(erielack) Transfer Cabooses and Locomotives (long)

[A Samostie <quahog_@_sprint.ca>]

Dear Group,

The recent discussion of transfer cabooses brought to mind numerous
questions that I'd been wondering about for some time...

First, how many cabooses of this type were on the Erie and DL&W rosters?
(I missed that, if it was included in the previous messages).

My understanding of transfer cabooses was that they were used on short
hops between nearby yards, or between a yard and an interchange point. 
Was this how they were used on the Erie / DL&W / EL?  Why wasn't a
regular road caboose used -- too few in the fleet?  Obviously, bunk
space wasn't necessary for these short jobs, but I imagine the
conductors could have used them as office space for completing waybills
and other paperwork.  Did the conductors actually ride in the them, or
were they just used to meet FRA requirements in the days before flashing
rear end devices?

Around 1979 or 1980, Model Railroader ran an article on transfer
cabooses.  While some railroads had respectable-looking custom-built
transfer cabooses, others were literally shacks mounted on an old
flatcar.  (The article mentioned that the slang terms "crummy" and
"hack" for caboose may have come from these less-than-luxurious cars). 
However, if I recall correctly, even the custom-built ones had long end
platforms, like the shack-on-a-flatcar versions.  Was there a particular
reason for the long end platforms on a transfer caboose?

Also, during the first-generation diesel years, a number of locomotives
are categorized as "Transfer Locomotives" in Louis Marre's Second Diesel
Spotters Guide.  EMD and Alco even differentiated them from their other
switchers by assigning a "T" or "TR" designation to the model numbers.

What, then, are the characteristics of a "transfer locomotive" as
opposed to a switcher or roadswitcher?  On page Alco-232, Marre explains
that "the units are equipped with transition-type control, which plain
switchers lacked."  Was this the case for the EMD models as well?  There
seems to be more to the "transfer locomotive" designation than
transition control, though...

The Baldwin and Lima "transfer locomotives" were massive, and seemed to
be more closely related to FM's Train Master than to the EMD and Alco
"transfer locomotives."  Was 2400 horsepower really necessary to move a
cut of freight cars between yards?  Some of the Baldwin and Lima
versions were supercharged and had dynamic brakes... were these
"expensive to maintain features" really necessary for this type of
service, even if used in a hump yard?

Examples of "transfer locomotives" include: 
- -- the center-cab EMD "T" model, 1800 hp, built for Illinois Central in
1936 (Marre, page EMD-33)
- -- the EMD TR, TR2, and TR3 models, which were essentially just cow-calf
versions of the NW2 switcher (Marre, page EMD-37)
- -- EMD TR1 model, 1350 hp, 4 units built in 1941... an FT freight
locomotive housed in a cow-calf switcher-style body, on Blomberg B road
trucks (Marre, page EMD-40).
- -- Alco T-6 switcher, 1000 hp, built 1958-1969, 55 units produced
(Marre, page Alco-232)
This one seems to have had a 'long shelf life' in the Alco catalogue,
although none were produced between 1959 and 1964.
- -- Baldwin centercab models DT-6-6-20 and RT-624, 2000 and 2400 hp, 70
units built from 1946-1954 (pages BLW-306 and 307).
- -- Lima 2500 hp centercab transfer locomotive (page Lima-353).  22 units
produced in 1950-51, all for PRR.

It seems that both the "transfer cabooses" and "transfer locomotives"
found favor on the Chicagoland-area railroads.  Obviously, there were
daily transfer runs between the various through railroads and the belt
lines around Chicago... but, then, why the need for high horsepower and
dynamic brakes in relatively flat terrain?

Were the Baldwin AS616s on the Erie originially intended for transfer
service, or for road freight?  Did they operate in the Chicago area?

Cheers,
Alan <quahog_@_sprint.ca>
ELHS #3178

------------------------------