year for the Soo-Dominion route? If so it would mean there were plenty of Grove cars available as extras. .



My understanding is that from 19 62 through the end in 1965 the St. Paul cars were routed through Winnipeg. The Mountaineer was discontinued at the end of August 1960 (the summer of my first-ever trip west on the Canadian). In the summer of 1961 the through cars continued to be routed through Portal on the Soo Dominion, but starting the following year they went via the Winnipegger after the St. Paul to Moose Jaw trains came off.



One reason for my thinking the cars were in tour service was the use of the Skyline coffee shop menu, which as I mentioned was a detail that has stuck in my mind for some reason. CP might have needed additional capacity for serving popular priced menus on summer Dominion consists.



I know that in the summer of 1964 the forward dining car on the Canadian served both the full and the coffee shop menus, At that time there were thirteen sleepers in service including three tourist cars.& nbsp;Under the Faresaver Plan tourist passengers ate in the coffee shop. By the summer of 1969, hiowever, when there were only first class sleepers left, both diners only servied the full menu. I also recall having seen an extra A class diner in service on the Canadian between Toronto and Sudbury on busy summer weekends during this time period, presumably to serve what was left of the Muskoka cottage traffic of earlier years. It served the Skyline menu as I recall.



Charles Barrett

Ottawa ON
Steve Ellis meadowbrookdairy-/E1597aS9LQAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 19:37:17 UTC
Permalink
Don, I am always amazed at how much you know about the history of passenger trains in North America. I have a 1951 Soo Line timetable which, of course, lists the Soo Dominion as a thru train from St. Paul to Vancouver.

Is this something I imagined or was there, very early, an extended version of this train? That is, didn't itextend east of St. Paul to Sault Ste. Marie and then on to Montreal?  There were Soo trains to S.S.M. in1951, but they were separate from the Soo Dominion. I seem to remember discussing this train in this group some years ago as a train that went Canada to US to Canada...something like The Atlantic did years later. I think the Montreal-St. Paul-Vancouver thru train ended maybe about 1920....a pretty obscure train indeed.
Steve EllisDodge CityKansas

On Sunday, October 5, 2014 3:01 PM, "'Don Thomas' thomasd-***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]" <Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:


  Yes, New York Central 10-6 cars were leased and appear in the Assignment of Space circular for 1964. That would free up more Groves for extra service. Of course extra Groves could operate to either St Paul or to eastern Canada, but sending them to the east is much more probable on any given day. Many of the cars going to St Paul were tour cars carrying on further, and CP would want to keep its own cars close to home to protect extra service on the system. Pullman cars normally handled extra business to the Soo Line and beyond.  The diner you saw could have been assigned, in part, to serve tour passengers on the attached sleepers who were on a budget meal plan. It would likely become the forward diner serving other cars already in the train, including some from tourist cars or coaches. It might also offer the full menu. This might depend on how many other sleepers were on the train, and how many passengers were on budget meal plans.  This could get quite complicated because some tours ran with their own cars, some had passengers assigned to various places throughout the train in coach and various types of sleeper space, and some had space in both regular and extra cars. Some tours offered a choice of meal plans. So the number, placement and level of service on the diners could change from day to day.  CP was quite stretched for diners in 1964. Due to rising costs of major overhauls of heavyweight cars, some diners due for overhaul after the summer of 1962 had been retired from service, though retained in storage. This meant there had not been enough full diners for the Dominion east of Winnipeg in summer 1963 and the café cars substituted for them were not adequate during heavy traffic. This had led to complaints of poor service. Some stored diners were overhauled in time for 1964 but the supply was still quite tight. Any time that a diner could be turned around short of Vancouver undoubtedly increased the flexibility to handle heavy extra traffic originating at Banff on busy days.  Incidentally the increasing cost of maintaining older cars in satisfactory condition was being recognized at this time as making them uneconomic to use, and with them, the services which depended on using them. This was the reason for CP’s decision in late summer 1964 to discontinue heavy overhauls for most of the older cars. This would allow the Dominion to operate for one or two more summers before the older cars wore out. By the spring of 1965 it had been determined that 1965 would be the final season. Thereafter CP reduced its passenger business to services which could be handled by lightweight equipment, largely stainless steel, although it took several years before the last heavyweights were removed from regular service.  Don  From: Canadian-Passenger-***@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org]
Sent: October-05-14 4:31 AM
To: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: RE: [CanPassRail] Re: Lower Berth Baggage        Hi Don.  <The first car is a T series 12-1 sleeper, rebuilt with  wide berth windows. The second car is a Grove 10-5 sleeper. The third car may be another Grove facing in the opposite direction. The presence of the switcher means at least some of the cars on this track will probably be placed on the Dominion. >  Yes, the first car appears to be  a T-class sleeper judging by the number and size of the windows, and the third car may also be a Grove with the vestibule end towards the camera.   <Charles, if the A class diner you saw was attached to the Grove car and a CP heavyweight sleeper, then it may have been going to Montreal or Toronto. In 1964 CP sleepers (and leased NYC sleepers) ran on the regular St. Paul-Vancouver lines, but extra tour cars to or from St. Paul were usually Pullmans belonging to various U.S. roads. CP usually used its own sleepers as extra cars for Montreal and Toronto. CP diners would accompany U.S. cars as far as Thief River Falls MN.>  I agree the cars I saw may have been set outs going all the way east on the Dominion, as the special cars in tour service typically were from US roads.   According to the table in Douglas  Smith's article on roomette cars  the Canadian Passenger train review #2, there were no Grove  cars regularly assigned to the St. Paul-Vancouver route in July 1964.  That would make 1964 the only year  between 1959 and 1965 when that was the case.  Were lightweight cars leased that year for the Soo-Dominion route? If so it would mean there were plenty of Grove cars available as extras.  .  My understanding is that from 19 62 through the end in 1965  the St. Paul cars were routed through Winnipeg.  The Mountaineer was discontinued at the end of August 1960 (the summer of my first-ever  trip west on the Canadian). In the summer of 1961 the through cars continued to be routed through Portal on the Soo Dominion, but starting the following year they went via the Winnipegger after the St. Paul to Moose Jaw trains came off. One reason for my thinking the cars were in tour service was the use of the Skyline coffee shop menu, which as I mentioned was a detail that has stuck in my mind for some reason.  CP might have needed  additional capacity for serving popular priced menus on summer Dominion consists.   I know that in the summer of 1964 the forward dining car on the Canadian served both the full and the coffee shop menus,  At that time there were thirteen sleepers in service including three tourist cars.& nbsp;Under the Faresaver Plan tourist passengers ate in the coffee shop.   By the summer of 1969, hiowever, when there were only first class sleepers left, both diners only servied the full menu. I also recall having seen an extra A class diner in service on the Canadian between Toronto and Sudbury on busy summer weekends during this time period, presumably to serve what was left of the  Muskoka cottage traffic of earlier years. It served  the Skyline menu as I recall.  Charles BarrettOttawa ON #yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455 -- #yiv3049251455ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mkp #yiv3049251455hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mkp #yiv3049251455ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mkp .yiv3049251455ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mkp .yiv3049251455ad p {margin:0;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mkp .yiv3049251455ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-sponsor #yiv3049251455ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-sponsor #yiv3049251455ygrp-lc #yiv3049251455hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-sponsor #yiv3049251455ygrp-lc .yiv3049251455ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455activity span .yiv3049251455underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3049251455 .yiv3049251455attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv3049251455 .yiv3049251455attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3049251455 .yiv3049251455attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3049251455 .yiv3049251455attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv3049251455 .yiv3049251455attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3049251455 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv3049251455 .yiv3049251455bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv3049251455 .yiv3049251455bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3049251455 dd.yiv3049251455last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3049251455 dd.yiv3049251455last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3049251455 dd.yiv3049251455last p span.yiv3049251455yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv3049251455 div.yiv3049251455attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3049251455 div.yiv3049251455attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv3049251455 div.yiv3049251455file-title a, #yiv3049251455 div.yiv3049251455file-title a:active, #yiv3049251455 div.yiv3049251455file-title a:hover, #yiv3049251455 div.yiv3049251455file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3049251455 div.yiv3049251455photo-title a, #yiv3049251455 div.yiv3049251455photo-title a:active, #yiv3049251455 div.yiv3049251455photo-title a:hover, #yiv3049251455 div.yiv3049251455photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3049251455 div#yiv3049251455ygrp-mlmsg #yiv3049251455ygrp-msg p a span.yiv3049251455yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv3049251455 .yiv3049251455green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv3049251455 .yiv3049251455MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv3049251455 o {font-size:0;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv3049251455 .yiv3049251455replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv3049251455 input, #yiv3049251455 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv3049251455 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-mlmsg #yiv3049251455logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-msg p#yiv3049251455attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-reco #yiv3049251455reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-sponsor #yiv3049251455ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-sponsor #yiv3049251455ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-sponsor #yiv3049251455ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv3049251455 #yiv3049251455ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv3049251455
charles.barrett25-FFYn/CNdgSA@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 20:41:37 UTC
Permalink
Hi Don.


Your comments about the shortage of A class diners in 1964 is fascinating and new information for me. I was aware the decision to suspend major overhauls of the heavyweight rolling stock in the early 1960s, but did not know specifically that there was a shortage of diners during this period.


This is particularly interesting given the assignment of two Budd diners to the Canadian in the peak season beginning in 1961 and extending through 1970. That meant that the Dominion required at least 8 A-series cars in the summer, more if multiple diners operated.


There were two subclasses of A series diners, 15 cars built in 1929 and another 8 in 1931. A Century of Deluxe Railway Cars in Canada indicates six cars had been retired by 1962, with the other 16 remaining on the roster until at least late1968 and some to 1970. However there may well have been cars stored due to deferred maintenance during this period.


You referred to café cars substituting for full diners on the Dominion. Do you have information on the cars assigned? A Century of Deluxe Railway Cars in Canada does not provide much information on latter day CPR café cars, though I know from old timetables and menus that they existed.


There were a handful of heavyweight buffet parlours still in service in the early 1960s, some of which had been converted from Café Parlous in the 1950s. These had kitchen facilities suitable to preparing full meals. Three of these cars were converted to buffet coaches to provide meal service on the off season Dominion between Sudbury and Winnipeg


As the 1960s progressed Budd diner appeared on the Quebec trains, and Skylines began replacing full diners on Montreal-Ottawa and Montreal-Quebec trains. This resulted in grievances regarding staff levels, with the arbitrator ruling on the company's behalf at least on one occasion. A series cars were used on the Atlantic Limited in the summer of 1967, as well as on the Expo limited.


Charles Barrett
Ottawa
'Don Thomas' thomasd-fVOoFLC7IWo@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-06 04:45:15 UTC
Permalink
Unfortunately the correspondence I saw did not specify the cars involved. It described the unsatisfactory experience after the summer was over, and the equipment itself was not being faulted, so there would have been no need to specify the equipment. A Century of Deluxe Railway Cars in Canada shows what café cars were in service at the time. Some cars which had been re-assigned from café to buffet service, whether with parlor chairs or coach seats, actually still had café kitchens and could prepare most anything a full kitchen could, in reasonable quantities, but obviously not to the quantities required by an overcrowded train on a busy day of the week.



The intercity services you mentioned out of Montreal were the principle concentration of non-RDC trains which CP ran in the later 1960s. There was apparently an internal debate about the continued viability of some passenger trains if they could be freed of the hefty maintenance expense required for heavyweight cars. In hindsight there was astounding inefficiency at Angus Shops were the overhauls were performed. Stainless cars didn’t require the same degree of maintenance and for a short time it seemed that limiting service to what could be provided by lightweight cars would allow reasonably well patronized trains to remain more or less profitable. This didn’t last long, because traffic declined while other costs increased.



In return for government agreement to discontinuance of the Dominion in early 1966, CP agreed to return the service during the summer timetable of 1967, which coincided with the dates Expo 67 would be open. Full service was actually provided for 6 months of 1967 on the Expo Limited, compared with less than three months during 1961 to 1965. Enough heavyweights received enough maintenance to get them through 1967.



