In Germany these days we've got the so-called 'parcel intercity', which is a very similar concept to the Super C, albeit exclusively for parcels. It's an intermodal train that runs non-stop from north to south across the country in one night at around 100 mph, and at both ends the containers are loaded directly onto trucks and sent to distribution centres. The introduction of this train has made next-day shipping possible from anywhere to anywhere within the entire country.
@@Southern_Plains_RailfanThe parcel intercity also had a predecessor service called the “Inter-Cargo-Express” (probably chosen to mirror the high-speed passenger InterCity Express). The service also ran at up to 100 mph but only lasted four years. The remarkable thing about it is though, that they constructed two-axle sliding door cars for it, that could sustain 100 mph running. Those were probably some of the fastest two-axle freight cars ever.
We have the royal mail trains too which I guess now mainly carries parcels, these are usually done using specially made EMU's that can go at 100MPH. Some rail freight companies are also trialling the use of withdrawn multiple units to carry parcels and such like. There also used to be some food items carried on the old HST's from Cornwall, though I understand that ceased with the introduction if new trains that no longer have a space for it. Also France had a special TGV for carrying mail.
The true purpose of those short SUPER-C trains was to give us model railroaders something that will fit and still be realistic!! 😏 (New subscriber. Great video informative and eye-catching!👍)
The big bottleneck wasn't the mostly CtC single track but the largely ABS, directional signaled double track with reverse spring switches. Any train slower then it, pretty much all of the,, would have to back up through spring switches onto the opposing mainline to clear for it. SF had very few controlled junctions and since most of it was directional ABS, you could run those trains on opposing tracks (you could but at restricted speed cause they would require train orders to proceed since it wasn't signaled in that direction), just park them there.
It got canceled in name only. Better to say it got a suspended...for a short while as they reorganized their marketing strategy. It got resurrected under different train symbols and has evolved over the decades since. it fumbled on and off throught the 70's and 80's under several different incarnations, but after deregulation and a UPS contract, it really took off solid.
The 60s was a time of railroad financial difficulty, as I seem to remember. The railroads were frantically trying to find new models to regain profitability.
6:27 During the early _Super C_ testing phases before the USPS mail contract arrived, setouts and pickups were at *Kansas City* and *Amarillo.* Eventually, *Wellington, Belen, Winslow* and *Barstow* were added during the peak of _Super C's_ 1970-76 operational run. source: _"Super C: Hottest of the Hotshots"_ by Fred W. Frailey; *_Trains_* April 1986
Great video as usual. The Z train before the Z train basically. They still treat most Z trains in the same fashion as the Super C meaning anything in the way is getting dumped in the siding no matter what and they want the train out on time even if it means leaving cars behind that didnt make it on time for the interchange. Pretty much the only thing that went away was the guaranteed delivery and the 90mph speeds(for obvious reasons) everything else is mostly the same in relation of the Super C to the Z train haha.
@sharkheadism yea youre right. Mainly when its on foreign tracks is when it gets treated like garbage and or if its multiple z trains on the same stretch of territory somebody's gotta get priority lol
As a teenager growing up in Northwest Missouri, use to love making the trip down to Henrietta to catch the westbound Super C at 90mph. My brother and I tried to pace it west from WB Jct, it was doing all of 90mph. Too afraid of meeting a highway patrolman, we didn't pace for very long. 😂
I don’t believe that Phoenix is on the BNSF Trans Con rails. The closest it comes is at Flagstaff, 175 miles north of Phoenix. There is a branch line that runs to Phoenix from the main line.
ASH FORK AZ IS WHERE THE PHOENIX LINE SPLIT OFF THE TRANSCON! THE 2 TRANSCON TRACKS WERE RELOCATED FARTHER NORTH ON A HUGE REROUTE OF THE TRANSCON BETWEEN WILLIAMS AND SELIGMAN AZ!!
The AT&SF,in the footsteps of Death Valley Scotty,only more often,and with freight! Never say die,and on a beautiful railroad! I was lucky[blessed],to ride the Super Chief,before Amtrak,and it was memorable! Thank you 😇 😊!!
I used to work with an old ATSF engineer who worked the Hereford Sub (Amarillo to Clovis). I asked him if he ever remembered a fast train called the "Super C." "Oh yeah! That was a rough ride on those old engines!" He was a fireman at the time. By the time I worked, the Super C was long gone, but we still had some smoking runs, 1:40 for the 100 miles from Amarillo to Clovis. Not too shabby.
Great job on the video and you kept it very fun informative and movin! It's amazing that this train was orchestrated so well to be able to move freight like it did. I'm really surprised that Penn Central was not a main component in it's discontinued status 😅.
Thank you! Yeah, I'm a bit surprised Penn Central didn't affect it's operation either, but then again, most of that NYC-LA cargo ran on standard rate trains, not The C.
*Alfred E. Perlman* (president of New York Central during Super C's conception and testing phase, and president of the merged behemoth Penn Central during Super C's operational service), never really intended to fully cooperate with Santa Fe in the potential _Super C_ branded transcontinental service for one key reason... *_Southern Pacific_* (SP). New York Central (NYC) and later Penn Central's single largest western interchange partner was _Southern Pacific._ Right from the outset, SP demanded to be included in any potential transcontinental *Super C* service via SP's _Cotton Belt Route_ - St. Louis to Dallas. New York Central sheepishly attempted to broker a Santa Fe - SP - NYC routing agreement, but Santa Fe countered that routing the service between three carriers from Los Angeles to New York made little logistical sense (especially through St. Louis simply to accommodate Southern Pacific), while at the same time - SP made it crystal clear to NYC, that SP's inclusion via St. Louis on Cotton Belt was a deal breaker. Perlman was legitimately concerned that if NYC cooperated with Santa Fe (SP's key competitor whose Trancon route had significant advantages verses SP between the mid-west and Los Angeles), then SP could retaliate by diverting the enormous volume of imported eastbound bridge traffic interchanged in St. Louis to competitors _Baltimore and Ohio_ and _Norfolk and Western,_ instead of NYC. So, NYC's (later Penn Central) refusal to cooperate long-term in _Super C_ with Santa Fe was largely due to Perlman's calculation that any proceeds from such a high profile service partnership with SP's competitive mortal enemy would be far outweighed by the potential endangerment of NYC/Penn Central's existing decades-long financially critical interchange arrangements with SP. Ultimately, NYC limited their _Super C_ participation to the testing phase by running a few test transcontinental trains with Santa Fe. One of NYC''s tangible contributions to _Super C_ was the suggestion of using Flexi-Van containers as opposed to traditional piggyback trailers due to Flexi-Vans' lower profile inducing less wind resistance at high speeds. Four Flexi-Van containers can be seen in the video at 7:03 behind the locomotives.
