(photo above) 1965 Canadian National Railways Pre-production Model
TRI-ANG RAILWAYS R.55 Diesel Locomotive
by Terry Walker
Background to the Model
At some point, probably in 1954, the decision-makers at Margate felt it was time to introduce a North American-style diesel locomotive for the ‘Transcontinental’ range to compliment R.54, the 4-6-2 Pacific steam engine released that year. According to Pat Hammond's ‘The Story of Rovex’ books, Jim Hoyland designed the model based on a picture of an EMD F7. Looking at the result, there are certain prototype aspects to it, especially the sides and roof, however the cab is definitely not F7. It appears to be more of a free-lanced amalgam of 3 different ‘A-Unit’ type locomotives - which were not only contemporaries of one another but which were all in use on both Canadian transcontinental railways in the 1950s and 1960s.
We'll never know for sure, of course, but it is possible that Jim Hoyland had also seen photos or drawings of the Alco FA diesels, as well as the Fairbanks-Morse ‘C’ Liner.
We'll never know for sure, of course, but it is possible that Jim Hoyland had also seen photos or drawings of the Alco FA diesels, as well as the Fairbanks-Morse ‘C’ Liner.
Looking at the development of Tri-ang Railways as a whole, through the 1950s and 1960s, it is evident that Margate wanted to progress from making 'toy trains' to turning out reasonably-priced scale models… for the British range, at least. It seems, however, that this attitude did not extend very far into the Transcontinental range. Later attempts did produce the more realistic-looking second series passenger coaches, but generally, the models were not updated to become acceptable items that the average HO modeller in North America would purchase. (It was not until 1970 that R.136, the Long Box Car, received actual data printed on its sides; and even then, it was only applied to the CP Rail version.)
The probable reason for this lack of input was money. It was no doubt felt that the Canadian market simply did not warrant the expenditure necessary to redo the products into something resembling serious scale models.
This resulted in R.55 remaining a somewhat homely and sad-looking affair throughout its production life. Aside from the cab not really representing anything real, the model rode on over-sized trucks and wheels that were nowhere near HO scale, and were even too big to be OO. When introduced, the detailing on the body sides was acceptable for the time, but was soon spoiled by the addition of bright silver metal grommets. Two rather obvious screws were evident on the roof, but the exhaust vents were completely missing; rooftop fans looked more like cogged gears, and the raised square element toward the rear was probably supposed to be a winterization hatch, but was much too shallow.
The one main problem, the cab / nose, was actually corrected when Tri-ang introduced R.159, the so-called ‘Double-ended Diesel’, which, for the time, had a perfectly acceptable front end for an EMD F-unit. It may be tempting to ask why Margate didn’t simply use the cab area of the new model and graft it onto R.55; however things are never that easy. For one thing, the two models have a different roof curvature.
The probable reason for this lack of input was money. It was no doubt felt that the Canadian market simply did not warrant the expenditure necessary to redo the products into something resembling serious scale models.
This resulted in R.55 remaining a somewhat homely and sad-looking affair throughout its production life. Aside from the cab not really representing anything real, the model rode on over-sized trucks and wheels that were nowhere near HO scale, and were even too big to be OO. When introduced, the detailing on the body sides was acceptable for the time, but was soon spoiled by the addition of bright silver metal grommets. Two rather obvious screws were evident on the roof, but the exhaust vents were completely missing; rooftop fans looked more like cogged gears, and the raised square element toward the rear was probably supposed to be a winterization hatch, but was much too shallow.
The one main problem, the cab / nose, was actually corrected when Tri-ang introduced R.159, the so-called ‘Double-ended Diesel’, which, for the time, had a perfectly acceptable front end for an EMD F-unit. It may be tempting to ask why Margate didn’t simply use the cab area of the new model and graft it onto R.55; however things are never that easy. For one thing, the two models have a different roof curvature.
Again, the cost of doing this was probably seen as not being all that beneficial to sales, for something that was aimed at people buying train sets for their kids… although, in retrospect, it could be argued that even children knew that this engine didn’t look like anything that would be seen in real life.
