Tuesday, October 20, 2015

"HO-key" Railroad Backstories - Part 2

A six-axle Baldwin working at Harvard, ID, Spring 1967.  Fact or fiction?  You be the judge.
This much is true:

Logging by rail vanished completely from Potlatch Forest Industries’ Bovill and Elk River operations in the mid-Fifties. PFI abandoned its last logging branch, from Elk River to Camp 43, in 1950 and only maintained a small steam engine at Bovill for another year or two to shuttle cars around the truck-to-rail reload yards there. Down on the “Headquarters Side,” logging by rail continued to the close of the decade, but that was it.
Many logs still traveled by rail from the PFI reloads at Bovill, Elk River, Headquarters, Jaype and Clarkia to their respective mills. But, only common-carrier railroads, like the Milwaukee Road and Camas Prairie, actually switched and hauled these log loads. PFI still owned the Washington, Idaho & Montana Railway, also a common carrier and built expressly to serve the mill at Potlatch. But, most logs arrived at that mill by truck after about 1955; leaving the WI&M to handle mostly finished products, not raw timber. Finally, in 1962, PFI sold the WI&M to the Milwaukee Road for its scrap value and was officially out of the railroad business from then on.

This is where the story starts to get hokey:

. . . or so they thought.  Only two years later, PFI management selected a large section of timber for harvest in the hills above Laird Park, not far from Harvard, ID. Although the distance from the harvesting area to the Potlatch mill was not great, and although building truck roads into the timber had become old hat to PFI, the company opted to try rail again. This was intended to be an experiment – one last chance for rail to demonstrate whether it offered any economic benefit to a modern-day logging operation.

Operating on a shoestring, PFI decided to build the line using “in house” resources rather than contracting with Morrison-Knudson or similar firms as sometimes had been done before. PFI gathered several of its old timers to consult on routing and constructing the line. Salvaged rail from PFI lines abandoned the previous decade was used for the loading tracks, while newer steel was brought in for the main line.

As built, the new rail route left the WI&M mainline at the Harvard siding and followed the Potlatch River for the first few miles before heading up a small draw to reach Camp. PFI hadn’t assigned the logging site an actual name, so everyone just called it “Camp”, even though no loggers actually lived there. The last several miles into Camp featured a few undulations, which resulted in short sections of stiff grades facing trains in either direction. A heavy duty locomotive would be needed to conquer these hogbacks, but it needed to be light on its feet to safely tread the budget-built line. That budget also would not tolerate a new locomotive, so PFI management went looking for a used engine to fill their needs.
The Baldwin Locomotive Works, known as Baldwin-Lima-Hamilton toward the end, had exited the locomotive business years earlier. Its products had a reputation as maintenance intense machines, and had never been very popular with larger railroads’ shop crews – or accountants. On the other hand, Baldwins were known as “luggers” that could tackle nearly any grade with a loaded train, as long as speed was not of any essence. With several Baldwin-owning railroads eager to purge them from their rosters by the Sixties, Baldwins could be had on the second-hand market for very reasonable prices. A six-motored example would have the needed tractive effort while keeping the axle loadings low.

Where PFI actually found their Baldwin is up for conjecture. It arrived in a weather worn yellow and green scheme with red striping at the color separations. No other railroad used this exact scheme – it looked like a mashup between the colors used by the Duluth, South Shore & Atlantic Ry. and the striping pattern found on Oregon & Northwestern Ry. diesels. Did it come from one of those roads, or from a larger trunk line? No one still seems to know.
It arrived with the letters "Wash Ida & Mont Ry." already painted on the sides in red, but there must have been some misunderstanding -- the WI&M had never been part of the purchase arrangement.  To avoid any conflict with FRA mandates requiring 90-day inspections for common carrier railroad locomotives, the locomotive would need to be lettered for PFI instead. Also, no one was certain why it had been numbered 33 when it arrived – was that its original number, or the result of another misunderstanding between PFI and the seller?

The crew at the Potlatch roundhouse, which still stood at the time, was somewhat befuddled by this acquisition. The Potlatch crew were all Alco men – this was right after they shipped their two Alco switchers off to Tacoma for sale by the Milwaukee – and they weren’t sure what this creature was or how to properly care for it. Clearly, someone down at the corporate office in Lewiston had not been thinking clearly when they bought a Baldwin instead of an Alco.
Still, it fired up easily enough the first time, so the first order of business became fixing the lettering on the engine. Not having the resources for a full paint job, and not having a particular corporate scheme to follow, they decided to stick with the existing colors. After removing the WI&M lettering, the yellow underneath seemed a little thin, so, the workmen applied a long rectangular patch of yellow and hand painted the words “Potlatch Forest Industries” across that patch using the same lettering style as PFI’s then-current letterhead.