Didn't they also use GE U28Cs to power this train? They emblazened the, "Santa Fe," lettering in big red letters on the long hood. I think that was the first time the road had used the red lettering. Informative vid. Thanks!
If the U28C was a passenger locomotive, then they could have used it, but I don’t remember reading anything that says they did. Yes, the passenger service U-boats were the first to debut ATSF’s billboard lettering. You’re welcome!
@@Southern_Plains_Railfan THE U 28 CG IS PROPER MODEL DESIGNATION, AND WAS DEFINITELY PASSENGER POWER UNITS WITH THE G DESIGNATION MEANING STEAM GENERATOR! I WAS WORKING IN ARGENTINE DIESEL SHOPS STARTING SEPT 16 1964, TO JAN 5 1995. THESE UNITS WERE KNOWN AS THE 350 CLASS, NUMBERED 350 TO 359. EARLY IN THE PURCHASE THE 350 CLASS WERE DISCOVERED TO BE PAINFULLY SLOW IN ACCELERATION WITH PASSENGER RUNS WITH ONLY TWO OR THREE CARS! I N THOSE DAYS THE OPERATING RULES REQIRED WHEN ACCELERATING FROM A STOP TO NOT ADVANCE THE THROTTLE UNTIL THE LOAD METER QUIT MOVING TO HIGHER AMPERAGE! THE 350 CLASS UNITS HAD 2800 HORSE POWER , BUT HAD THE ELLIOT TURBOCHARGERS , WHICH PERFORMED POORLY WITH LIGHT TRAINS. BEN STROH, WHO WAS THE LOCAL GENERAL ELECTRIC FACTORY REP RODE SEVERAL TRIPS ON THE KANSAS CITY OIL FLYER , AND # 47 AND 48, THE TWO TRAINS BETWEEN KANSAS CITY AND TULSA OKLAHOMA. THE ENGINE CREWMEN GAVE BEN QUITE A HARD TIME ABOUT THE POOR ACCELERATION! FINALLY BEN ORDERED THE CREWS TO GET THEM OUT OF THE STATIONS NORMALLY AND GET UP TO THROTTLE NOTCH 3, AND THEN PULL THE THROTTLE OUT TO FULL NOTCH 8, UNTIL MAKING TRACK SPEED! THROTTLING UP THIS WAS WOULD GET THE ELLIOT TURBO UP TO SPEED AND PROPER ACCELERATION! THE U 25 AND THE U-28 LOCOMOTIVES ALSO HAD AN 16 NOTCH THROTTLE AS OPPOSED TO THE USUAL 8 SPEED THROTTLE! WHILE THERE WERE 8 SPEEDS ON THE ENGINE THE EXTRA THROTTLE NOTCHES WERE HALF NOTCHES THAT SLIGHTLY INCREASED MAIN TRACTION GENERATOR OUTPUT! ALL LATER GENERAL ELECTRIC LOCOMOTIVES HAD THE STANDARD 8 NOTCH WITH NO HALF STEP GENERATOR CONTROL!! AS FOR THE 350 CLASS PAINT IT WAS THE RED , SILVER , AND YELLOW WARBONNET COLORS WITH RED LETTERING ON THE SIDES, BUT SOMEWHAT LESS STRIKING THAN THE ORIGINAL! KEEP THEM ROLLING BROTHERS!! 👍👍
@@ADIX2400 Trains Magazine had an article on Super-C back in the 80s, I think, and had a photo of the train. The engines were said to be U28Cs. The hood unit U30Cs look exactly like them, though.
We ran a lot of freight on the rail at YRC/Yellow. I’ve been to rails yards in Chicago, Philly, Harrisburg, and Atlanta. We used BNSF quite frequently.
Interesting you've touched on a couple of points that kind of made this train more trouble and expense than it was worth. I believe Trains had an article one time about running fast trains. It's all glamorous and all, but the way it snarles up everything else makes it hard to justify. And most customers don't want to pay for a premium, they're simply happy if the trailer loaded on the train shows up in the three days like it's supposed to. So generally trains like this make for great PR, and a really neat model RR subject, but operationally not really that great.
DP Morgan covered the Super C pretty well back then. The rate cuts that have hit Box freight seem to attract shippers, but do cut into Stockholder profits. The Railroads are now designed to feed the Stockholders Values, not to accommodate the Shippers, that the original Charters called for.
Nice👍Be cool if you did a story of the opposite,the slowest train with shortest track in history that lasted over 45yrs,the Illinois Midland. It's a good story.
4:08 Domestic auto parts ? That's a Hillman Husky surely , although it's news to me it shared a line with the Hunter . I thought they were built in Scotland .
WORKING IN THE ARGENTINE LOCOMOTIVE SHOP I WAS ON THE FUEL AND SERVICE CREW ON THE FIRST OFFICIAL RUN! AT THE TIME WE HAD 2 LARGE LOCOMOTIVE FUELING TRUCKS FOR THE YARDS AND THESE ENGINES WERE SERVICED NEAR THE ARGENTINE DEPOT AREA! IN THE LATE 1980 s A NEW FUELING FACILITY WAS BUILT ON THE #1,AND 2 MAINLINE AT 42 nd STREET , USED PRIMARILY FOR AMTRAK AND HOT SHOT THROUGH FREIGHTS! KEEP THEM ROLLING BROTHERS!! 👍👍
That’s amazing! Would you happen to know what all the passenger cars were for on its inaugural run? Was it just to take executives on a joyride, or were some of them dynamometer cars taking live data?