It's interesting to note that one obvious visible feature of R.55 was the placement of the number boards on the side of the cab, instead of angled across the curving corner of the nose, as found on EMD units. Conversely, the vast majority of Alco FA locomotives did have their number boards on the sides; however, it would appear that both the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) and the Canadian National Railway (CNR) asked for these Canadian-built products to have the boards placed in the same location as the EMD units. Perhaps this was done for some form of continuity in being able to visibly identify individual engines. Whatever the reason, it differentiates them from the Alco FAs in use on the American railroads. It is possible that it was a picture of a U.S. variant that was copied which led to the side placement of the number boards on the Tri-ang model.
On a related note, the road number chosen for the model, 4008, would have been an Alco FA on the CPR roster.
From the outset, the model was meant to be a Canadian Pacific Railway locomotive. This can be seen in the original paint scheme given to the model, with the main body being grey and the lower dark red stripe angling back from below the cab. This detail is in fact moulded right into the plastic, and even though liveries were altered over the ensuing years, and new ones introduced, it remained a part of the model right up to the end of production.
In addition, although the upper part of the body lacked maroon paint, there were yellow ‘speed stripes’or ‘whiskers’ applied to the nose of the cab which lined up with the angled red stripe, just as they do on CPR A-Units. The final touch was creating a CPR-like shield for the centre of the nose, using the letters ‘TR’ instead of Canadian Pacific's beaver crest.
Due to unsightly flow lines in the silvery-grey plastic, later models had the entire cab area painted in what had become scarlet red.
There are several different versions of the silver and red ‘Single-ended Diesel,’ as Margate liked to refer to the model. Originally, these units had clear plastic in the side portholes and over the headlight hole, and did not have the metal grommets in these areas. They also had blacked-out number boards.
It's interesting to note that one obvious visible feature of R.55 was the placement of the number boards on the side of the cab, instead of angled across the curving corner of the nose, as found on EMD units. Conversely, the vast majority of Alco FA locomotives did have their number boards on the sides; however, it would appear that both the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) and the Canadian National Railway (CNR) asked for these Canadian-built products to have the boards placed in the same location as the EMD units. Perhaps this was done for some form of continuity in being able to visibly identify individual engines. Whatever the reason, it differentiates them from the Alco FAs in use on the American railroads. It is possible that it was a picture of a U.S. variant that was copied which led to the side placement of the number boards on the Tri-ang model.
On a related note, the road number chosen for the model, 4008, would have been an Alco FA on the CPR roster.
From the outset, the model was meant to be a Canadian Pacific Railway locomotive. This can be seen in the original paint scheme given to the model, with the main body being grey and the lower dark red stripe angling back from below the cab. This detail is in fact moulded right into the plastic, and even though liveries were altered over the ensuing years, and new ones introduced, it remained a part of the model right up to the end of production.
In addition, although the upper part of the body lacked maroon paint, there were yellow ‘speed stripes’or ‘whiskers’ applied to the nose of the cab which lined up with the angled red stripe, just as they do on CPR A-Units. The final touch was creating a CPR-like shield for the centre of the nose, using the letters ‘TR’ instead of Canadian Pacific's beaver crest.
Due to unsightly flow lines in the silvery-grey plastic, later models had the entire cab area painted in what had become scarlet red.
There are several different versions of the silver and red ‘Single-ended Diesel,’ as Margate liked to refer to the model. Originally, these units had clear plastic in the side portholes and over the headlight hole, and did not have the metal grommets in these areas. They also had blacked-out number boards.
The second issue examples from 1957 were the most convincing as being Canadian Pacific, as the colour of paint was more or less correct (maroon-red).
In 1962, the model appeared with a new name, ‘Transcontinental,’ in script along the sides, replacing the ‘Tri-ang Railways’ block capital lettering. (It is probably no coincidence that it was around this time that the CPR had replaced the former block lettering with a new script style on its locomotives and freight rolling stock.) As well, the main body colour of the model became much more silver, rather than grey.
In 1962, the model appeared with a new name, ‘Transcontinental,’ in script along the sides, replacing the ‘Tri-ang Railways’ block capital lettering. (It is probably no coincidence that it was around this time that the CPR had replaced the former block lettering with a new script style on its locomotives and freight rolling stock.) As well, the main body colour of the model became much more silver, rather than grey.
It is not clear why Lines Bros. did not use the name "Canadian Pacific" from the beginning: it's possible that a reasonable agreement could not be reached with the company's lawyers - the CPR had a well-deserved reputation for tight-fisted meanness to begin with... It could also be that Margate were still thinking that other markets might be available to them, and wanted a more 'generic' looking model available for export. We'll never know for sure, but it's fun to theorize.
