• Harlem Steam Era Freight

  • Discussion relating to the NYC and subsidiaries, up to 1968. Visit the NYCS Historical Society for more information.
Discussion relating to the NYC and subsidiaries, up to 1968. Visit the NYCS Historical Society for more information.

Moderator: Otto Vondrak

  by Otto Vondrak
 
If Ten-Wheelers went up the Lake Mahopac Branch, one of two things happened.

1) The train terminated at the Harlem's stub-end terminal at Lake Mahopac, and the engine was turned on the turntable there.

2) The train switched onto the Put at XC, and continued all the way to Brewster, and thence to White Plains North.

A great book of SHARP, CRISP steam-era photos on the Harlem and Putnam can be found here for a great price:

http://www.alco628.com/wizzbc.html

It's also a great book because KATONAH is on the cover.

-otto-

  by Tom Curtin
 
Noel Weaver wrote: The Lake Mahopac Branch was pretty short and there probably wasn't
much freight on it if any.
Not much is right. But I believe they delivered coal to Lincoln Hall School in Lincolndale

  by John P.
 
Otto Vondrak wrote:If Ten-Wheelers went up the Lake Mahopac Branch, one of two things happened.

1) The train terminated at the Harlem's stub-end terminal at Lake Mahopac, and the engine was turned on the turntable there.

2) The train switched onto the Put at XC, and continued all the way to Brewster, and thence to White Plains North.

A great book of SHARP, CRISP steam-era photos on the Harlem and Putnam can be found here for a great price:

http://www.alco628.com/wizzbc.html

It's also a great book because KATONAH is on the cover.

-otto-
Thanks Otto, I just placed an order for it from Ron's!
Last edited by John P. on Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

  by John P.
 
Tom Curtin wrote:
Noel Weaver wrote: The Lake Mahopac Branch was pretty short and there probably wasn't
much freight on it if any.
Not much is right. But I believe they delivered coal to Lincoln Hall School in Lincolndale
I thought there was some kind of a milk plant on it, but don't have any details.

  by John P.
 
Noel Weaver wrote:The B & A was one of the first parts of the New York Central to be fully
diesel operated occurring in 1951. The former B & A Hudsons were ideal
for the Harlem because they had lower drivers than the other Hudsons for
the grades on the B & A. The Harlem was/is not exactly water level in
any regard and these particular engines were well suited for it.
I suspect that other steam freight power was used on the Harlem whether
any records show anything or not, maybe no records even exist to prove
anything one way or the other.
I will dig out some old timetables when I can and see if they will shed any
light on the subject.
Noel Weaver
Noel-
Speaking of old timetables, where is it documented not to take heavy engines up the Put? I have a 1957 Employees Time Table and it does not address engine restrictions on the line.

  by Noel Weaver
 
John P. wrote:
Noel Weaver wrote:The B & A was one of the first parts of the New York Central to be fully
diesel operated occurring in 1951. The former B & A Hudsons were ideal
for the Harlem because they had lower drivers than the other Hudsons for
the grades on the B & A. The Harlem was/is not exactly water level in
any regard and these particular engines were well suited for it.
I suspect that other steam freight power was used on the Harlem whether
any records show anything or not, maybe no records even exist to prove
anything one way or the other.
I will dig out some old timetables when I can and see if they will shed any
light on the subject.
Noel Weaver
Noel-
Speaking of old timetables, where is it documented not to take heavy engines up the Put? I have a 1957 Employees Time Table and it does not address engine restrictions on the line.
I just did a check on both the Harlem and the Putnam Divisions from a
1950 timetable. In 1957 both lines had been fully diesel operated for
some time and the timetables from 1957 had no instructons as to engine
restrictions for steam power. You will need a much older timetable to
check for information of this nature.
Noel Weaver

  by John P.
 
Noel Weaver wrote:I just did a check on both the Harlem and the Putnam Divisions from a
1950 timetable. In 1957 both lines had been fully diesel operated for
some time and the timetables from 1957 had no instructons as to engine
restrictions for steam power. You will need a much older timetable to
check for information of this nature.
Noel Weaver
I'm sorry Noel, I neglected to mention I also have a 1940s Employee Time Table that does list the engine restrictions. I was curious as to why the 1957 version did not list restrictions on the larger diesel engines.

  by Otto Vondrak
 
The Harlem Division may have delivered coal to Lincoln Hall at Lincolndale... I know there were a few customers in Mahopac that were served off sidings at the terminal at Lake Mahopac that were NOT Putnam customers. The Borden's plant was in Baldwin Place or Carmel and was a Put customer.

From what I understood, the 0-8-0's were restricted from working above Ardsley. Biggest restriction was the bridge over the Croton Reservoir, from what I was told. We discussed Putnam weight restrictions elsewhere, I think. The Put was dieselized by Septemebr 1951, except for the Nepperhan freight switcher that continued to rate a U-class engine for a couple more years.

As for why no restrictions with diesels? Good question. Does a GP outweigh a Ten-Wheeler?