I wonder why they thought this was a good idea, was it because they had spare high speed locomotives left over from their dying passenger service. The 747 was entering service at the same time. If your freight is time critical you send it by air, if its cost critical you send it by rail. Its no surprise that hardly anyone wanted to pay extra to cut a few hours off of a rail shipment.
The plan was to team with NYC to run trailers between LA and New York City on a schedule that would depart Friday afternoon, and deliver to New York on the following Monday am. New York Central could never hold up their end of the schedule
That's not quite correct. On it's test run on the New York Central, they did run into delays. But only one test run was done on the Central. The NYC decided not to go with it, due to possible retaliation by the Southern Pacific, who they needed to ship Detroit Autos and Auto parts to. SP could of teamed up with GT, bypassing the Central, and therefore costing them profitable business.
The ATSF-PC merger we could only imagine: Although, ig that mail contract loss didn't really stop atsf from running tons of power on tiny trains at super high speeds outside of the superC 😅
Can you do a video on the folowing trains please Porters steam locos,(a 0,20, some a 0,2,2) The cook mogul, 2, 3,1 or 0,3,1 i can't rember, its cab is decided by the bpiler so you have to stand on the tender or go to the sides of it to drive it,) The Japanese class d51 nick name hero of the railways, And mabey another talking about the different types of stram funnles, and one on the different types of cut offs/reversers/ Johnson bar Theres the valve wheel, the big lever, and 2 other versions i can't describe...
One thing I heard was that if Amtrak did not happen, or if ATSF stayed out of Amtrak, the Super C might have been a hybrid mail-exopress-passenger train.
The concept of totally clearing the main line for a fast train like the Super C is a much more daunting challenge than it sounds. It has so many ripple effects. This same factor caused Union Pacific to abandon its cross-country express concept in the 2000s.
I'm astonished by the amount of rail infrastructure that has been removed all over the US since it's decline. We're in an endless cycle of build and then destroy. What will it be next, interstates that cut through major cities?
Why do you consider the Super C a failure? Today it would be recognized as a viable proof-of-concept effort. It proved that fast priority freight could be handled efficiently and routinely. It led to further efforts into fast priority freight that might lead to even better service today (if some railroads don't for get their roots and what their primary job is). Your reference to the Penn Central also ignores the previous operations Santa Fe tried with New York Central's Flexi-Van service in '67, moving traffic from New York City to Los Angeles in 54 hours, 21 minutes. NYC had a fast backdoor between Detroit and New York via the Canada Southern, and the later proposals utilized this. The fact that the PC merger hobbled the more innovative NYC with old fashioned "We're the standard of the world" Pennsy thinking was what damaged a good idea. Even today railroads are trying new ideas. Too many short-sighted people laugh at battery locomotives. They don't understand that some ideas with potential have to have real world trials to work out the bugs and find the unexpected benefits. But one day there will be innovations that come out of all the research that will benefit main stream railroading.
This is just a response to the battery locomotive thing, I do think they have potential but mainly as slugs and B units to kick in when overhead line stops because a town declined the installation of electrified trackage; current battery chemistry doesn't really favor them being the sole long haul road locomotive type on a train. Of course, that's just current battery chemistry I suppose; the locomotive Galvani from 1837 could only run for four hours at 15 mph light and it was literally just a four-axle power truck with an array of batteries, so we've certainly come a long way.
You're spot on about The New York Central and the PRR. The PRR was a Wooden Axle Railroad compared to the Central. You're also right that the Super C was not a failure
The video self-contradicts. The map at the beginning clearly shows the transcon route with Phoenix nowhere close, then the narration claims later it did run through there. The Peavine comes off the transcon at Williams, AZ
All the engineers that got to operate these trains got the honor of knowing they were the BEST and everyone else had to yield to them not to mention they got to their destination fast and got to go home early most likely.
Are you sure that any significant quantity of goods from Europe to Asia go via the US or Panama canal? London to Tokyo via Panama is about 1000 miles of extra sailing compared to going through Suez, and that's about the shortest possible Europe-Asia journey via the western hemisphere. Suez is even more advantageous for going to China, and the largest container ships in the world operate that route. London-New York-LA-Tokyo saves about a thousand miles of total distance compared to Suez, but with the added inconvenience of transloading twice. That 1000 miles is less than two days' sailing for a container ship doing 20 knots, and those two transloads are going to take at least a day each. Anything coming to or from Europe is going to be in 40ft containers, and you see very few of those on American freight trains.
@@sharkheadism Same thing applies -- going in the opposite direction is the same distance. European imports from Asia come in 40ft containers through the Suez canal. Going via the US is no faster and, if it were happening, you would see _a ton_ of 40ft containers on US container trains. Remember that the population of Europe is more than 50% bigger than the USA's, so it we presumably import 50% more stuff from Asia than the US does. If a significant fraction of that traffic were coming across the USA, it would be using a significant proportion of US intermodal train capacity.
@@beeble2003Plus Europe is focusing on better rail links with places like China, the main exporter. Put the rest of Asia exports through that with small links, and it can be even faster than by sea, and more environmentally friendly too.
@@beeble2003 There are a ton of 40' containers on US trains. Speed isn't the only determining factor in how freight moves. Land bridging has been going on for decades and still is.
Here at the UP, we treat our Z trains the same way so this definitely had a huge afect on the industry. When we get a Z train through town, the yard and everything with it wil stop to take care of it and let it through. It usually has way extra power for the event of a failure
At 6 minutes 33 seconds you point out that the super c could have interchanged traffic. In particular you point out Phoenix. Phoenix is not on the southern transcon. Would they have interchanged at Williams Arizona?
Not sure about the Super C going thru Phoenix. Maybe the train picked up and dropped off cars for Phoenix in Flagstaff? Very good video presentation otherwise.