Whatever the reason, 1965 saw the introduction of R.55 in the new ‘CN’ livery. Canadian National Railways had revamped its corporate image in 1962, replacing the green, gold and black paint schemes on its locomotives and passenger cars with a striking black and white design, with red highlights; the company name was abbreviated to CN, and appeared as a corporate logo on its equipment as the so-called “wet noodle”, which in reality was meant to represent curvaceous railway lines.
Finally, in 1967, it was possible to buy a Tri-ang Railways diesel locomotive in Canadian Pacific livery. Perhaps it was seeing the models in rival CN colours that convinced the CPR to allow Lines Bros. to use their name for a reasonable cost, or perhaps even ‘au gratis’.
Unfortunately, though, it had taken a bit too long to arrive at this agreement, as 1968 saw the introduction of the new ‘CP Rail’ corporate identity. Tri-ang then had to apply this appearance to R.55, and the first of these were shipped out of Margate in May, 1970.
Despite its shortcomings, R.55 proved to be a very successful model after all. Over the 16 years of its production, some 176,400 models left the stores at Margate.
Today, the grey-silver and red Tri-ang Railways / Transcontinental version, along with the CN model, are still the most common non-domestic locomotives to be found at train shows and swap meets in Canada.
Whatever the reason, 1965 saw the introduction of R.55 in the new ‘CN’ livery. Canadian National Railways had revamped its corporate image in 1962, replacing the green, gold and black paint schemes on its locomotives and passenger cars with a striking black and white design, with red highlights; the company name was abbreviated to CN, and appeared as a corporate logo on its equipment as the so-called “wet noodle”, which in reality was meant to represent curvaceous railway lines.
Finally, in 1967, it was possible to buy a Tri-ang Railways diesel locomotive in Canadian Pacific livery. Perhaps it was seeing the models in rival CN colours that convinced the CPR to allow Lines Bros. to use their name for a reasonable cost, or perhaps even ‘au gratis’.
Unfortunately, though, it had taken a bit too long to arrive at this agreement, as 1968 saw the introduction of the new ‘CP Rail’ corporate identity. Tri-ang then had to apply this appearance to R.55, and the first of these were shipped out of Margate in May, 1970.
Despite its shortcomings, R.55 proved to be a very successful model after all. Over the 16 years of its production, some 176,400 models left the stores at Margate.
Today, the grey-silver and red Tri-ang Railways / Transcontinental version, along with the CN model, are still the most common non-domestic locomotives to be found at train shows and swap meets in Canada.
Prototype Information
It is necessary to be somewhat general here, as the model doesn’t really have a true prototype. It seems reasonable to assume, however, that given the more-or-less correct detail of the sides and roof, the less than accurate cab must have been done on purpose. Perhaps it was meant to embody the overall spirit of a North American cab unit diesel.
In any case, the existing body sides and roof suggest the EMD F7. The cab and nose area seems to take elements from two other locomotives, the Alco FA, and the Fairbanks-Morse CPA-16-4 ‘C’ Liner.
However, the first and by far the most important of these, was the General Motors Electro-Motive Division F7.
In any case, the existing body sides and roof suggest the EMD F7. The cab and nose area seems to take elements from two other locomotives, the Alco FA, and the Fairbanks-Morse CPA-16-4 ‘C’ Liner.
However, the first and by far the most important of these, was the General Motors Electro-Motive Division F7.
General Motors EMD F7
In 1930, automobile builder General Motors bought a small manufacturing concern based in Cleveland, Ohio called Electro-Motive Company (EMC), which had been building self-propelled gas-electric cars. GM decided to keep the already-established name, and EMD (Electro-Motive Division) was born.
Over the ensuing years, leading up to the Second World War, EMD developed a range of lightweight diesel-electric engines for various railroads in the U.S. which were aimed at the still-growing passenger train market. The word “streamliner” became synonymous with fast express trains pulled by a custom designed locomotive sporting aerodynamic lines, and often complete with art deco styling touches. Usually, these locomotives were of an articulated design and were essentially married to the train they were assigned to.
There existed, however, a small but influential group within EMD that believed the diesel was not being used to its full potential. Successive designs eventually led to Electro-Motive No. 103, the 4-unit ‘FT’ demonstrator, an A-B-B-A set which left the La Grange, Illinois plant in November, 1939.
