Talk:Arrow (railcar)

Trains: in New York City / Passenger trains Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	March 16, 2016

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject New York City Public Transportation (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Passenger trains task force.

"Destroyed" Arrow IIs 590-591

I will have to find a way to link this, but I have photographs of these cars being repaired, and later being rebuilt by Morrison & Knudsen during 1983, still in its PC/NJ DOT paint. I also have an Amtrak Dispatcher sheet from June 3, 1979 that lists 590 as being in the lead of Harrisburg train.

Most sources report this pair as being destroyed in the Seabrook, MD collision on June 9, 1978, but this is clearly not the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAB IV (talk • contribs) 05:37, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Coupler

What is a Budd "Pin and Cup" style Railway coupling? Peter Horn User talk 00:18, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One of these. It might be called the Model N or Style N, but Pin and Cup is a more informative description.Sturmovik (talk) 02:56, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So a new section should be added to the railway coupling article to describe this "gizmo". Peter Horn User talk 21:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That image explains (matches) this adapter! Peter Horn User talk 22:40, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah go nuts if you have enough information on it.Sturmovik (talk) 23:15, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have sources claiming the Arrow Is used JA-1 couplers, and that the subsequent arrows used JA-2s. I'm not all that familiar with these coupler types, and i don't know if they've been changed since then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAB IV (talk • contribs) 04:26, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image added. Peter Horn User talk 04:02, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, WABCO N-Type and Budd Pin and Cup coupler now redirect both to the same place, namely to railway coupling#WABCO N-Type. Peter Horn User talk 16:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Manufacturer of Arrow II/III

There seems to be confusion about the Arrows. These later Arrow bodel shells were produced by Avco, not budd. Budd may have done some small work on them, but multiple sources from the time period name Avco as the producer of the Arrow body shells. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.138.61 (talk) 02:58, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And there are dozens and dozens of sources, along with contemporaneous photographs showing them leaving the Budd facility on Red Lion Road in Philadelphia. While I don't doubt that the sources you've added say what they say, but they are contradicted by too many sources from then to now that say the cars were built by Budd to change the article without more investigation.oknazevad (talk) 14:23, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if there are such sources, can you share them with me? Besides, there is no doubt of Avco's involvement. One friend knowledgable friend of mine thinks that it was probably Avco who designed the shells, and that final assembly took place at the budd plant. Still, no one has been able to share with me any evidence of the Arrows or Silverliners at Budd. CAB IV —Preceding undated comment added 16:28, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments about Oknazevad’s edit note: “Arrow IIs were built between the Silverliners, and that was the evidence”

-but the Wikipedia Silverliner article says the SI IV’s were built by GE-AVCO. And that entry was written by Sturmovik despite him putting the Budd-Arrow connection in here originally.

-I’ve been looking at this question for a decade and do no not find dozens of references nor lots of Arrow II/SI IV pics at Red Lion. Can you link to or cite any?

-there's nothing in the Trains DVD or Middleton’s Steam Roads (both editions) beyond mentioning AVCO as a body builder generally (if not SI/Arrow what did they build?) and GE as the lead for the Arrow II & IIIs

-Philly NHRS’s BUDD list shows both whole cars and body kits cars but there are not enough vaguely described orders to account for the Arrow II and III cars.

-Carleton’s Pennsy Wires notes were written at the time these cars were built.

The one allowance I would make for Budd is that their shotwelding patents would likely ensure they were involved for licensing. But that doesn’t guarantee any further involvement.

At this point I don’t think we have a case for naming anyone as the shell builder yet, we should being leaving the article as "uncertain" on the question.

PhaseBreak (talk) 23:49, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An employee confirmed that there were not GE shells other than the Metropolitans at the Red Lion plant during the mid 70s. Apparently, Amfleet Is were filling the production line. Other evidence discussed above can be found at this railroad.net forum thread- http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=109239&p=1102396#p1102396 .

Since there are many references to Avco producing the bodies for GE, I think we can safely stick to Avco as the body builder. At the very least, we know its not Budd now. CAB IV (talk) 21:11, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Saw that. Happy to be proven wrong, but remember that message boards can be used as cited sources. That said, the thread there just confirmed other sources so its pretty much accurate now. Thanks for the follow up investigation. oknazevad (talk) 21:11, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, I don’t think we’re there yet. A Railway Age Oct’84 pg56-61 article titled “M&E: Re-electrification and rebirth” includes the phrase “Budd-bodied Arrow III” followed by “most successful car to come off General Electric’s assembly line”. Now I concede that it could be a reporter’s typo but I’ve only found 2 other print quotes, Carleton who names Avco and Cudahy who does the same in “A Century of Subways”. But Cudahy is writing so much later that I have to wonder if he might just be following the same leads we’ve already found and that likely go back to Carleton & Pennypacker.

I Googled Silverliner+Avco, Silverliner+Budd, Arrow III+Avco and Arrow III+Budd. Discarding the photo captions I still found there is much conflicting opinion out there. http://ihphobby.tripod.com/hopages/expresssil4.html even said “NJ commuter operations turned to General Electric, which designed a car based on the Arrow I design for both systems. Utilizing body shells designed by aerospace firm AVCO and assembled at Budd's Red Lion plant”.

I also noticed someone mistakenly crossing AVCO (originally Aviation Co.) with American Vickers (never a car builder) and then leaping to long unrelated Canadian Vickers (who did make SS bodies). By the way Hawker-Siddley's rail connection is via the Canadian Car & Foundry factory at Fort William, a long time Canadian railcar facility now run by Bombardier.

For me there is still too much fuzziness out there.

PS: if Avco’s name is going to be mentioned it should be placed after GE

PhaseBreak (talk) 08:43, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Saw the post of “Headlights” on Railroad.net. I’m sufficiently convinced about AVCO having built the shells. Thanks green_elite_cab. PhaseBreak (talk) 09:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whats all of this about Canadian Vickers? I changed it back, but there isn't any evidence out there for their involvement. Canadian vickers isn't ever brought up in any of my Silverliner IV or Arrow II Material (or Arrow IIIs for that matter), but AVCO pops up a couple times.

It sounds like someone extrapolated a partnership on the M2s to all GE involved MU cars. CAB IV (talk) 17:21, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]