Can anyone who knows tell me how truck trailers piggy backing on trains hasn't become very dominant? I talked to a UP conductor who says that they can haul the same freight trailer for 10% of the cost over the same distance.
Listen to the part of the video where the primary cargoes of the trailers are discussed. Auto parts and US Mail. Where you have US manufacturing or distribution/warehousing on both ends of the run, TOFC makes more sense. But when one end is import/export via ship? Containers make more sense. The thing that happened to TOFC traffic, and caused it to give way to COFC, was imports substituting for domestic production.
To be fair to PC, both of its halves were well versed in intermodal traffic by the time the Super C came around. PRR’s TrucTrain was the first dedicated service of its type in the US, and the NYC had their own unique but innovative version in Flexi Van. The latter shipped containers worldwide while the former awww basically the predecessor to TTX. Conceptually it made sense, and actually harkens back to an early NYC merger proposal.
Fast cargo is an interesting topic anyway. The French used to have a postal TGV for overnight mail transport across the country. Italy had a similar concept only a few years ago, which went down during Covid if I recall correctly. The gap between air freight (really fast and expensive) and regular freight (slow and cheap) seems to be too small for fast trains to fit in.
This is the end of rail transportation as trucks electronic and air service keeps eating into train service. The best thing to do is pave over the tracks and have truck dedicated routes. The rail age is quickly ending.
That doesn't make sense. Rail can move the freight 10 times cheaper and almost as fast as a truck. If all Long distance freight went that way, no truck would have to drive more than 100 miles. Most would drive far less than that
By the time of Santa Fe railroad Super C high-speed Freight Train being operated in the late 1960s early 1970s there might have been observers from West Germany Deutsche Bundesbahn Bahndirektion Frankfurt am Main Nürnberg Hannover since they were already starting construction on Schnellfahrstrecke Hannover Würzburg (Train Sim world 3 Kassel Wilhelmshöhe Würzburg Hbf route) on how to run high-speed freight trains this might have likely inspired them to do it on that route. ATSF RR would have never have East German Workers here because this type of operation would have been Limited to 75 mph on East German tracks due to poor railroad ties made of Baltic Sea concrete
@@stephenheath8465 Crew changes in Fort Madison can have a westbound train stretching across the Mississippi River bridge and clear into Illinois. 15,000 feet, basically 3 miles long. Quite often, trains will have to wait because of congestion. Also, the bridge has to open for boat traffic, resulting in half hour or more delay.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
Merch, anyone? okieprint.com/SPR/shop/home
I wish, man, I wish
Don’t mind my username, I like to play Roblox, obviously
As soon as you said “Penn Central” I knew this was doomed to fail.
That’s what I was thinking
Same
@@gamerfan8445me two
Same here
Lol 😂
In Germany these days we've got the so-called 'parcel intercity', which is a very similar concept to the Super C, albeit exclusively for parcels. It's an intermodal train that runs non-stop from north to south across the country in one night at around 100 mph, and at both ends the containers are loaded directly onto trucks and sent to distribution centres. The introduction of this train has made next-day shipping possible from anywhere to anywhere within the entire country.
That’s really cool!
In Japan they have a similar service between Tokyo and Osaka, and even have a specialized intermodal freight EMU for it.
@@Southern_Plains_RailfanThe parcel intercity also had a predecessor service called the “Inter-Cargo-Express” (probably chosen to mirror the high-speed passenger InterCity Express). The service also ran at up to 100 mph but only lasted four years. The remarkable thing about it is though, that they constructed two-axle sliding door cars for it, that could sustain 100 mph running. Those were probably some of the fastest two-axle freight cars ever.
We have the royal mail trains too which I guess now mainly carries parcels, these are usually done using specially made EMU's that can go at 100MPH. Some
rail freight companies are also trialling the use of withdrawn multiple units to carry parcels and such like.
There also used to be some food items carried on the old HST's from Cornwall, though I understand that ceased with the introduction if new trains that no longer have a space for it.
Also France had a special TGV for carrying mail.
Of course, distances here in Germany are not what they are in the States. Still an excellent service, our household makes regular use of over-nights.
The true purpose of those short SUPER-C trains was to give us model railroaders something that will fit and still be realistic!! 😏
(New subscriber. Great video informative and eye-catching!👍)
The history presented in this video is absolutely accurate! I'm a NS railroad retired road conductor
It's worth saying at the time the Super C ran, there was still a lot of single track on the LA-Chicago line.
Well shit no wonder dispatchers hated keeping track of it!
The big bottleneck wasn't the mostly CtC single track but the largely ABS, directional signaled double track with reverse spring switches. Any train slower then it, pretty much all of the,, would have to back up through spring switches onto the opposing mainline to clear for it. SF had very few controlled junctions and since most of it was directional ABS, you could run those trains on opposing tracks (you could but at restricted speed cause they would require train orders to proceed since it wasn't signaled in that direction), just park them there.
I’ve known about about the Super-C for a long time, but never actually learned much about it. This video helped a lot, so thanks!
You're welcome!
Great video. The Super C did help the Santa Fe learn how to run ~40 hour freights on the southern transcon, as regular service later.
It got canceled in name only. Better to say it got a suspended...for a short while as they reorganized their marketing strategy. It got resurrected under different train symbols and has evolved over the decades since. it fumbled on and off throught the 70's and 80's under several different incarnations, but after deregulation and a UPS contract, it really took off solid.
The Super C is one of my favorite named freight trains, despite its failure.
4:00 Has the vibe of a model train starter set. 😂
For sure. Lionel could easily make this in a LionelChief set
@@Bobdole4373or Bachman
Williams Jct. was as close to Phoenix as the Super C ever got.
The 60s was a time of railroad financial difficulty, as I seem to remember. The railroads were frantically trying to find new models to regain profitability.
