RE: [cpsig] Gyralights (was Re: Domes and icicle breaker cars)
- From: "Doug Cummings" <DougCummings@xxxxxxx>
- To: <cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 10:17:13 -0800
The Canadian usually was handled by FP's but it was handled by Geeps on more
than one occasion. Several groups of geeps were passenger equipped although
the Dominion was far more likely to be handled by Geeps than the Canadian.
An FP-GP-FP combination was also quite common as were FP-FB-FB's or FP-GP-GP
or FP-GP-FB or other variations thereof. And there are lots of photos that
show an RS18 in the consist as well, but generally speaking they did not run
RS18's west of Calgary.
So far we've engaged in a LOT of conjecture. Nobody on this
list has yet produced ANYTHING from the CPR or other contemporary
sources stating the purpose of these roof-mounted lights. Though I'd
personally side with the PR angle. And it would work fine until The
Canadian was led by an RS10, RS18, GP9, E8, or even a steam-jenny
fitted Train Master. But this "never" happened, did it? ;)
Yet was the CPR not fitting RDC's with Gyralites for improved public
crossing visual conspicuity at about the time that The Canadian was
introduced to the travelling public? Which raises the possibility that
the CPR also wanted to make The Canadian more visible to motorists?
And as suggested, if Dean and Hanna are wrong in their book's photo
caption regarding these lights' purpose, what else is also inaccurate
in that book? To assert that Dean and Hanna printed an inaccurate
caption in their book on CP's diesel locos is also to raise the
spectre of other inaccuracies contained in it. Which opens a can of
worms...
So is Dean and Hanna's book not to be relied on?
--It would be very unique not to find at least one error in just about every
non-fiction book ever published. The latest copy of RAILFAN & RAILROAD has a
major boo boo in one of its photo captions.
CPR fitted removable, front-facing Gyralites on the front door of its RDCs.
The Gyralite was removable so it could be moved to the front end of the
train when it turned. It is well-documented that RDCs were considered much
more quiet than the locomotive-hauled trains they replaced, and in
grade-crossing accidents involving RDCs, the lack of noise has been cited in
multiple instances as a reason the car or truck driver failed to notice the
train. It is also a fact the gyrolight was not introduced until some time
after the Canadian was introduced.
--There is a 1963 photo in the Dean & Hanna book of the Canadian with 1419
leading and it does not have the gyrolight, there is also a builders photo
of 1415 without the gyrolight, and similar other photos of the era do not
show the gyrolights either. When they were introduced I do not know but it
does not appear they had either them or the icicle breakers when the
Canadian was first introduced. So the theory it was to make the trains more
visible and was to promote these "new" trains just does not hold water but
the icicle breakers appear to have been installed well before the
gyrolights.
--The fact the gyrolight was aimed skyward pretty much shoots down that
theory. If the motorists can't see a very powerful headlight they would
certainly not see the gyrolights.
So if only The Canadian was guaranteed to have locomotives with lights on
the roof, and if no other CP passenger train was guaranteed to have
locomotives with these lights, doesn't logic suggest that their use is
connected to the uniqueness of The Canadian, rather than to any other
consideration?
--And what was the most unique feature of the Canadian? The Dome cars.
--You can argue until the cows come home on the purpose of the gyrolights on
the roof of the FP's. I don't believe for one second it was to make the
train more visible. There were other far more effective ways to do that.
Perhaps you do, we can agree to disagree on that one. I was here when the
Canadian made its first trip and I saw that train regularly from then until
VIA took it off many years later. I saw them introduce the icicle breakers
and the gyrolights and what I have been saying is what we were all told at
the time. This is not second hand hear say, this is first hand observation
and conversation with those involved.
Doug
Other related posts:
