New York Central question concerning the C-Liner

[Power Stroke]

What was the latest that the NYC ran the CFA-16-4 C-liner and what would be the appropriate freight? I picked up 6603+6604 because this is my 2nd favorite carbody style for transitional diesels.
That being said, I can't rightly run modern freight behind these without some level of guilt.
The only thing I have found online was a postcard from NYC touting the Pacemaker service. Is that it, or were they used for mixed freight, or haul freight from other roads?
I would appreciate the education.
Thanks,
Stephen.

[AVR Mark]

NYC bought the first C liners made, CFA20-4 (12) and CFB20-4 (3) in two orders between March and July of 1950. They bought CFA16-4 ( and CFB16-4 (4) in February 1952. They also bought CPA24-5 ( in March 1952. It appears that the CFA16-4s (and Bs) were relatively less troublesome than the CFA20-4s and The CPA24-5s. All of both types (including the CFB20-4s) were repowered by NYC with EMD 567C V-16s between 1955 and 1957. This didn't do much to help the problems which were mostly with the Westinghouse generators and their switch gear. Also keep in mind, that at that time a used (even not working) FM OP engine was worth a lot of money. I have read that the repowered units really weren't a solution and that most of those units spent a lot of time in storage until their equipment trusts expired at 15 years. The CFA16-4s (and Bs) were not repowered, but probably also had their share of problems and definitely would have been gone at the end of 15 years which would have been late 1966 or early 1967. All the C-Liners were gone before the PC merger.

Mark

[Power Stroke]

Mark.
Thanks for the reply. Anything on what they might have pulled for freight?

[brokemoto]

NYCS yanked the CFA/CFB-16-4, class DFA/DFB-9, in September, 1966.  They did not receive a new class designation nor re-numbering.  In 1966, NYCS changed all of its class designations to conform with PRR designations in anticipation of the PC merger.  NYCS also re-numbered many of their locomotives (as did PRR).  The Motive Power Departments of both roads decided not to retain the FM cab units after the merger.

Most of the photographs that I have seen of these as they pulled freight trains show them in general merchandise service.  Funny, I have seen more than a few running MU with EMD power.  These are not always those that later received EMD horses.

In 1957, the order came down from 230 Park Ave. to begin painting into the Cigar Band scheme.  The shops frequently did this during major shoppings of locomotives.  As the FMs were maintenance hungry, you would think that most of them would have received the Cigar Band early.  I have seen photographs of these things, taken as late as 1966, showing Lightning Stripes (although in pretty bad shape).

The freight Eries came between 1947 and 1949.  Those that did not receive EMD engines lasted until December, 1960.  Those that did lasted until April, 1963.

The CFA/CFB-20-4 s came April, 1950.  The first ones received new engines in July, 1955; the last in January, 1957.  The first ones went August, 1964; the last September, 1965.

The passenger Eries (A units,  only) came March and April, 1949.  All of them went January, 1964.

The B/A-1-A passenger units (again, A units, only) came March and April, 1952.  The first received EMD engines in October, 1955; the last, March, 1956.  All of them went October, 1966.

The H20-44 transfer units came between July, 1948 and May, 1949.  The first ones went July, 1964; the last, March, 1966.

The H16-44s came between July and November, 1951.  The first one went in March, 1957 (wreck?), the last, May, 1967.

Many of the FM yard goats did make it to PC, but, like the road switchers, they did not last long.

I do not know what PRR nor what NYNH&H FM units made it to PC

A funny footnote, it was an FM yard goat that convinced P&LE that it did not want the A-2a, but, wanted diesels, instead.

[strummer]

Interesting stuff,that....

Mark in Oregon

[jmlaboda]

I read a Trains issue that dealt with some of the problems with various power that NYC was having and in it it mentioned that using the cost of repairs on EMD as the measuring stick, since they were having to be repaired less than any other type of diesel - electric, I remember that they mentioned that ALCOs required 1½ times as much money to repair them than the EMDs, while Baldwins and Limas were considerably higher than that, while FM power was the most costly (around 4x IIRC), largely because of the opposed piston engines requiring a large amount of labor just to take the main parts of the motors apart so that repairs could be made.  The Westinghouse electricals really didn't help either with problems still being found even after repowering, which did lead to the FMs being sidelined well before they were retired.

[AVR Mark]

I'm not claiming to an expert, but from what I have read, FM products had very mixed results depending on what railroad owned them. The FM power plant had nothing in common with the EMD power plant except that they burned the same fuel. On railroads with large numbers (think several hundred) of the EMD locomotives, as opposed (pardon the pun) to maybe a few dozen FM Locomotives, of course the EMDs were much more reliable than the FMs. Also, when maintenance was required, the EMDs were always serviced first and the FMs when they got around to it. Most of the big railroads would send their maintenance personnel to EMD schools to learn how to maintain them, usually as part of the "new locomotive's" price. If a railroad sent someone to a FM school that person was more likely to be a supervisor type employee rather than an average maintenance worker. Since there were were many more EMD products around, the odds were good that whatever maintenance personnel was assigned to the repair would be able to fix it. Meanwhile, the broken FM still waited to be fixed because it was not the same methodology to fix and not that many in the shop could fix it. On some railroads, such as the SP and the CP, they had much better luck with their FM (and CLC) products, because they had more of them and the were all assigned to the same shops where the same people maintained them and no other brands of locomotives. In these cases, the maintenance people knew how to fix the FM engines and did all the time. Also the fact that FM actively tried to purchase the OP power plants from their older locomotives lead some railroads to retire the locomotives and sell the engines to FM. When I was in the Navy, I was stationed on a ship that had two FM 5 cylinder 38D 5 1/4 300 HP OP engines for emergency generators, one of which was located less than twenty feet from where I slept. In the three years that I was on there, I can't remember them ever having a major problem with them.

Mark

[strummer]

I remember reading in "TRAINS" once that the FM units fared poorly in the Southwest, due to the excessive heat in that part of the country.

I guess that's why Espee  used their Trainmasters around the Bay area,where the air is cooler...

Mark in Oregon