6:27 During the early _Super C_ testing phases before the USPS mail contract arrived, setouts and pickups were at *Kansas City* and *Amarillo.* Eventually, *Wellington, Belen, Winslow* and *Barstow* were added during the peak of _Super C's_ 1970-76 operational run.
source: _"Super C: Hottest of the Hotshots"_ by Fred W. Frailey; *_Trains_* April 1986
Great video as usual. The Z train before the Z train basically. They still treat most Z trains in the same fashion as the Super C meaning anything in the way is getting dumped in the siding no matter what and they want the train out on time even if it means leaving cars behind that didnt make it on time for the interchange. Pretty much the only thing that went away was the guaranteed delivery and the 90mph speeds(for obvious reasons) everything else is mostly the same in relation of the Super C to the Z train haha.
Z trains can just be "another train" depending on the territory. Been on a lot of slow Z's before.
right - kind of a "super" Z on steroids @@sharkheadism
@sharkheadism yea youre right. Mainly when its on foreign tracks is when it gets treated like garbage and or if its multiple z trains on the same stretch of territory somebody's gotta get priority lol
Enjoy your channel, my dad was a train master for Santa Fe from the early 60s until the 90s in LaJunta Colorado
The Santa Fe was and is still an icon! BNSF should bring this iconic name and image back.
BNSF just blew a few billion on building a bridge.
They may not try another scheduled train on the Main line they make so much profits from.
As a teenager growing up in Northwest Missouri, use to love making the trip down to Henrietta to catch the westbound Super C at 90mph. My brother and I tried to pace it west from WB Jct, it was doing all of 90mph. Too afraid of meeting a highway patrolman, we didn't pace for very long. 😂
Excellent Job with the Video and Audio. Very Interesting Freight Service. Thanks! 👍🙏
You’re welcome! Glad you enjoyed!
I don’t believe that Phoenix is on the BNSF Trans Con rails. The closest it comes is at Flagstaff, 175 miles north of Phoenix. There is a branch line that runs to Phoenix from the main line.
ASH FORK AZ IS WHERE THE PHOENIX LINE SPLIT OFF THE TRANSCON!
THE 2 TRANSCON TRACKS WERE RELOCATED FARTHER NORTH ON A HUGE REROUTE OF THE
TRANSCON BETWEEN WILLIAMS AND SELIGMAN AZ!!
The Peavine or Phoenix Subdivision
The AT&SF,in the footsteps of Death Valley Scotty,only more often,and with freight! Never say die,and on a beautiful railroad! I was lucky[blessed],to ride the Super Chief,before Amtrak,and it was memorable! Thank you 😇 😊!!
Nothing beat the Cotton Belt Memphis Blue Streak Merchandise.
Some great history about a train I haven't even heard before. I love it!
I used to work with an old ATSF engineer who worked the Hereford Sub (Amarillo to Clovis). I asked him if he ever remembered a fast train called the "Super C." "Oh yeah! That was a rough ride on those old engines!" He was a fireman at the time. By the time I worked, the Super C was long gone, but we still had some smoking runs, 1:40 for the 100 miles from Amarillo to Clovis. Not too shabby.
That was a really good video! I can always learn something about trains from Southern Plains Railfan!
Great job on the video and you kept it very fun informative and movin! It's amazing that this train was orchestrated so well to be able to move freight like it did. I'm really surprised that Penn Central was not a main component in it's discontinued status 😅.
Thank you! Yeah, I'm a bit surprised Penn Central didn't affect it's operation either, but then again, most of that NYC-LA cargo ran on standard rate trains, not The C.
*Alfred E. Perlman* (president of New York Central during Super C's conception and testing phase, and president of the merged behemoth Penn Central during Super C's operational service), never really intended to fully cooperate with Santa Fe in the potential _Super C_ branded transcontinental service for one key reason... *_Southern Pacific_* (SP). New York Central (NYC) and later Penn Central's single largest western interchange partner was _Southern Pacific._ Right from the outset, SP demanded to be included in any potential transcontinental *Super C* service via SP's _Cotton Belt Route_ - St. Louis to Dallas. New York Central sheepishly attempted to broker a Santa Fe - SP - NYC routing agreement, but Santa Fe countered that routing the service between three carriers from Los Angeles to New York made little logistical sense (especially through St. Louis simply to accommodate Southern Pacific), while at the same time - SP made it crystal clear to NYC, that SP's inclusion via St. Louis on Cotton Belt was a deal breaker.
Perlman was legitimately concerned that if NYC cooperated with Santa Fe (SP's key competitor whose Trancon route had significant advantages verses SP between the mid-west and Los Angeles), then SP could retaliate by diverting the enormous volume of imported eastbound bridge traffic interchanged in St. Louis to competitors _Baltimore and Ohio_ and _Norfolk and Western,_ instead of NYC. So, NYC's (later Penn Central) refusal to cooperate long-term in _Super C_ with Santa Fe was largely due to Perlman's calculation that any proceeds from such a high profile service partnership with SP's competitive mortal enemy would be far outweighed by the potential endangerment of NYC/Penn Central's existing decades-long financially critical interchange arrangements with SP. Ultimately, NYC limited their _Super C_ participation to the testing phase by running a few test transcontinental trains with Santa Fe. One of NYC''s tangible contributions to _Super C_ was the suggestion of using Flexi-Van containers as opposed to traditional piggyback trailers due to Flexi-Vans' lower profile inducing less wind resistance at high speeds. Four Flexi-Van containers can be seen in the video at 7:03 behind the locomotives.
Didn't they also use GE U28Cs to power this train? They emblazened the, "Santa Fe," lettering in big red letters on the long hood. I think that was the first time the road had used the red lettering. Informative vid. Thanks!
If the U28C was a passenger locomotive, then they could have used it, but I don’t remember reading anything that says they did. Yes, the passenger service U-boats were the first to debut ATSF’s billboard lettering. You’re welcome!
@@Southern_Plains_Railfan THE U 28 CG IS PROPER MODEL DESIGNATION, AND WAS DEFINITELY PASSENGER POWER
UNITS WITH THE G DESIGNATION MEANING STEAM GENERATOR!
I WAS WORKING IN ARGENTINE DIESEL SHOPS STARTING SEPT 16 1964, TO JAN 5 1995.
THESE UNITS WERE KNOWN AS THE 350 CLASS, NUMBERED 350
TO 359.
EARLY IN THE PURCHASE THE 350 CLASS WERE DISCOVERED TO BE PAINFULLY SLOW IN ACCELERATION WITH PASSENGER RUNS WITH ONLY TWO OR THREE CARS!
I N THOSE DAYS THE OPERATING RULES REQIRED WHEN ACCELERATING FROM A STOP TO NOT ADVANCE THE THROTTLE UNTIL THE LOAD METER QUIT MOVING TO HIGHER AMPERAGE!
THE 350 CLASS UNITS HAD 2800 HORSE POWER , BUT HAD THE ELLIOT TURBOCHARGERS , WHICH PERFORMED POORLY WITH LIGHT TRAINS.
BEN STROH, WHO WAS THE LOCAL GENERAL ELECTRIC FACTORY REP RODE SEVERAL TRIPS ON THE KANSAS CITY
OIL FLYER , AND # 47 AND 48, THE TWO TRAINS BETWEEN KANSAS CITY AND TULSA OKLAHOMA.
THE ENGINE CREWMEN GAVE BEN QUITE A HARD TIME ABOUT THE POOR ACCELERATION!
FINALLY BEN ORDERED THE CREWS TO GET THEM OUT OF THE STATIONS NORMALLY AND GET UP TO THROTTLE NOTCH 3, AND THEN PULL THE THROTTLE OUT TO FULL NOTCH 8, UNTIL MAKING TRACK SPEED!
THROTTLING UP THIS WAS WOULD GET THE ELLIOT TURBO UP TO SPEED AND PROPER ACCELERATION!
THE U 25 AND THE U-28 LOCOMOTIVES ALSO HAD AN
16 NOTCH THROTTLE AS OPPOSED TO THE USUAL 8 SPEED THROTTLE!
WHILE THERE WERE 8 SPEEDS
ON THE ENGINE THE EXTRA
THROTTLE NOTCHES WERE HALF NOTCHES THAT SLIGHTLY INCREASED MAIN TRACTION GENERATOR OUTPUT!
ALL LATER GENERAL ELECTRIC
LOCOMOTIVES HAD THE STANDARD 8 NOTCH WITH NO HALF STEP GENERATOR CONTROL!!
AS FOR THE 350 CLASS PAINT
IT WAS THE RED , SILVER , AND YELLOW WARBONNET COLORS WITH RED LETTERING ON THE SIDES, BUT SOMEWHAT LESS STRIKING THAN THE ORIGINAL!
KEEP THEM ROLLING BROTHERS!!
👍👍
They could've used their U28CG's.
@@ADIX2400 Trains Magazine had an article on Super-C back in the 80s, I think, and had a photo of the train. The engines were said to be U28Cs. The hood unit U30Cs look exactly like them, though.
Funniest part is bnsf can't even come close 50 years later even with all the double tracking that's been done
Their super long PSR Trains pretty much defeat this concept lol
We ran a lot of freight on the rail at YRC/Yellow. I’ve been to rails yards in Chicago, Philly, Harrisburg, and Atlanta. We used BNSF quite frequently.
Interesting you've touched on a couple of points that kind of made this train more trouble and expense than it was worth. I believe Trains had an article one time about running fast trains. It's all glamorous and all, but the way it snarles up everything else makes it hard to justify. And most customers don't want to pay for a premium, they're simply happy if the trailer loaded on the train shows up in the three days like it's supposed to. So generally trains like this make for great PR, and a really neat model RR subject, but operationally not really that great.
DP Morgan covered the Super C pretty well back then.
The rate cuts that have hit Box freight seem to attract shippers, but do cut into Stockholder profits.
The Railroads are now designed to feed the Stockholders Values, not to accommodate the Shippers, that the original Charters called for.
Oooh, enjoyed the Intercity 125 cameo 6:15
This interesting because I didn't know a service like this existed
Always enjoy your informative videos 👍🏽
6:36 aaaaaaye, that’s some nice dispatcher. Yes sir, very nice, very nice indeed.
Larry was a great dispatcher, he is shown working 2nd trick on the 200 mile 2nd District between Amarillo and Waynoka.
Nice👍Be cool if you did a story of the opposite,the slowest train with shortest track in history that lasted over 45yrs,the Illinois Midland. It's a good story.
Sounds very interesting
4:08 Domestic auto parts ? That's a Hillman Husky surely , although it's news to me it shared a line with the Hunter . I thought they were built in Scotland .
it's one of interesting freight train!
also hitting 90mph(144km/h if you leaving Si world) is impressive!
For a freight train is mind boggling.
States PennCentral
Me: “they’re fucked”
lmao
Amazing video! Thank you!
You're welcome! I'm glad you enjoyed!
WORKING IN THE ARGENTINE LOCOMOTIVE SHOP I WAS ON THE FUEL AND SERVICE CREW ON THE FIRST OFFICIAL RUN!
AT THE TIME WE HAD 2 LARGE LOCOMOTIVE FUELING TRUCKS FOR THE YARDS AND THESE ENGINES WERE SERVICED NEAR THE ARGENTINE DEPOT AREA!
IN THE LATE 1980 s A NEW FUELING FACILITY WAS BUILT ON THE #1,AND 2 MAINLINE AT 42 nd STREET , USED PRIMARILY FOR AMTRAK AND HOT SHOT THROUGH FREIGHTS!
KEEP THEM ROLLING BROTHERS!!
👍👍
That’s amazing! Would you happen to know what all the passenger cars were for on its inaugural run? Was it just to take executives on a joyride, or were some of them dynamometer cars taking live data?
I would suppose that when the mail switched to the UP it was handled on the Super Van.
I wonder why they thought this was a good idea, was it because they had spare high speed locomotives left over from their dying passenger service. The 747 was entering service at the same time. If your freight is time critical you send it by air, if its cost critical you send it by rail. Its no surprise that hardly anyone wanted to pay extra to cut a few hours off of a rail shipment.