Over the ensuing years, leading up to the Second World War, EMD developed a range of lightweight diesel-electric engines for various railroads in the U.S. which were aimed at the still-growing passenger train market. The word “streamliner” became synonymous with fast express trains pulled by a custom designed locomotive sporting aerodynamic lines, and often complete with art deco styling touches. Usually, these locomotives were of an articulated design and were essentially married to the train they were assigned to.
There existed, however, a small but influential group within EMD that believed the diesel was not being used to its full potential. Successive designs eventually led to Electro-Motive No. 103, the 4-unit ‘FT’ demonstrator, an A-B-B-A set which left the La Grange, Illinois plant in November, 1939.
The 190-foot, 456-ton, 5400 hp FT prototype spent the next 11 months traversing some 84,000 miles across 35 states, with ever-increasing tonnage ratings completely baffling the dynamometer crews.
The units promised lower maintenance costs, much greater flexibility, a higher level of comfort for crews and didn’t require watering every so many miles. More importantly for management, they represented substantial savings in labour costs.
Orders for the new diesels began to pour in. It was almost as if, overnight, a railroad spike had been driven into the heart of the iconic steam locomotive.
'Trains’ magazine at one point said of No. 103: “Perhaps the most influential piece of motive power since Stephenson’s ‘Rocket’.”
No. 103 was a four-unit set comprised of two cab units bracketing two cab-less booster units, all of which were semi-permanently coupled together. The booster engines had their name abbreviated to ‘B-unit,’ with the cab locomotives logically then becoming ‘A-units’.
It soon became apparent that being together as one single locomotive resulted in unnecessary restrictions, and EMD began producing the two different units separately, allowing each railway company to put together their own configurations of power.
Up to this point, the Union Pacific Railroad’s huge Alco-built ‘Big Boy’ 4-8-8-4 was the king of the rails, weighing in at nearly 400 tons with full tender, and producing something on the order of 7000 horsepower. Although undeniably impressive, and still the world’s largest steam locomotive, it also came with monstrous operating costs, and limiting curvature and loading restrictions. This was generally true of all the late-era steam giants that had been built to handle ever longer and heavier trains.
The new diesel-electrics on the other hand, could be acquired unit by unit as costs would allow, and coupled together to produce as much power as needed. What they may have lacked in horsepower and tractive effort compared to the bigger steamers was more than made up for in sheer flexibility. Later developments with distributed power would make the diesels even more effective, but that’s another story for another day.
The individual FT units produced 1350hp each, and over the next few years, successive models eventually resulted in the 1500hp F7. Although the ‘F’ designation originally stood for ‘freight,’ the F7 could be seen not only hauling heavy mainline freights, but performing branchline chores, and on the point of the top passenger expresses of the day.
As the 1950s progressed, the F7 became the face of North American railroading. A passenger version, the FP7 was introduced, being 4 ft. longer to accommodate a steam generator to provide train heating.
Finally, in 1954, the F9 appeared, and although the most powerful at 1750hp, it was destined to be the fewest in number. Visually, the differences between it and the F7 were subtle - vertical side louvers instead of horizontal, a more forward placed front porthole, and a noticeably larger roof fan for dynamic braking.
Altogether, the EMD F units represented nothing less than a railway revolution. The century-long domination of the rails by steam motive power came to a very swift end. It has been pointed out that no other basic industry underwent such a massive paradigm shift in so short a period of time; even the airline business converting to jets pales in comparison.
In Canada, only the F7 and F9, along with their respective passenger-service siblings, the FP7 and the FP9, saw active service with the CPR and the CNR. As in the U.S. the ‘covered wagons’ as they were known to crews, slowly began to be replaced with new hood-style units that were favoured for having greater versatility.
In a reversal of fortunes, the F units that survived were assigned to what had become, in the railway industry’s eyes at least, secondary passenger service.
The units promised lower maintenance costs, much greater flexibility, a higher level of comfort for crews and didn’t require watering every so many miles. More importantly for management, they represented substantial savings in labour costs.
Orders for the new diesels began to pour in. It was almost as if, overnight, a railroad spike had been driven into the heart of the iconic steam locomotive.
'Trains’ magazine at one point said of No. 103: “Perhaps the most influential piece of motive power since Stephenson’s ‘Rocket’.”
