The Flying Yankee

Trainman101-
I think you're safe.

I just read: "The Yankee would perform its final service shuttling travelers between Boston and New York as the Minuteman."

How was this done? It had no third rail capability, right?

That reference is misleading. The Flying Yankee trainset ran as the Minuteman between Boston and TROY, New York, not into New York City.

Ah! Thank you, Tom.

TomNelligan wrote:That reference is misleading. The Flying Yankee trainset ran as the Minuteman between Boston and TROY, New York, not into New York City.

Well, after looking at the map I guess I have to ask . . . WHY?

A New York Central connection at the long-gone Troy Union Station was once the B&M's western gateway for long distance passengers. If you go far enough back, there were even through coaches and sleepers from North Station to points west of Albany/Troy via the NYC. This was always a secondary route as compared with the Boston & Albany, though, so the through cars disappeared fairly early and in the last years of Boston-Troy passenger service (late 1950s) the remaining trains consisted of just one or two RDCs. As to why the Flying Yankee set was assigned to this run, I assume its limited capacity and relative low cost of operation fit the B&M's needs. It certainly wasn't for speed, since it was never a particularly fast route.

TomNelligan wrote:A New York Central connection at the long-gone Troy Union Station was once the B&M's western gateway for long distance passengers. If you go far enough back, there were even through coaches and sleepers from North Station to points west of Albany/Troy via the NYC. This was always a secondary route as compared with the Boston & Albany, though, so the through cars disappeared fairly early and in the last years of Boston-Troy passenger service (late 1950s) the remaining trains consisted of just one or two RDCs. As to why the Flying Yankee set was assigned to this run, I assume its limited capacity and relative low cost of operation fit the B&M's needs. It certainly wasn't for speed, since it was never a particularly fast route.

Thanks again, Tom. Interesting info.

From the Concord Monitor:

Concord Monitor wrote:Flying Yankee’s unusual design was its appeal, and its downfall

One of the reasons the Flying Yankee is a hit with rail fans is also why it proved to be something of a commercial dud.

The problem isn’t its sleek “streamliner” shape or unique-at-the-time stainless steel body, both of which drew big crowds and still carry a whiff of the futuristic even though it is eight decades old.

The problem is the wheels.

Most locomotives and train cars have two sets of wheels, known as trucks – one at each end of every car. The Flying Yankee and its few brethren, most famously the California Zephyr, shared trucks among the locomotive and the first two cars, which carried passengers.

That is, the rear wheel assembly on the locomotive was half-used by the first passenger car, and the rear wheel assembly on the first car was half-used by the second passenger car. This radical design made the system lighter by doing away with two heavy truck assemblies and with heavy, space-wasting couplings between cars.

But it also made the train hard to reconfigure. You couldn’t, for example, remove the second passenger car and replace it with a mail car if business demanded. Further, it made the train so long that it didn’t fit on rail yard turntables, so it could only turn around on a special loop track or Y-configuration tracks, limiting the lines on which it could run.

Once it was in service, Boston and Maine Railroad found that these logistical drawbacks overcame the design advantages.

Read the rest of the article at: http://www.concordmonitor.com/community ... s-downfall" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

from the concord monitor:

By DAVID BROOKS

Monitor staff
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
(Published in print: Wednesday, February 24, 2016)

It sounds straightforward: Take a sleek, historic train that traveled the rails of New England for two decades out of storage in the White Mountains and bring it back to the Concord rail yards where it was once maintained, creating the centerpiece of a transportation museum that can revitalize the city center.

Wonderful idea. But there’s an obstacle, and you can probably guess what it is.

“The minimum, just to move it, is probably $65,000 to $75,000, depending on where it’s moved and the condition under which it’s moved,” said Wayne Gagnon, who rode in the Flying Yankee as a child when his father, grandfather and godfather were all locomotive engineers for what was then the Boston and Maine Railroad.

Even if the 200-foot-long Flying Yankee can get to Concord, it’s not in great shape, having been out of service for 49 years. Restoring the diesel locomotive, which doesn’t run, and its two attached cars will cost millions of dollars. Then there’s the expense of housing it.

read the rest of the article at http://www.concordmonitor.com/news/2112 ... to-concord" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm starting to wonder if the Yankee would be better saved as a static display after all. There's plenty of interior work to be done, but surely that will be less costly than building up all the mechanical features. If it were part of a new transportation museum in which you could go inside it and see the original diesel etc...that would be pretty cool. In fact, it was already pretty cool to see it in pieces in Lincoln. Perhaps it could continue to be displayed in process? Riding the Yankee as a passenger would be nice, but it is a sealed up train with full HVAC, so that takes away a bit of the typical heritage railroad charm on a summer day.

Hmm...guess the Flying Yankee is single ended. Hadn't thought of that. Surprised at the statement that the interior is in poor condition - I thought they replaced the seats and installed HDTV monitors (not appropriate for an historic train).

It's a pitty, wouldn't this be the perfect set for the Downeaster?

BandA wrote:It's a pitty, wouldn't this be the perfect set for the Downeaster?

Without getting in to a discussion of suitability based on technical specifications .... It's actually far too small for the Downeaster's current passenger counts.

If platform height wasn't an issue the Talgo trainsets might have been an option.

The article was rather harsh and not totally accurate in its assement of the FY. The Yankee is in good condition, but it is not completed. The structure seems quite finished and presentable, whilst the interior and propulsion are stripped out (excluding the B car which has a completed interior). As it is, you can see what's under her skin and see what it looks like finished, which is pretty cool.

As for DE service, she's probably not crash worthy either.

A pretty close twin to the FY is in the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago. It is in beautiful shape. It was restored...not sure if it is operable...but on display and open for tours. It "works" as part of the museum...one attraction of many. If it were a stand alone exhibit, i.e. in Concord, I doubt that it would have the draw to survive.

Steve

Interesting thought,...
...is there room to put it next to the Boston Museum Of Science where the 3713 used to be?