Don



From: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org]
Sent: October-05-14 2:42 PM
To: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: RE: [CanPassRail] Re: Lower Berth Baggage





Hi Don.



Your comments about the shortage of A class diners in 1964 is fascinating and new information for me. I was aware the decision to suspend major overhauls of the heavyweight rolling stock in the early 1960s, but did not know specifically that there was a shortage of diners during this period.



This is particularly interesting given the assignment of two Budd diners to the Canadian in the peak season beginning in 1961 and extending through 1970. That meant that the Dominion required at least 8 A-series cars in the summer, more if multiple diners operated.



There were two subclasses of A series diners, 15 cars built in 1929 and another 8 in 1931. A Century of Deluxe Railway Cars in Canada indicates six cars had been retired by 1962, with the other 16 remaining on the roster until at least late1968 and some to 1970. However there may well have been cars stored due to deferred maintenance during this period.



You referred to café cars substituting for full diners on the Dominion. Do you have information on the cars assigned? A Century of Deluxe Railway Cars in Canada does not provide much information on latter day CPR café cars, though I know from old timetables and menus that they existed.



There were a handful of heavyweight buffet parlours still in service in the early 1960s, some of which had been converted from Café Parlous in the 1950s. These had kitchen facilities suitable to preparing full meals. Three of these cars were converted to buffet coaches to provide meal service on the off season Dominion between Sudbury and Winnipeg



As the 1960s progressed Budd diner appeared on the Quebec trains, and Skylines began replacing full diners on Montreal-Ottawa and Montreal-Quebec trains. This resulted in grievances regarding staff levels, with the arbitrator ruling on the company's behalf at least on one occasion. A series cars were used on the Atlantic Limited in the summer of 1967, as well as on the Expo limited.



Charles Barrett

Ottawa







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------
Posted by: "Don Thomas" <thomasd-***@public.gmane.org>
------------------------------------

For help, send an email to Canadian-Passenger-Rail-help-***@public.gmane.org
'Gary Klouda' glk-ssk-1srLxb0qcfWsTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 19:43:25 UTC
Permalink
Do you know what type (e.g., 10-6, 10-5, 12-1, etc.) type of NYC sleepers were leased? - Gary
'Don Thomas' thomasd-fVOoFLC7IWo@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-06 04:43:34 UTC
Permalink
CP’s assignment circulars show NYC 10-6 cars in the early 1960s. Doug Phillips has advised that some NYC 12 bedroom lightweights (“Port” series) replaced CP heavyweight 10 compartment Glen cars around the same time, with Glen cars available as spares. These weren’t shown in CP’s circulars. They may have been an impromptu last minute change, and wouldn’t have caused problems to reservation clerks because a 12 bedroom car could replace a 10 compartment car without loss of capacity.



Don



From: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org]
Sent: October-05-14 1:43 PM
To: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: RE: [CanPassRail] Re: Lower Berth Baggage





Do you know what type (e.g., 10-6, 10-5, 12-1, etc.) type of NYC sleepers were leased? - Gary
'Gary Klouda' glk-ssk-1srLxb0qcfWsTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-07 02:16:47 UTC
Permalink
Thank you for the info. I must confess I know little of NYC passenger cars. Would there be any way of knowing if these 10-6's were smoothside or Budd? Did NYC have more than one type/make of smoothside 10-6's? I am both curious for curiousity's sake and for modelling reasons. - Gary
'Don Thomas' thomasd-fVOoFLC7IWo@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-07 04:33:48 UTC
Permalink
They CP probably leased smoothside cars. NYC disposed of almost all their 97 smoothside 10-6 fleet between 1963 and 1966. (20 cars went to CN and the rest to Mexico.) They kept their 40 Budd 10-6s until 1967-1968. I expect this meant that NYC preferred the Budd cars and kept them in service on their own lines. Thus whenever a surplus developed the smoothside cars were expendable and were chosen for lease or sale.



All NYC smoothside 10-6 cars were of the same type, built by Pullman-Standard. They closely matched the 40 Budd cars in layout. The Budd cars were similar to the usual Budd 10-6 in that they had their roomettes at the vestibule end. However their bedrooms were aligned like those commonly found on Pullman-Standard 10-6s, which resulted in the middle pair of bedroom windows being shifted a few inches toward the center of the car. This was found on the most common P-S style, Plan 4140 and its variants, including some of the car for PRR and its connections; those for ACL, SAL, Southern and connecting lines, and for Southern Pacific. ACF 10-6s for PRR and Lackawanna had the same appearance. These cars all had their bedrooms at the vestibule end. NYC’s smoothside 10-6s from Pullman Standard duplicated their Budd cars in having their roomettes next to the vestibule, and the uneven bedroom layout. These peculiarities interfere with using most 10-6 models to stand in for an NYC car, which is a source of frustration to me.



NYC’s Budd 10-6s came in two groups of 19 and 21 which differed in the position of the toilets in the roomettes. Their Pullman-Standard 10-6s appear to have all had the same internal layout.



Don Thomas



From: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org]
Sent: October-06-14 8:17 PM
To: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: RE: [CanPassRail] Re: Lower Berth Baggage





Thank you for the info. I must confess I know little of NYC passenger cars. Would there be any way of knowing if these 10-6's were smoothside or Budd? Did NYC have more than one type/make of smoothside 10-6's? I am both curious for curiousity's sake and for modelling reasons. - Gary
gopullman-YDxpq3io04c@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-02 16:49:49 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 10/2/2014 10:44:56 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org writes:

The good news is that with Porter flying Dulles to Toronto the air fares
have been driven down. My son and I are flying an Air Canada non stop for
$92@ (US).
===============================================
That sounds good, plus you won't have to ride that bus.

Tom Hoffman
Pearisburg VA
Tom Box tbox-7i5HoP2kWQc@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-02 17:13:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
This time I'm taking #1
I trust that you're aware, from frequent discussions here, that
on-time performance by the Canadian has deteriorated badly in
this past year, and extreme delays are now commonplace. #1 is
often late even at the very start of the trip, leaving Toronto
after midnight instead of at the scheduled 22:00. #2 usually
leaves Vancouver on time, as far as I can tell, but has just as
many problems en route as #1.

It can still be a great trip. I had an excellent time on #2
in April, even though we were over seven hours late into Toronto.
But you need to plan accordingly and be flexible.
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
Picasa Web Albums - Ira Silverman - Across Canada...
<https://picasaweb.google.com/107478393786789439802/AcrossCanada1964?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCI2mmdPv2NrToAE&feat=directlink>
Great album. Thanks for posting the link.

One of your captions says "Pacific Great Eastern Caribou Dayliner
at Williams Lake BC. Train #2 according to timetable. Usual
convention in the US is even numbers are east and north."

The usual convention in Canada is that even numbers are east and
south. That's true on Canadian National, Canadian Pacific, and
several smaller railways. Offhand, I can't think of any exceptions.

Another of your captions illustrates an exception to the usual U.S.
convention: "D and H #9 The Laurentian approaches the Seaway bridge"
On the Delaware & Hudson, northward trains had odd numbers.

Tom Box
tbox at ncf dot ca
Port Hope, ON, Canada


------------------------------------
Posted by: Tom Box <tbox-***@public.gmane.org>
------------------------------------

For help, send an email to Canadian-Passenger-Rail-help-***@public.gmane.org
marcrail1-H+0wwilmMs3R7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-04 00:47:26 UTC
Permalink
I'm well aware of #1's dismal performance. There's nothing much I can do about the Toronto departure except hope I get lucky with an on time departure. I've got a hotel in Vancouver on day of arrival. Actually I wouldn't mind a 3 or 4 hour late arrival in Vancouver so my son can see the Fraser River canyon. If misery loves company BNSF, NS and CSX continue to melt down. The eastbound Capitol Limited was 10 hours late at Washington earlier this week and today is running 5 hours late.