But "hardly anyone" included the Post Office who also made use of the successor Train 199.
Great video Santa Fe was the best of the best ashame they are just a fallen flag.
It goes with the fallen country that is in its final stages. All planned.
Heavens 😶 A Hillman Imp at 4:08
The plan was to team with NYC to run trailers between LA and New York City on a schedule that would depart Friday afternoon, and deliver to New York on the following Monday am.
New York Central could never hold up their end of the schedule
That's not quite correct. On it's test run on the New York Central, they did run into delays. But only one test run was done on the Central.
The NYC decided not to go with it, due to possible retaliation by the Southern Pacific, who they needed to ship Detroit Autos and Auto parts to. SP could of teamed up with GT, bypassing the Central, and therefore costing them profitable business.
Interesting piece of RR history. From short trains to trains now (PSR) that are miles long and 100-175 cars.
The ATSF-PC merger we could only imagine:
Although, ig that mail contract loss didn't really stop atsf from running tons of power on tiny trains at super high speeds outside of the superC 😅
Super C was to the Santa Fe what the Blue Streak Merchandise was to the Cotton Belt/Southern Pacific
When pigs flew.
Very informative! It would be interesting if this was still around.
It is, just not in the incarnation shown.
Thought it was a bit ironic to choose the Rootes (Hillman) Factory in Scotland to illustrate the domestic American automotive industry!
Can you do a video on the folowing trains please
Porters steam locos,(a 0,20, some a 0,2,2)
The cook mogul, 2, 3,1 or 0,3,1 i can't rember, its cab is decided by the bpiler so you have to stand on the tender or go to the sides of it to drive it,)
The Japanese class d51 nick name hero of the railways,
And mabey another talking about the different types of stram funnles, and one on the different types of cut offs/reversers/ Johnson bar
Theres the valve wheel, the big lever, and 2 other versions i can't describe...
One thing I heard was that if Amtrak did not happen, or if ATSF stayed out of Amtrak, the Super C might have been a hybrid mail-exopress-passenger train.
What is it if not just a freight version of the Super Chief?
The concept of totally clearing the main line for a fast train like the Super C is a much more daunting challenge than it sounds. It has so many ripple effects. This same factor caused Union Pacific to abandon its cross-country express concept in the 2000s.
I'm astonished by the amount of rail infrastructure that has been removed all over the US since it's decline. We're in an endless cycle of build and then destroy. What will it be next, interstates that cut through major cities?
Your insight is correct thousands of miles of R R tracks abandoned or removed
@@jr56440 thanks for you insight. I work in tech and can totally relate to an industry hell bent on growth at all costs.
Many people want the interstate highways removed from the cities, (railways too), claiming they be raysis!!
All people do intercities is complain. Well they keep voting for the same political party so nothing changes.
Now that’s a good Backstory for a tv show!
Why do you consider the Super C a failure? Today it would be recognized as a viable proof-of-concept effort. It proved that fast priority freight could be handled efficiently and routinely. It led to further efforts into fast priority freight that might lead to even better service today (if some railroads don't for get their roots and what their primary job is).
Your reference to the Penn Central also ignores the previous operations Santa Fe tried with New York Central's Flexi-Van service in '67, moving traffic from New York City to Los Angeles in 54 hours, 21 minutes. NYC had a fast backdoor between Detroit and New York via the Canada Southern, and the later proposals utilized this. The fact that the PC merger hobbled the more innovative NYC with old fashioned "We're the standard of the world" Pennsy thinking was what damaged a good idea.
Even today railroads are trying new ideas. Too many short-sighted people laugh at battery locomotives. They don't understand that some ideas with potential have to have real world trials to work out the bugs and find the unexpected benefits. But one day there will be innovations that come out of all the research that will benefit main stream railroading.
This is just a response to the battery locomotive thing, I do think they have potential but mainly as slugs and B units to kick in when overhead line stops because a town declined the installation of electrified trackage; current battery chemistry doesn't really favor them being the sole long haul road locomotive type on a train. Of course, that's just current battery chemistry I suppose; the locomotive Galvani from 1837 could only run for four hours at 15 mph light and it was literally just a four-axle power truck with an array of batteries, so we've certainly come a long way.
You're spot on about The New York Central and the PRR. The PRR was a Wooden Axle Railroad compared to the Central.
You're also right that the Super C was not a failure
Great Vid the super c is very cool
man. sure miss the old Santa Flush.
2:25 Fun fact: the twin towers on the far right, the black ones, were the tallest twin towers in the world until the more famous ones on the left.
Phoenix is not on the transcontinental line I worked the super-C as a brakeman out of Winslow az
The video self-contradicts. The map at the beginning clearly shows the transcon route with Phoenix nowhere close, then the narration claims later it did run through there. The Peavine comes off the transcon at Williams, AZ
All the engineers that got to operate these trains got the honor of knowing they were the BEST and everyone else had to yield to them not to mention they got to their destination fast and got to go home early most likely.
Cool video idea
Thanks!
@@Southern_Plains_Railfanwelcome
Great video
Thank you!
@@Southern_Plains_Railfan no problem
The Super C was a success, it was the prelude to Santa Fe's 198 and 199 trains.
Great video I learned something.
Thank you!
Are you sure that any significant quantity of goods from Europe to Asia go via the US or Panama canal? London to Tokyo via Panama is about 1000 miles of extra sailing compared to going through Suez, and that's about the shortest possible Europe-Asia journey via the western hemisphere. Suez is even more advantageous for going to China, and the largest container ships in the world operate that route. London-New York-LA-Tokyo saves about a thousand miles of total distance compared to Suez, but with the added inconvenience of transloading twice. That 1000 miles is less than two days' sailing for a container ship doing 20 knots, and those two transloads are going to take at least a day each.
Anything coming to or from Europe is going to be in 40ft containers, and you see very few of those on American freight trains.
He meant goods bound to Europe from Asia via land bridging at west coast ports.