Choosing what number to give the locomotive also required considerable discussion. Back in steam days, the Bovill Side had numbered most of their Shay engines consecutively, starting with 101. The last one in this series (except for #200, which was acquired late in the program) was 110, so one suggestion for the Baldwin was numbering it 111. Someone else mentioned that on the Headquarters Side, numbering had been based on the locomotive’s tonnage, i.e. 70 ton locomotives had been numbered starting with 71. Looking at a spec sheet for Baldwin road switchers, someone noted their tonnage was in the 160’s, so maybe it should be numbered 161 - it also fit well with the engine's 1600 horsepower. That idea was rejected for the sake of simplicity, or maybe because the Bovill Side men preferred not to follow any Headquarters traditions. 111 it would be.
Lettering by hand was time consuming, so for other lettering needed on the unit, the shop used their standard set of stencils. On the short hood, they painted “Bovill Unit”to make it clear whose locomotive this was. They also painted safety reminders, “Caution” and “Work Safely” next to the step wells, and safety warning stripes along the edges of the pilot plates to hopefully prevent accidents at crossings and when working around other equipment.

One question the loggers asked the shop crew was about the need for a spark arrestor. Steam locomotives in logging service generally had them to ensure embers from coal or wood burning did not ignite any forest fires. Even though the PFI steam fleet mostly burned oil, spark arrestors had usually been applied as a precaution. The shop proposed a wait and see plan. The 111’s 608A engine had a turbo-supercharger which ran the exhaust gasses through a turbine, compressing the intake air to boost overall horsepower.  Turbochargers were often enough to prevent sparks, but if the crews operating the train noticed any sparks, the shop crew was sure they could cobble up something.
A few arrangements had previously been made to allow log trains to reach the mill. In 1962, PFI had sold off the WI&M to the Milwaukee Land Co. The WI&M continued to exist on paper, but was now operated by the land company’s sister, the Milwaukee Road. Now that PFI was seeking to operate its privately owned locomotive and trains on the WI&M, legal arrangements had to be made. To avoid issues with union agreements, PFI basically contracted with the WI&M to operate the log trains on its behalf. Also, all locomotive and rolling stock maintenance would be provided by the WI&M, while PFI would maintain its own logging trackage.

Logging started at Camp just as the snows receded in Spring, 1965 and the 111 went right to work. Typically, the 111 would haul two strings of log cars from Camp to Harvard siding each day. Once the crew arrived with the second cut of cars, they would couple up to the first cut, tack on their caboose (WI&M X-5), and head for Potlatch. Most days, the "mainline" WI&M train, led by Milwaukee GP-9s, had passed westward through Harvard an hour or more earlier. Still, the log train conductor would call the dispatcher for clearance and authority to occupy the main track. With no lineside phones installed, he simply walked across the street to the HooDoo Cafe to call the dispatcher from the pay phone inside. Having a nickel in his pocket each day was just part of his job description.
The rest of the rolling equipment used on the Camp line came from a variety of sources, in various stages of disrepair; NP flatcars, MILW gondolas, and even a few of the remaining serviceable original WI&M truss-rod flatcars. Because of their condition, none were allowed in interchange service, but that was not necessary and not a problem. Over the few years the Camp line operated, the wood flatcars finally wore out one by one and were scrapped so that only the steel-framed cars remained.

No caboose was used for moves between Camp and Harvard, although it may have been safer to have used one for the backup moves. Per the tradition of earlier years, the locomotive always worked from the downhill end of the train, facing Harvard, to prevent runaway cars. For the shove up hill, a lone brakeman rode the first car heading up. Because there were no loads, the engineer could usually keep him in sight, and he watched for any indication from the brakie of the need for a stop. The brakeman usually carried a fusee with him, prepared to strike it and wave for a“washout”, but that seldom happened. The moves were never very fast, and he could jump off to protect himself if needed.
For the mainline runs to Potlatch and back, a caboose was necessary. One of the old WI&M ex-NP cabooses usually sat on the Harvard siding, just east of the Camp spur switch. Once the downhill train was past the switch, the crew would shove back onto the caboose and perform their air test while the conductor called for clearance. As with moves on the logging line, the eastbound empty train nearly always backed up for the eight mile run from Potlatch back to Harvard. The brakeman appreciated a more secure perch on the rear platform of the caboose, and used his pea whistle and lantern to signal for right-of-way at the few crossings they encountered.