The Adirondack is an example of the numbering convention causing a problem. From New York to Albany it is westbound (odd #'s in the US) but at Albany it becomes northbound (even #). Amtrak compromises and just calls it #69. The most egregious case of this was on the Southern Pacific. All trains towards the Southern Pacific HQ in San Francisco were westbound (odd#). So the northbound Coast Starlight was odd between Los Angeles and San Francisco and then even beyond to Portland. From the railroad point of view the train had two numbers. Amtrak just used one of the numbers for public consumption and internal reports.

Tom commented on the US sleepers in my 1964 pictures of the Garden Tracks at Banff. By that time the Mountaineer/Soo-Dominion were gone so how did they get there. I asked Doug Phillips, aretired CPR officer and expert on CPR passenger service:

The ‘Mountaineer’ was discontinued quietly at the end of August 1960. The following summer and for each summer until summer of 1965 the Pullman traffic turned north at Glenwood ND on the ‘Winnipegger’ and ran into Winnipeg where the cars were combined with the ‘Dominion’. In those summer months train 7 and 8 could be seen in two and sometimes three sections west of Winnipeg. The mix of coaches and sleepers made the trains very colourful, but would last for only a 70-72 day period. Then the sleepers and the diners came off for the off-season and back on went the express cars. In the off-season the ‘Dominion’ usually had just two coaches with mail and express filling out the front end. Until 1964 it had a coach buffet car as well west of the “Peg” (Winnipeg). At the same time it would be used to handle D/H sleepers being repositioned and for special tour groups that would have chartered sleepers, then a diner would have been added for the special. The main function of the ‘Dominion’ in those days was to handle over flow traffic off the ‘Canadians’ as they were confined to a max of 15 cars. The ‘Dominion’ handled all extra tourist traffic, military traffic and special group traffic and such.

For a few days during Christmas and new Years the sleepers and diners returned and then there were the “Grey Cup” specials for the football fans. Again these specials, although operating in November would run as two or more sections.

Remember the white flags for extra passenger trains and green for the following section!. Well one year Regina, Sask. played at Toronto for the Grey Cup and the colours for the Saskatchewan Roughriders are ‘green’ and ‘white’. The CPR ran one train with “White” extra flags on the lead end and on another train ran it ahead to the regular section of the “Dominion” flying “Green” flags.

In those days the CPR had a personal connection with the public

long before EHH arrived!.

The Dominion was discontinued January 1966 after running as a full train for a week and a half over the Christmas New Years window. It was down right cold when it came off that day and few were out to watch it fade into history. In fact the last train out of Vancouver could not leave because of snow slides in the Fraser Canyon. The train that left Calgary for the east was taken off at Winnipeg. And the train that had left Winnipeg was so late getting into Sudbury it was combined with the Canadian from Sudbury to Montreal. The end.


Ira Silverman
Rockville MD
tbox-7i5HoP2kWQc@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-04 14:46:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
I'm well aware of #1's dismal performance.
Forewarned is forearmed.
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
There's nothing much I can do about the Toronto departure except
hope I get lucky with an on time departure.
Here's hoping.
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
If misery loves company BNSF, NS and CSX continue to melt down.
I experienced that firsthand. After leaving Vancouver on time and
being 7 h 10 min late into Toronto on VIA #2 last April, I left
Portland on time on Amtrak #28 in June, and got to St. Paul
7 h 48 min late. News reports blame the Bakken crude oil trains,
but while I saw some of those, I saw a lot more grain and intermodal
trains. The BNSF line is just very busy.

There's very little that either VIA or Amtrak can do about the
chronic delays to their trains, but at least in the case of the
Empire Builder, I think Amtrak is doing a better job than VIA of
keeping passengers informed.

If you book a trip on the Builder on-line, you'll see an exclamation
mark in a red triangle next to the train number. If you click on
it, you get a pop-up window that says "Passengers traveling aboard
Empire Builder trains can encounter delays due to high volumes of
freight train traffic and railroad improvement work on the route.
During recent weeks, these trains typically encountered delays of
approximately one to three hours." The delay time is changed
periodically to reflect the recent performance.