@@sharkheadism Same thing applies -- going in the opposite direction is the same distance. European imports from Asia come in 40ft containers through the Suez canal. Going via the US is no faster and, if it were happening, you would see _a ton_ of 40ft containers on US container trains. Remember that the population of Europe is more than 50% bigger than the USA's, so it we presumably import 50% more stuff from Asia than the US does. If a significant fraction of that traffic were coming across the USA, it would be using a significant proportion of US intermodal train capacity.
@@beeble2003Plus Europe is focusing on better rail links with places like China, the main exporter. Put the rest of Asia exports through that with small links, and it can be even faster than by sea, and more environmentally friendly too.
@@beeble2003 There are a ton of 40' containers on US trains. Speed isn't the only determining factor in how freight moves. Land bridging has been going on for decades and still is.
@@mattevans4377 The rail link goes through Russia and Belarus. I very much doubt that it's active at the moment.
Fantastic video with great photos I tell u what
Thank you!
@@Southern_Plains_Railfan I appreciate that boomhauer! Lol
We are still waiting for you to make videos for our products, thanks!
Here at the UP, we treat our Z trains the same way so this definitely had a huge afect on the industry. When we get a Z train through town, the yard and everything with it wil stop to take care of it and let it through. It usually has way extra power for the event of a failure
4:37 What the heck are those?
They're either GE U-boats or Dash-7's.
They look like C36-7's.
79mph not 90 was the regular service speed. Only the passenger power was geared for 90.
Also, Phoenix is not on the transcon, it's a branch.
6:27 _Phoenix_ 👀
Your voice is the perfect representation of a railroader
At 6 minutes 33 seconds you point out that the super c could have interchanged traffic. In particular you point out Phoenix. Phoenix is not on the southern transcon. Would they have interchanged at Williams Arizona?
They should have made a dedicated line, with vacuum tubes and... pods! Then it may have been a success.
hyperloop sucks and scam to sabotaging HSR
I believe that the world's fastest freight trains are the Pacific National's Superfreighters From Sydney/Melbourne to Perth
Most interesting.
Didn’t the BN had something similar?
Phoenix?
Great video
Thank you!
Sante Fe Jct. Kansas City at 4:45
Not sure about the Super C going thru Phoenix. Maybe the train picked up and dropped off cars for Phoenix in Flagstaff? Very good video presentation otherwise.
Definitely did not go through Phoenix,
Just guessing but it probably had to have the required inspection at winslow (eastbound). Don't know what the rule was 50 years ago.
Can anyone who knows tell me how truck trailers piggy backing on trains hasn't become very dominant? I talked to a UP conductor who says that they can haul the same freight trailer for 10% of the cost over the same distance.
It's extremely dominant. Every major railroad and then some uses piggy-backs. Thousands and thousands of semi trailers are shipped by rail every day.
Listen to the part of the video where the primary cargoes of the trailers are discussed. Auto parts and US Mail. Where you have US manufacturing or distribution/warehousing on both ends of the run, TOFC makes more sense. But when one end is import/export via ship? Containers make more sense.
The thing that happened to TOFC traffic, and caused it to give way to COFC, was imports substituting for domestic production.
Penn Central for priority high-speed service‽ The same PC that managed to misplace the entire state of Maine's potato harvest?
lmao
To be fair to PC, both of its halves were well versed in intermodal traffic by the time the Super C came around. PRR’s TrucTrain was the first dedicated service of its type in the US, and the NYC had their own unique but innovative version in Flexi Van. The latter shipped containers worldwide while the former awww basically the predecessor to TTX. Conceptually it made sense, and actually harkens back to an early NYC merger proposal.
I would love to have hogged the Super C. I don’t believe in waiting and I believe in being first. Of course, I’m egotistical enough as it is.
Your getting to 20k subs faster then these trains are making their deliveries lol
They had locomotives built for freight than can exceed 70 MPH im appalled 😮
Great idea for the time.
looks like an intermodal freight train.
Fast cargo is an interesting topic anyway. The French used to have a postal TGV for overnight mail transport across the country. Italy had a similar concept only a few years ago, which went down during Covid if I recall correctly.
The gap between air freight (really fast and expensive) and regular freight (slow and cheap) seems to be too small for fast trains to fit in.
the super C would not work at all on the north/south former SCL now CSX line from Florida to New York because even Amtrak waits for the "juice train"!
Greeeed Greeeeeed
Santa Fe
All The Way!
This is the end of rail transportation as trucks electronic and air service keeps eating into train service. The best thing to do is pave over the tracks and have truck dedicated routes. The rail age is quickly ending.
That doesn't make sense. Rail can move the freight 10 times cheaper and almost as fast as a truck. If all Long distance freight went that way, no truck would have to drive more than 100 miles. Most would drive far less than that
By the time of Santa Fe railroad Super C high-speed Freight Train being operated in the late 1960s early 1970s there might have been observers from West Germany Deutsche Bundesbahn Bahndirektion Frankfurt am Main Nürnberg Hannover since they were already starting construction on Schnellfahrstrecke Hannover Würzburg (Train Sim world 3 Kassel Wilhelmshöhe Würzburg Hbf route) on how to run high-speed freight trains this might have likely inspired them to do it on that route. ATSF RR would have never have East German Workers here because this type of operation would have been Limited to 75 mph on East German tracks due to poor railroad ties made of Baltic Sea concrete
driverwoods?
@@LewisLevycorrect that is my profile on Train Sim World forums
Dam, its faster than Amtrash.
How do Z trains these days compare 🤔
They’re about a day/ day and a half slower than the Super C. They travel slower and have to stop.
and they are much longer these days lol@@Southern_Plains_Railfan
@@stephenheath8465 Crew changes in Fort Madison can have a westbound train stretching across the Mississippi River bridge and clear into Illinois. 15,000 feet, basically 3 miles long. Quite often, trains will have to wait because of congestion. Also, the bridge has to open for boat traffic, resulting in half hour or more delay.
😎
The first Z train
Never should have merged.😢