No. 103 was a four-unit set comprised of two cab units bracketing two cab-less booster units, all of which were semi-permanently coupled together. The booster engines had their name abbreviated to ‘B-unit,’ with the cab locomotives logically then becoming ‘A-units’.
It soon became apparent that being together as one single locomotive resulted in unnecessary restrictions, and EMD began producing the two different units separately, allowing each railway company to put together their own configurations of power.
Up to this point, the Union Pacific Railroad’s huge Alco-built ‘Big Boy’ 4-8-8-4 was the king of the rails, weighing in at nearly 400 tons with full tender, and producing something on the order of 7000 horsepower. Although undeniably impressive, and still the world’s largest steam locomotive, it also came with monstrous operating costs, and limiting curvature and loading restrictions. This was generally true of all the late-era steam giants that had been built to handle ever longer and heavier trains.
The new diesel-electrics on the other hand, could be acquired unit by unit as costs would allow, and coupled together to produce as much power as needed. What they may have lacked in horsepower and tractive effort compared to the bigger steamers was more than made up for in sheer flexibility. Later developments with distributed power would make the diesels even more effective, but that’s another story for another day.
The individual FT units produced 1350hp each, and over the next few years, successive models eventually resulted in the 1500hp F7. Although the ‘F’ designation originally stood for ‘freight,’ the F7 could be seen not only hauling heavy mainline freights, but performing branchline chores, and on the point of the top passenger expresses of the day.
As the 1950s progressed, the F7 became the face of North American railroading. A passenger version, the FP7 was introduced, being 4 ft. longer to accommodate a steam generator to provide train heating.
Finally, in 1954, the F9 appeared, and although the most powerful at 1750hp, it was destined to be the fewest in number. Visually, the differences between it and the F7 were subtle - vertical side louvers instead of horizontal, a more forward placed front porthole, and a noticeably larger roof fan for dynamic braking.
Altogether, the EMD F units represented nothing less than a railway revolution. The century-long domination of the rails by steam motive power came to a very swift end. It has been pointed out that no other basic industry underwent such a massive paradigm shift in so short a period of time; even the airline business converting to jets pales in comparison.
In Canada, only the F7 and F9, along with their respective passenger-service siblings, the FP7 and the FP9, saw active service with the CPR and the CNR. As in the U.S. the ‘covered wagons’ as they were known to crews, slowly began to be replaced with new hood-style units that were favoured for having greater versatility.
In a reversal of fortunes, the F units that survived were assigned to what had become, in the railway industry’s eyes at least, secondary passenger service.
In 1977, the Canadian government created a crown corporation in order to continue to provide passenger rail service in Canada. As both transcontinentals were about to discontinue their passenger trains, Via took over the operations and most of the equipment of both CN and CP Rail. By the 1980s, Via was the largest operator of EMD F units in North America.
By this time however, the locomotives were showing their age, and many a visiting tourist witnessed the indignity of the passenger train they were on having to be dragged into the yard by a much newer SD40-2, or similar freight engine, with the F units dead-in-consist.
Today, even on Via, the F unit has all but disappeared from the mainline railroad scene, finally replaced by newer and much less-inspiring equipment. However, quite a few examples were saved, and in a case of going full circle, the newly re-christened Canadian Pacific Railway company recently acquired a matching
A-B-A set of former CPR and CNR units from the Mid-western United States, where they had still been in revenue freight service. After refurbishing and upgrading, as well as repainting into the original CPR livery, the venerable old F units now head the company’s Royal Canadian Pacific luxury tour train, hauling well-heeled visitors on a 3-day journey through the Canadian Rockies.
Today, even on Via, the F unit has all but disappeared from the mainline railroad scene, finally replaced by newer and much less-inspiring equipment. However, quite a few examples were saved, and in a case of going full circle, the newly re-christened Canadian Pacific Railway company recently acquired a matching
A-B-A set of former CPR and CNR units from the Mid-western United States, where they had still been in revenue freight service. After refurbishing and upgrading, as well as repainting into the original CPR livery, the venerable old F units now head the company’s Royal Canadian Pacific luxury tour train, hauling well-heeled visitors on a 3-day journey through the Canadian Rockies.
Alco FA
In 1944, management at the American Locomotive Company (Alco) decided that a diesel-electric cab unit was required to stay competitive with EMD, and entered a partnership with General Electric (GE) to provide a new product that would allow them to take advantage of the railroad industry’s desire to move away from the increasingly difficult economics of steam power.