-otto-

  by John P.
 
Otto Vondrak wrote:The Harlem Division may have delivered coal to Lincoln Hall at Lincolndale... I know there were a few customers in Mahopac that were served off sidings at the terminal at Lake Mahopac that were NOT Putnam customers. The Borden's plant was in Baldwin Place or Carmel and was a Put customer.

From what I understood, the 0-8-0's were restricted from working above Ardsley. Biggest restriction was the bridge over the Croton Reservoir, from what I was told. We discussed Putnam weight restrictions elsewhere, I think. The Put was dieselized by Septemebr 1951, except for the Nepperhan freight switcher that continued to rate a U-class engine for a couple more years.

As for why no restrictions with diesels? Good question. Does a GP outweigh a Ten-Wheeler?

-otto-
Was not really thinking of a GP but something a little larger, say like an E unit.

  by Otto Vondrak
 
I know C-Liners were used on the Harlem... E-units occasionally... like when Hudson Div trains would detour over the Harlem... on the Put? No need for E's, therefore they weren't considered...

  by John P.
 
Otto Vondrak wrote:The Harlem Division may have delivered coal to Lincoln Hall at Lincolndale... I know there were a few customers in Mahopac that were served off sidings at the terminal at Lake Mahopac that were NOT Putnam customers. The Borden's plant was in Baldwin Place or Carmel and was a Put customer.

-otto-
Where would one look to find a listing of all these Harlem customers? I can still remember some of the ones in Mahopac from watching the Alcos moving cars around.

  by Otto Vondrak
 
You'd have to scrounge up NYC evaluation maps and hope they listed the customers on them... or rely on other's memories... no book I know it lists them all. Two questions- are you looking for the ENTIRE Harlem? And what time period? Curious, any particular reason you're looking for this data? Answer these questions and we can help you better find your info.

-otto-

  by John P.
 
Otto Vondrak wrote:You'd have to scrounge up NYC evaluation maps and hope they listed the customers on them... or rely on other's memories... no book I know it lists them all. Two questions- are you looking for the ENTIRE Harlem? And what time period? Curious, any particular reason you're looking for this data? Answer these questions and we can help you better find your info.

-otto-
Just looking for info on the branch including the Lake Mahopac area. I remember going to the lumber yards with my Dad and seeing the cars being switched. In fact my Uncle nearly ran into one train as it was crossing route 6 at night.

  by Noel Weaver
 
Otto Vondrak wrote:The Harlem Division may have delivered coal to Lincoln Hall at Lincolndale... I know there were a few customers in Mahopac that were served off sidings at the terminal at Lake Mahopac that were NOT Putnam customers. The Borden's plant was in Baldwin Place or Carmel and was a Put customer.

From what I understood, the 0-8-0's were restricted from working above Ardsley. Biggest restriction was the bridge over the Croton Reservoir, from what I was told. We discussed Putnam weight restrictions elsewhere, I think. The Put was dieselized by Septemebr 1951, except for the Nepperhan freight switcher that continued to rate a U-class engine for a couple more years.

As for why no restrictions with diesels? Good question. Does a GP outweigh a Ten-Wheeler? -otto-
I went through timetables from both 1955 and 1958 and all I could find
for restrictions was cars weighing over 210,000 lbs without permission
from the superintendent. I would think this could also apply to engines
until it occurs to me that RS-3's among others which were in common
use on the Put weighed more than 210,000 lbs. There was no
restriction pertaining to multiple use of diesels either.
During the period of the two above timetables, the Croton Lake Bridg had
a 15 MPH restriction for all engines and maybe that covered it.
I am not a bridge expert but I know there were a lot of cases when
steam was replaced on some railroads bridges that had a major
restriction on steam engines had no restrictions on diesels. Likewise, in
a few cases, some railroads had rather small steam engines that remained
in operation for a longer time than one would think because it was
difficult to get a decent diesel unit small enough to replace them.
In some cases a railroad could also have an unofficial restriction, it did
not appear in the timetable but they still had one and they would not
exceed it.
I recall in the Penn Central days of the early 1970's, they did not operate
six motor engines on the Beacon Branch between Hopewell Junction and
Beacon after a few trips with them, they simply decided that they were
too heavy for the line. They also had a restriction on the River Line
from at least 1973 for a period when there were no six motor engines on
that line either. Eventually both restrictions were lifted but nothing ever
appeared in the timetable about either one of them.
Noel Weaver

  by Otto Vondrak
 
I don't think the Lake Mahopac Branch had any customers on-line... unless you count the customers at Golden's Bridge, the possibility of coal deliveries to Lincoln Hall in Lincolndale, and the one or two customers at the end of the branch at Lake Mahopac station. I know there was a Harlem freight house at Lake Mahopac. Remember that the New York & Mahopac (leased by the Harlem) got to Lake Mahopac in 1872- a good eight years before the New York & Northern (later the Putnam Division) was built. So any customers immediately around Lake Mahopac would have been scooped up by the Harlem...