PFI’s operation at Camp lasted only six years. By then, the useable trees had been harvested and it was time to move on. Looking over the books, the accountants were not happy. Whatever savings may have been realized from operating a single daily train instead of a fleet of trucks had not been enough to cover the initial cost of building the line.
In October, 1970, the last daily log train rolled out of the woods and off to the mill. The following spring, the old Baldwin made one last run to retrieve the few derelict log cars remaining at Camp. There was a final burst of activity for the 111 as it spent a busy week that May hauling off loads of rail removed from the Camp line back to Potlatch. The older steel got loaded into gondola cars and carted off for scrap, while the newer rail from the Camp line was stockpiled at Potlatch for future use by the WI&M. The log cars got cut up at Potlatch and loaded for scrap as well.

The 111 sat behind the Potlatch depot for several months, and then one day it was gone. PFI sold it to a used equipment dealer, but no one knew where it went exactly. PFI had maintained it in reasonable condition, so another Baldwin-oriented railroad somewhere, possibly ITT Rayonier, may have snatched it up and put it to work or dismantled it for parts.  No one is certain.

"HO-key" Railroad Backstories - Part 1

Getting this locomotive onto my HO-scale layout required a lot of imagination, and a little bit of compromise
On my HO-scale railroad layout, I always try to emulate my prototype railroad, the Washington, Idaho & Montana Railway (WI&M).  Of course, I realize that compromise is a necessary ingredient in any model railroad, and I can’t even count the ways my little version of the WI&M differs from the big one.

But, I do take some pride in those few instances where I can say that, to the best of my knowledge and ability, a particular part of my railroad is “just like the real one.”  And in other instances, I can show a clear correlation how some feature of the prototype WI&M is directly represented by the model I have built, even though it isn’t exact.

But sometimes my modeling muses (sirens?) lure me in a totally different direction.  Most often, I can ignore them when what they suggest deviates too wildly from my chosen prototype, but sometimes the urge is too strong.
Take my infatuation with Baldwin diesel locomotives, for instance.  I don’t know when, but at some point in my early years of rail enthusiasm, the boxy lines of those Baldwins caught my attention.  I hadn’t even seen any in person, but because they were different from what I did see around me, I found them strangely compelling.


A grainy black-and-white photo of this particular locomotive in an old issue of Trains Magazine is what sparked my initial interest in Baldwin diesels.  Photo by an unknown photographer from my collection.
The good news for me was that two particular examples of Baldwin diesels once did serve the area I model.  The Northern Pacific bought two DRS-4-4-1500 road-switchers in 1947 for use on their Eastern Washington branchlines, and they could be seen leading freight and passenger trains through Palouse, WA (the WI&M’s western terminus) up until about 1954.  But, to my knowledge, they never operated on the WI&M, and why would they have?
I did detail and paint an HO version of the NP road switchers for interchange work on my WI&M layout – I even installed sound in it recently, and it sounds pretty friggin’ awesome.  I also obtained an NP Baldwin VO-1000, which were used extensively by NP in the Spokane area, but not on the NP's Palouse & Lewiston branch. (Again to my knowledge – anyone want to show me a picture and prove me wrong?)  The DCC sound installation is currently in progress on this one.

But then, there were those 6-axle Baldwins that other logging railroads operated!  One enclave of these worked the Oregon & Northwestern RR up until 1984, and another flock of them hauled logs on the Rayonier operation north of Grays Harbor, also until 1984.  If only I’d been older and had gotten turned on to those two outfits a few years earlier, I could have witnessed those monsters in action!

An example of ITT Rayonier's 6-axle Baldwins that roamed the Olympic Peninsula.  Photo by an unknown photographer from my collection.

One of four Oregon & Northwestern RR 6-axle Baldwins that worked in the 'desert' of Eastern Oregon for many years.  Photo by an unknown photographer from my collection.
Any model railroader’s balm for missed opportunities is to make a trip to the hobby shop.  I acquired another Stewart Baldwin road switcher, and started wondering how to fit it into my plans for a WI&M layout.  My first divergence into fantasy railroad modeling, to align my interests in Baldwins and in the WI&M, fell along the lines of “what if the WI&M had bought new locomotives from Baldwin instead of Alco?”
Logic said a shortline like the WI&M would probably have accepted Baldwin’s suggestion for a paint scheme, and I liked the ones that had been applied to the Duluth, South Shore & Atlantic’s and O&NW’s engines.  I hybridized them using the DSS&A colors (yellow and green with red strips), but using the O&NW striping pattern (their colors had been yellow and rust, with horizontal rust-colored stripes wrapping around the hood ends).  It didn’t hurt my case that Rayonier also shared a similar scheme – yellow and green with no stripes.  For lettering, I also followed the DSS&A’s use of red “railroad roman” initials along the side of the hood, and I selected the number 33 for the cab sides.  I then applied some airbrush weathering to the sides, and I used “Baldwin dust” to smudge up the roof.

