FL9s numbered in the 500s

I have never seen or heard anything about FL9s numbered in the 500s. This photo dates 1984 and shows FL9s 519 and 502 at Peekskill. Were these units borrowed from LIRR or was this a short thing with F units.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=92794

P.S. Note that there is no M in a circle with metro north commuter railroad on the right side of 219.

When they first applied the beach ball scheme the units were being renumbered in 500 series, conflicts with the Harlem line NWP train numbers made MNCR go back to 2000 series. only 4 or 5 units were numbered in 500's

On the same subject (New Haven followers are probably all aware of this, this comment is for everybody else): when MNR renumbered the FL9s in the 2000 series, even though this was the same numbering series, the late New Haven Railroad had used on the same engines, no FL9 got back its original New Haven number.

Examples: 1)the first one I recall seeing was MNR 2012 which had been New Haven 2039. 2) the first four units that CT had restored to the New Haven scheme were MNR 2002, 2006, 2019, and 2023 which had been, respectively, New Haven 2005, 2026, 2049, 2057.

I had been told by a couple of "reliable" sources that the reason for the
numbering in the manner in which it was done was so that the lowest
numbered engines would be the ones that they intended to keep running
the longest and the higher numbered ones would be the first to go.
It looks like most of them spent quite a few years around the railroad
after that last re-numbering.
Noel Weaver

Right, Noel . . . I heard the same thing back when that was done (1984). The lower-numbered ones were the recent rebuilds, and others in better shape, and were supposed to be destined for the longest service lives

Is there a book that lists the numbering for each FL-9 through its various owners?

NH Chris

Look for "Diesels to Park Avenue" by Joseph R. Snopek and Robert A. Lamay. Color photos. 8 1/2" x 11" 116 pages. Hardbound. Photos of FL9's for all owners and eras. Contains roster as of publication date.

http://www.railroadcatalog.com/ditopaavflst.html

-otto-

To confirm the numbering story yes the higher the number the more likely for it to bite the dust.
The B units, no longer able to lead due to no Cab signal or 26rl brake and mostly no HEP were sidelined first together with the high numbers who had never been converted and still had steam boilers.
the rare high numbers that did not get sidelined were the FL9m's that CDOT owned and later desided to rebuilt. like the 2024/2026/2027.

Was there a formula for deciding which FL-9 locomotives went to Amtrak, and which FL-9 units went to MetroNorth and to CDOT? I ask because the "500" series would have been just above the Amtrak 48x numbers applied to their FL-9 units.

The 500 numbering was done a year after the other units went to Amtrak so that had nothing to do with it..
The CDOT units were allocated to CDOT during the Metro North creation in Jan 1983.
Only reason MNCR tried to number the units outside the 2000 numbers cause Conrail claimed they needed the nembering for B23-7's.
It was pointed out to Conrail that the 2000 series had been on FL-9's since 50's and they went back to 2000 series.

Why would Conrail be able to dictate to MN how they could number their engines?

at the time Conrail was old hand, they thought they owned the number seriies.
MNCR was just created and did whatever the big railroads wanted.

So why didnt MN keep the FL9s in the 5000's that PC had them in to avoid confusion or conflicts in the first place, Conrail did it. It wasnt uncommon to see an Ex-NH locomotive still in NH paint in the 5000s until PC gave some of them them the blue and yellow treatment. I have even seen units still in the 5000s with previous paint schemes with MN logos slapped on to it. Were they not allowed to keep the 5000s or did MN have other equipment at the time with the same number series or was it because the FL9s were so tattered they decided to just rebuild every last thing.
Look- http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=94706
5037, numberboard looks bad- http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=28925
Still in NH paint http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=47493