Alco had a long and successful history as a builder of steam locomotives, culminating in the largest ever built, the Union Pacific’s 4-8-8-4 ‘Big Boy.’ In this case however, Alco were having to play catch-up, as EMD already had new diesel units tested and for sale before the start of World War ll. In response, Alco hurried their design into production in just two years, resulting in a prime mover, the ‘244,’ that soon proved problematic. By the time these engine design faults were rectified, the company found it difficult to surmount the damage done to the reputation of this model; in addition, the railroads had moved on to purchasing the more utilitarian hood units such as the EMD GP7 and GP9, the Fairbanks-Morse Trainmaster, and Alco’s own RS series of road switchers.
Alco’s chances of competing on an even footing with EMD were hurt by WW II. The U.S. government ordered the major locomotive builders of the day to halt production of new diesel-electrics and continue to provide steam engines for the railroad industry. The exception was EMD, as their design was already in production, and in use by several railroad companies.
It is quite fitting that Craig Rutherford’s book describing the history of the Alco diesel A-units was subtitled, “Running In The Shadow,” as the company was never able to overcome the lead time, and massive popularity, of the EMD cab engines.
The Alco FA, and the FA1 and FA2 that followed it, were brawnier in appearance than the GM-built units, with a snub nose which - along with the deep-toned, nasal
one-note air horns - lent them a no-nonsense demeanour of brute force. A booster unit, the FB, was also available, followed by the FB1 and FB2, that allowed for the same kind of multiple unit operation as the EMD products; however, in the early years of initial dieselization, single FAs could be seen handling an entire freight train by themselves - as did the 244 engine, when it did run properly - providing amazing pulling power.
Alco had a long and successful history as a builder of steam locomotives, culminating in the largest ever built, the Union Pacific’s 4-8-8-4 ‘Big Boy.’ In this case however, Alco were having to play catch-up, as EMD already had new diesel units tested and for sale before the start of World War ll. In response, Alco hurried their design into production in just two years, resulting in a prime mover, the ‘244,’ that soon proved problematic. By the time these engine design faults were rectified, the company found it difficult to surmount the damage done to the reputation of this model; in addition, the railroads had moved on to purchasing the more utilitarian hood units such as the EMD GP7 and GP9, the Fairbanks-Morse Trainmaster, and Alco’s own RS series of road switchers.
Alco’s chances of competing on an even footing with EMD were hurt by WW II. The U.S. government ordered the major locomotive builders of the day to halt production of new diesel-electrics and continue to provide steam engines for the railroad industry. The exception was EMD, as their design was already in production, and in use by several railroad companies.
It is quite fitting that Craig Rutherford’s book describing the history of the Alco diesel A-units was subtitled, “Running In The Shadow,” as the company was never able to overcome the lead time, and massive popularity, of the EMD cab engines.
The Alco FA, and the FA1 and FA2 that followed it, were brawnier in appearance than the GM-built units, with a snub nose which - along with the deep-toned, nasal
one-note air horns - lent them a no-nonsense demeanour of brute force. A booster unit, the FB, was also available, followed by the FB1 and FB2, that allowed for the same kind of multiple unit operation as the EMD products; however, in the early years of initial dieselization, single FAs could be seen handling an entire freight train by themselves - as did the 244 engine, when it did run properly - providing amazing pulling power.
In 1950, the Canadian subsidiary of Alco, Montreal Locomotive Works (MLW) began building the FA and FB series for Canada’s two main railways, the CPR and the CNR, with production continuing until 1959. As with the EMD F7s and F9s, a passenger version was introduced, with a longer car body to allow a steam generator to be fitted. Several of the Alco units ended up in the possession of Via Rail, and could be found still in use into the 1990s. Some of these locomotives eventually found their way onto tourist lines, mostly in the U.S., and can still be seen in service today.
Fairbanks-Morse CFA16-4 and CPA16-4 ‘C’ Liner
The Fairbanks-Morse Company (F-M) had been a builder of 2-stroke opposed piston marine diesel engines, mostly for the U.S. Navy, since 1932. During the 1930s some of these power plants found their way into experimental gas-electric cars but it was not until 1944 that F-M actually produced a railway locomotive of their own. It was a small yard switcher, which had been designed several years previously, but like Alco, F-M were handcuffed by strict wartime measures regarding locomotive production.
