Would railways have run RPO's and Mail/baggage cars in the same train?

[thomasjmdavis]

Jerry, I really don't want to be argumentative, but if name trains could carry 2 full RPOs, why not 1.5? Indeed the Super Chief (in some consists on the gmbus site) did carry 2 RPOs during Christmas seasons in the late 50s.  My assumption would be that it would be certainly plausible for it to carry only 90' of RPO space (one full RPO and one baggage mail) on days when it needed more than 60, but not more than 90.  In point of fact, several of the consists state exactly that (ie- an RPO and a mail baggage), but from the context (the reference to the baggage mail as selected from "LW baggage"), I assume it was actually a "baggage-storage mail" car.

The Chef DID carry an RPO and an RPO-baggage, at least in 1960 (also at the GMbus site http://santafe.gmbus.com/
Train 20                               Aug 15, 1959       Chicago to Los Angeles                    The Chief
 
#
Type
Number first call
Between
Notes
 
Bag-RPO
3401-08, 3600-03
Kansas City to Chicago
Eff 1960 Exc Sat Sun
 
60’ RPO
50-52, 80-98
Kansas City to Chicago
 
Granted, those are lightweight cars, but if the Chief and Super Chief would sometimes haul multiple RPOs, or RPO and RPO-baggage, I would think it conceivable that almost any train could, including heavyweight consists.

My point was merely that even name trains could carry an RPO route.  Under Post Office regulations, at least as I understand, the railroad was obligated to provide as much RPO space as the PO paid for on any given route on any given day- and the PO would not care whether it was on the Super Chief.

Your point about the Hummingbird is, of course, correct- as trains were combined in the late 50s through the coming of Amtrak, the express business was consolidated in fewer and fewer trains.  But my point was simply that as a result of that, some "name" trains certainly might end up with multiple RPOs.

I daresay, for that matter, there were some roads that had very few, if any, full RPOs, so there might be some precedent for 2 mail-baggage combines in the same train on busy days.  Yes, I admit that is speculation, but if is a big mail day, and there are only 2 combines in the coach yard, and you need 60' of mail space on the run....

[chicken45]

Wait, are we talking about dedicated mail RPO cars, baggage-mail cars, or running a mail car with a baggage car?

We had M70 mail cars, BM70 baggage mail cars, B70 baggage cars, and the rare PBM70 what was half coach, around a third baggage, and a sixth mail.

[thomasjmdavis]

As I understood it Josh, we started with a question about whether an RPO car and an RPO-baggage (the next car coming from MT) could run together in the same train.  I sited some published consists that demonstrate this did happen on occasion.  A consist that lists an RPO-baggage is clearly referencing a car (like the planned MT car) that had a baggage section and an RPO section.

One problem is that some (most?) consist lists use the term "mail baggage" or "baggage mail" to mean a car with an RPO "apartment" (usually 15' or 30', but sometimes other lengths) and a baggage section.  But another consist might use the term "mail-baggage" or "baggage mail" to mean a storage mail car, or a baggage car that was commonly used to carry mail, but did not have the internal layout of a dedicated storage mail car.  Car numbers are helpful, when available, to determine exactly what was meant.   Some ATSF consists list a "mail baggage" but note it is from the pool of LW or HW baggage cars, which indicates that the car is actually be a baggage car in use in conjunction with the RPO, or as a sealed mail storage car.

Further confusion comes in during the late 50s and the 60s, because a number of postal cars (of whatever configuration) were converted to baggage or express cars with little, if any, external modification.  ATSF and other roads had baggage express cars that still had RPO doors and windows at one end (converted from RPO-baggage cars), by removing the mail hooks, stripping out the furnishings, painting out "US Railway Post Office" and giving it a new number.  But a chronicler might list it as an RPO-baggage car as it rolled past.

[Cajonpassfan]

As I understood it Josh, we started with a question about whether an RPO car and an RPO-baggage (the next car coming from MT) could run together in the same train.  I sited some published consists that demonstrate this did happen on occasion.  A consist that lists an RPO-baggage is clearly referencing a car (like the planned MT car) that had a baggage section and an RPO section.

One problem is that some (most?) consist lists use the term "mail baggage" or "baggage mail" to mean a car with an RPO "apartment" (usually 15' or 30', but sometimes other lengths) and a baggage section.  But another consist might use the term "mail-baggage" or "baggage mail" to mean a storage mail car, or a baggage car that was commonly used to carry mail, but did not have the internal layout of a dedicated storage mail car.  Car numbers are helpful, when available, to determine exactly what was meant.   Some ATSF consists list a "mail baggage" but note it is from the pool of LW or HW baggage cars, which indicates that the car is actually be a baggage car in use in conjunction with the RPO, or as a sealed mail storage car.

Excellent observations, Tom. It just shows that if one wants to be accurate with a particular railroad's practices, a careful study of time and place is important. If one just wants to be plausible, and there's nothing wrong with that approach, having more one RPO apartment on one train is probably okay (although I admit I know very little about the Erie, other that that it interchanged headend business with the ATSF, among other traffic).
Regards, Otto K.

[jmlaboda - RIP]

That is, Tom.  Thanks!!!

And thanks for the info on the Santa Fe... always good to be able to learn more!!!

One thing that seems to be a pattern when two mail cars (be they two straight RPOs, an RPO and a baggage - mail or two baggage - mail cars) were in use is that one would be handling the local mail that would be picked up at various towns while the second would be dealing with the long distance mail, sorting it and preparing it for its next hand-off, be it being put into a storage mail car or being physically handed off at a large terminal.

Also worth noting is that both cars would not necessarily be close together on some of the heavier runs of mail and express... there are some examples that exist where the mail cars were actually on opposite ends of a given train, which definitely is unique to some roads.

[Nato]

          Union Pacific and Southern Pacific often used old rHarriman Roofed RPO and RPO baggage cars in their mail trains as mail storage cars. The only way to tell they were not in RPO service was the mail bag catcher arms were removed. Besides the Recient RMC article on modeling a Union Pacific mail train I recommend the book published by the Southern Pacific Historical and Tehnical on their By area to Ogden mail trains numbers 21 and 22.     Nate Goodman (Nato). Salt Lake ,Utah. 

[jmlaboda - RIP]

The only way to tell they were not in RPO service was the mail bag catcher arms were removed.

This was a very common practice on a number of roads, though as time progressed these cars also had their windows plated over so they wouldn't have to contend with broken window glass.

[Mark5]

I recall that in the 50s, one of the N&W east-west trains (Cavalier?) sometimes ran in two sections, one section with passengers and another section with a another loco just made up of mail cars (and a RPO?).

Jerry could probably comment on this (I gotta figure out which book I saw this in)

Mark

[jmlaboda - RIP]

Will have to dig for my N&W Passenger Train book... hopefully it won't be too hard to find.