Before my trip, I got an e-mail from Amtrak warning me about the
possibility of lenghty delays. I was stopping over in St. Paul
for a day and taking the next day's Builder to Chicago. When I
got to St. Paul, I had e-mail and phone messages asking me to
contact Amtrak. When I called, I was told the next day's train
was also running late, and so there would be a bus from St. Paul
to Chicago, at the train's scheduled departure time. Since that
train was not as late as the previous day's, I opted to take the
train, which left St. Paul 1 h 50 late and got to Chicago 2 h 25 min
late. Having the bus as an alternative would have been good if I
had been trying to make connections in Chicago.

As far as I can see, VIA is doing nothing to warn passengers on
the Canadian at the time they make reservations that delays of
many hours are very possible. I regularly see complaints on the
VIA Facebook page from passengers on #1 or 2 who are totally
unprepared for the delays that we know are routine. I think VIA
should be doing a lot more to inform them of what they're likely
to encounter.

You also see a lot of stupid whining on Facebook and Twitter:
people who say that all VIA trains are always late, or that
their lives have been ruined because a train is 15 min late,
or who don't seem to understand that occasional problems occur
on all modes of transport. Those complaints are unreasonable,
but I think the complaints by passengers on #1 and 2 are
different. VIA can't prevent the delays, which are mostly CN's
doing, but it should be informing its passengers in advance
about them.

In my hotel room in St. Paul, when I needed to decide whether
to take the bus or the train to Chicago, I was able to check on
how the train was doing, since the Amtrak web site provides good
information on the actual and expected arrival times. VIA does
not do so for the Canadian. The web site only has sporadic notices
of an "important delay", with skimpy details and instructions to
phone VIA. I know there are technical challenges to providing
up-to-date status information for the Canadian, but VIA could
be doing a lot better at providing on-line information.
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
The eastbound Capitol Limited was 10 hours late at Washington
earlier this week and today is running 5 hours late.
The Capitol Limited and the Lake Shore Limited have both been
suffering terrible delays in both directions between Chicago
and Cleveland in the past few weeks. I don't see any advance
warnings about this on the Amtrak web site, unlike with the
Empire Builder. I don't know exactly how long those trains have
been having problems. Perhaps Amtrak thinks it's a short-term
problem and will be cleared up soon. Or maybe, like VIA, they're
not handling the situation very well.

Tom Box
tbox at ncf dot ca
Port Hope, ON, Canada
'Mark W. Walton' mark.walton-rieW9WUcm8FFJ04o6PK0Fg@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-04 14:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Although I stand to be corrected, I believe Amtrak has much more legal clout than VIA does to hold BNSF et al to account for delays.

Mark Walton
<mailto:mark.walton-***@public.gmane.org> mark.walton-***@public.gmane.org

From: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org]
Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2014 10:47 AM
To: Canadian-Passenger-Rail-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: [CanPassRail] Chronic delays (was Re: Lower Berth Baggage)

<not so big snip>
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
There's nothing much I can do about the Toronto departure except
hope I get lucky with an on time departure.
Here's hoping.
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
If misery loves company BNSF, NS and CSX continue to melt down.
I experienced that firsthand. After leaving Vancouver on time and
being 7 h 10 min late into Toronto on VIA #2 last April, I left
Portland on time on Amtrak #28 in June, and got to St. Paul
7 h 48 min late. News reports blame the Bakken crude oil trains,
but while I saw some of those, I saw a lot more grain and intermodal
trains. The BNSF line is just very busy.

There's very little that either VIA or Amtrak can do about the
chronic delays to their trains, but at least in the case of the
Empire Builder, I think Amtrak is doing a better job than VIA of
keeping passengers informed.

