On the E&N they certainly did have "unit trains". I submit the log trains on
the E&N as qualifiers. Prior to the 50's too.
Len Thompson
--- In cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, <mile179kingston@...> wrote:
Interesting thread. So with our unit train definition of: same cargo, same
origin, same destination, same car type throughout the train...did CP operate
'em in the 50's?
Good suggestion of the silk trains for inclusion. Technically, they meet the
above criteria. But...not a long train. Kept short for speed. Unit trains are
not kept short for speed, at least when hauling bulk commodities. They have
to travel between two points able to handle entire trains to make them
cost-effective.
In the 50's, CP was not a unit train railway in my mind. Crew changes,
motive power and van changes, and yarding of trains en route, made up of
individual blocks and cars that could occur at major terminals in large
cities like Winnipeg, Toronto etc.
Still waiting for an example. What about ore trains? Also, should their be a
train length (# of cars) to add to the criteria?
Eric Gagnon
Kingston, Ontario
Just blogged CP's Magical Multimark at:
http://tracksidetreasure.blogspot.ca
---In cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, <mikesue.salfi@> wrote:
Hello all,
Today you see many unit trains, the one that comes to mind mostly is a train
with only tank cars. I am wondering if this occurred in the 1950's as well.
I have seen video's of trains made up solely of tank cars or refrigerator
cars on the Union Pacific and hauled by steam locomotives, would the same
have happened in Canada on the CPR?
Thanks,
--
Mike and Sue Salfi
Kitchener, ON