Following the war, the company sought to access the new market created by the railroads phasing out steam and upgrading to diesel-electric power. A new design cab unit was built at GE’s Erie, Pennsylvania plant due to space restrictions at F-M’s own facility, and introduced in December, 1945.
Over the next four years, the design proved to be only moderately successful, and a decision was made to produce a successor, which would be designed and built at the company’s own shops in Beloit, Wisconsin. The result was the ‘Consolidated Line,’ which soon became commonly known as ‘C’ Liners.
These were offered in 1600, 2000, or 2400 hp versions, as either cab-equipped ‘A-units’ or cab-less ‘B-units’. As with EMD and Alco, the ‘C’ Liner was offered in both freight and passenger versions, but most, if not all, steam generating equipment was removed from these units early in their operational life. Similarly, like the competing builders, F-M arranged for separate construction to take place in Canada to supply the two Canadian transcontinentals and, starting in March 1950, ‘C’ Liners were built at the Canadian Locomotive Company’s (CLC) plant in Kingston, Ontario.
F-M continued in the use of the opposed piston concept for their engines, which produced a unique sound unlike any other diesel locomotive. Initially ordered by several different roads in the U.S., as well as both CNR and CPR in Canada, it unfortunately became apparent fairly quickly that the 2400 hp versions were suffering an unacceptable failure rate of their Westinghouse-built generators. The lower horsepower versions had their problems also, and difficult maintenance along with poor technical support from F-M would eventually doom the ‘C’ Liner to ‘also-ran’ status in the annals of dieseldom.
Following the war, the company sought to access the new market created by the railroads phasing out steam and upgrading to diesel-electric power. A new design cab unit was built at GE’s Erie, Pennsylvania plant due to space restrictions at F-M’s own facility, and introduced in December, 1945.
Over the next four years, the design proved to be only moderately successful, and a decision was made to produce a successor, which would be designed and built at the company’s own shops in Beloit, Wisconsin. The result was the ‘Consolidated Line,’ which soon became commonly known as ‘C’ Liners.
These were offered in 1600, 2000, or 2400 hp versions, as either cab-equipped ‘A-units’ or cab-less ‘B-units’. As with EMD and Alco, the ‘C’ Liner was offered in both freight and passenger versions, but most, if not all, steam generating equipment was removed from these units early in their operational life. Similarly, like the competing builders, F-M arranged for separate construction to take place in Canada to supply the two Canadian transcontinentals and, starting in March 1950, ‘C’ Liners were built at the Canadian Locomotive Company’s (CLC) plant in Kingston, Ontario.
F-M continued in the use of the opposed piston concept for their engines, which produced a unique sound unlike any other diesel locomotive. Initially ordered by several different roads in the U.S., as well as both CNR and CPR in Canada, it unfortunately became apparent fairly quickly that the 2400 hp versions were suffering an unacceptable failure rate of their Westinghouse-built generators. The lower horsepower versions had their problems also, and difficult maintenance along with poor technical support from F-M would eventually doom the ‘C’ Liner to ‘also-ran’ status in the annals of dieseldom.
By the time Westinghouse announced it was leaving the locomotive business in 1953, orders from U.S. railroads had ceased. In Canada, production continued for another two years but, as the design had been only marginally accepted by the railway industry, it was not considered prudent to undertake the complete redesign necessary to accommodate a new generator, and production ended in 1955.
Interestingly, the Canadian Pacific Railway remained the lone holdout customer that continued to order and run ‘C’ Liners, eventually grouping them in southern British Columbia, in the mountainous Kootenay and Okanagan Valley regions. Based in Nelson, B.C., many of the units soldiered on into the mid 1970s, finally replaced by newer and more versatile hood-style road switchers.
Interestingly, the Canadian Pacific Railway remained the lone holdout customer that continued to order and run ‘C’ Liners, eventually grouping them in southern British Columbia, in the mountainous Kootenay and Okanagan Valley regions. Based in Nelson, B.C., many of the units soldiered on into the mid 1970s, finally replaced by newer and more versatile hood-style road switchers.
Today, just four examples of this locomotive design exist, in the form of two A-units and two B-units; all of them are ex-CPR models, and all of them are currently in Calgary, Alberta at or near Canadian Pacific’s Ogden Shops. At least one of the A-units, No. 4104, has been restored to operational condition, and can be seen occasionally in excursion train service.