Baldwin dust?  Well, that came from an interesting relic.  This locomotive modeling project began while I was completing college in Utah.  A local hobby shop was selling a consignment item for another customer – an actual piston removed from a Baldwin diesel engine.  The nearby US Steel - Geneva mill had recently scrapped or re-engined nearly all its old Baldwin switchers, so this piston likely came from there.  I wanted to buy it and turn it into a glass-topped end table, but a look at our student budget put a stop to that idea.  So, with permission, I scraped a bunch of the carbon deposits on the crown of the piston into an envelope for use in weathering my HO Baldwins.  Although I’ve misplaced that envelope since then, a healthy coat of Dullcoat applied to this and an Athearn Baldwin S-12 project I’d painted in a matching scheme ensured they’ll never lose that (to me) key element of realism.
 
One of the Geneva Steel Baldwins - could this have been the source of my 'Baldwin Dust'?
Steve Gartner photo from my collection.
I did not have an operating layout at the time this, so my WI&M Baldwins went into their boxes and suffered through several moves.  About 20 years later, I dug them out to see how they would fit into my layout scenario.

Like Dorothy in Oz, they awoke in a whole new world.  My prototype-based WI&M layout was well underway and populated by a series of more accurate WI&M models.  I had thrown most of my “what if” ideas in the trash, and had committed myself to “representational” prototype modeling.  That’s a catch phrase for my modeling philosophy:  get the key elements as accurate as possible, and fill in the rest with close-enough stand-ins to represent what was really there.

In a nutshell, these Baldwins really didn’t fit.  It also hurt their case that their mechanisms were hopelessly out of date Athearn-clones and that Stewart’s original in-house design for the six-axle Baldwin trucks sucked, to be ‘blunt’ (serious diesel fans will notice the lame pun here).  Stewart had upgraded its Baldwin road switchers to much smoother Kato-style mechanisms several years later.  Their newer motor, drive and truck design were more conducive to DCC operation and sound, and they matched the quality of the mechanisms on my newer fleet of locomotives.
I bided my time watching eBay and soon nabbed a four-axle Stewart/Kato model for cheap.  That went to re-power my NP Baldwin, which I knew would find work on the layout.  And then, I got my hands on a newer six-axle model to upgrade my WI&M Baldwin.  But, I still had a hard time stomaching a “fantasy” WI&M locomotive.

One of my biggest hang-ups with fantasy modeling, or free-lance as it’s often called, are the often hokey backstories modelers conjure up to justify their layouts and models.  A healthy imagination is a good thing, but retaining some plausibility is also important to me.  If I was going to work this engine into my operating schemes, I would need some justifiable reason for it to have been that way.  I puzzled on this for a while.
The idea hit me while I was writing an article on the prototype WI&M for the historical society newsletter I edit.  I was writing how the Potlatch Lumber Co., the WI&M’s builder and owner for many years, had maintained a separate fleet of steam locomotives for running up to the harvesting sites and herding the logs down to where the “mainline” railroad would haul them to the mill.  They kept their WI&M and logging company locomotives separated mostly to avoid government-mandated inspection frequencies that only applied to “common carrier” railroads.
A Whitcomb diesel owned by Potlatch Forest Industries, circa 1955.  Tom Kreutz photo from WI&MRy. HPG collection.
Would this thinking also apply to a diesel?  Again, there were lots of examples where lumber companies maintained their own diesels, including a handful of other Potlatch Forest Industries operations around Idaho and the country.  But, railroad logging in the Potlatch/Palouse watersheds ended in the early Fifties – trucks were more flexible and cheaper for the short hauls either directly to mill or to truck-rail reloads.  So here was where I inserted another “tiny” bit of reality.
When I built my 1955 and later era WI&M layout, I located a single logging spur that left the Harvard siding and “disappeared” through the backdrop.  There had not actually been any such siding at that time and in that place.  I’d intended it to represent all the old logging spurs east of there and the rail-side locations where I knew logs had been occasionally loaded onto trains.  What if this represented an active spur?  What if it was of fairly new construction in the mid-Fifties or later to reach some new harvesting site?  What if PFI needed its own diesel to handle traffic on the spur?

Actually, the mid-Sixties made even more sense to me.  By that time, PFI had sold off the WI&M to the Milwaukee Road, who, in turn, parceled off the WI&M’s old Alco switchers to other owners (the WI&M continued to exist, but used Milwaukee locomotives and equipment from then on).  So, to operate their own logging railroad, PFI could follow the lead of Rayonier and the Hines Lumber-owned O&NW and acquire used Baldwins from class one railroads.  And, as in earlier days of cooperation between PFI and the Milwaukee Road, PFI could contract for permission to haul the trains all the way to the mill over the WI&M tracks (using WI&M crews to allay any argument from the unions).
So, with that thinking in mind, I went ahead and made some minor changes to my HO Baldwin, and concocted a ‘hokey’ backstory (see Part 2) to justify my decision.