<big snip>


Tom Box
tbox at ncf dot ca
Port Hope, ON, Canada

_____

Posted by: tbox-***@public.gmane.org
_____
marcrail1-H+0wwilmMs3R7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-05 22:15:08 UTC
Permalink
I can't speak as to the exact wording of the law, but in my 20 years there Amtrak had little or no clout over the freight railroads. I do know that in the 1970's the Department of Justice (they have to bring suit not Amtrak) successfully sued the Southern Pacific for dispatching delays. It had a short run positive effect but nothing like this ever happened again probably because the Depart of Justice had bigger fish to fry. As part of the TIGER federal grant program DOT promulgated some very strict on time standards which were intended to assure that Federal money spent on high speed rail improvements wasn't misspent. The industry went crazy and is concerned they could be held to account for ALL Amtrak trains. As described below in a NARP newsletter the AAR has sued to try and get these standards overturned. I personally believe that the decline in Amtrak performance has nothing to do with this suit but simply reflects record traffic levels in intermodal, oil and grain. As they say in Man of La Mancha: wether the stone hits the pitcher or the pitcher hits the stone, the pitcher is going to suffer. The grass is definitely not greener on that score south of the border.

http://www.narprail.org/uploads/3/0/4/0/30401991/august_2014.pdf http://www.narprail.org/uploads/3/0/4/0/30401991/august_2014.pdf

Ira Silverman
Rockville MD
xcnken-/E1597aS9LQAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-06 02:14:47 UTC
Permalink
Quite so. Handling all that volume over sub-divisions that have largely been single tracked over the years.


Let me ask you this. Is financial disclosure in the US between the Class 1's and passenger carriers / agencies as un-transparent as it is here ? Do the railroads disclose the sums they receive annually or otherwise ?


K. Wadden Pointe Claire Qc
tbox-7i5HoP2kWQc@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
2014-10-04 15:26:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
The Adirondack is an example of the numbering convention causing
a problem. From New York to Albany it is westbound (odd #'s
in the US) but at Albany it becomes northbound (even #).
Amtrak compromises and just calls it #69.
I'm not aware of any U.S. railroads that didn't/don't follow the
convention that westward = odd and eastward = even. But while the
majority of roads used southward = odd and northward = even, there
were several that used the opposite. Two of them were the lines
that carried the Adirondack's predecessors, the New York Central
and the Delaware & Hudson.

The Laurentian from New York to Montreal was NYC #51 from New York
to Albany and D&H #35 from Albany to Montreal, at least in the
April 1964 public timetable:
<http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/ptt/images/tt-0464.pdf>
Although New York to Albany is northward, NYC defined it as westward
in its employee timetables. I suppose they were taking the big
picture and considering it as part of the New York - Chicago route,
which is basically east-west. But NYC did have routes that it
defined as being north-south, e.g. Syracuse - Massena and Utica -
Malone - Montreal, and on them northward trains had odd numbers,
while southward trains were even.
<http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/ett/images/adirondack-tt-1057.pdf>

Likewise on the D&H. Albany-Rouses Point was defined as north-south in
employee timetables, and northward trains had odd numbers.
<http://goo.gl/fEoo3n> or
<http://www.multimodalways.org/docs/railroads/companies/D%26H/D%26H%20ETTs/D%26H%20ETT%20%2344%204-24-1960.pdf>
Post by marcrail1-H+***@public.gmane.org [Canadian-Passenger-Rail]
The most egregious case of this was on the Southern Pacific.
All trains towards the Southern Pacific HQ in San Francisco were
westbound (odd#). So the northbound Coast Starlight was odd
between Los Angeles and San Francisco and then even beyond to
Portland. From the railroad point of view the train had two
numbers. Amtrak just used one of the numbers for public
consumption and internal reports.
For a long time, CN and then VIA Toronto - Niagara Falls trains
had two numbers in both the public and employee timetables, since
they went westward (odd) from Toronto to Hamilton, then eastward
(even) from Hamilton to Niagara Falls. VIA only began using a
single number for those trains in 1987. They chose the Toronto -
Hamilton number, so the trains were numbered the "wrong" way
for Hamilton - Niagara. Even today, the Maple Leaf is Amtrak #63
(odd - westward from New York to Niagara) but VIA #98 (even -
eastward from Hamilton to Toronto).

Tom Box
tbox at ncf dot ca
Port Hope, ON, Canada
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...