Markings on engines optional or mandatory?

[faraway]

The Indiana Railroad (INRD) got a bunch of ATSF CF-7 as their very first engines. Those engines has been used without any paint job over years. They kept all ATSF lettering, logos and also the ATSF road numbers.
I was always under the assumption that it is required/mandatory to have owner marks on each engine. At least an ugly patch as used after mergers is required.

The INRD case teaches me that is was wrong and an engine might be painted as desired. Even wrong identification (ATSF on an INRD engine) is ok at least as long as the legal owner of the name does not protest. Did I get that right?

[nachoman]

I have no idea, but what an interesting question. I assumed all non-patched locomotives that I saw not on home rails were leased or part of some kind of trade or other agreement. When Uhaul or other truck leasing agencies sell surplus trucks, they usually paint out their own logo before they sell. Same with municipalities. So maybe it is up to the individual selling railroad to paint out their logo if they don't want it to appear on another railroad's tracks.

[railohio]

There is no requirement to repaint or patch a locomotive as long as the correct reporting marks are displayed.

The Wheeling & Lake Erie, colloquially known as the "Wheeling & Rio Grande" here, is one prime example of this:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=302191&nseq=7">http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.p ... 191&nseq=7</a><!-- m -->

Note the orange markings above the number on the cab. Those are the correct "WE" reporting marks for the Wheeling. As long as those are visible the giant "Rio Grande" is meaningless.


Another example is this locomotive that still carries Santa Fe paint:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/railohio/4587439873/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/railohio/4587439873/</a><!-- m -->

It is patched with the right reporting marks, CNUR for Indiana's Connersville & New Castle, and still carries it's old Santa Fe paint.

[eightyeightfan1]

This is probably the best example of that question.
This FL-9 was rebuilt from an original New Haven FL-9, by Chrome Locomotive, repainted in New Haven"McGuiness" scheme, and used by Metro North and CDOT, with out either railroads reporting marks.(the only thing changed was the road number from the original NH number.) Now, the Naugatuck Railroad uses it. again without NV reporting marks, and still in original paint.
   

Then again, another example. This U-boat, has all the Providence and Worster identity removed, but the paint still screams P&W.
   

[Puddlejumper]

If the equipment is not interchanged then it does not matter. You can paint whatever you want on a piece of equipment that is to stay on home rails. If a piece of equipment is to be interchanged for any reason it has to meet FRA regulations including the correct reporting marks, tho I have seen instances where that was not followed. After the CR split I had units in my consist that had PRR, PRRx, NS, and CR reporting marks, but all were painted CR and owned by NS. Oakway SD60s were EMD, EMDX, or OWY.

[faraway]

That is good news.
I did just establish the "Curve Switching and Transfer Railroad" using old AT&SF CF-7 on my layout. The CSTR exchanges with two class I railroads in the vicinity of a large city on both ends and supplies switching services to an older industrial area in between. Main customer is a large GERN plant.
The CSTR owns five CF-7 and two old D&H caboose used as shoving platforms.

[Puddlejumper]

Here is an example of following the FRA regs:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=109240">http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails. ... oID=109240</a><!-- m -->

This unit is not owned by the MRL, but is stenciled MRL 36 (by agreement with the MRL) for transit and interchange purposes. Being interchanged as MILW 36 would not be appropriate.

Your CSTR would not have to stencil or paint your CF7 at all. But if you had to send the unit to, say, Altoona for wheel work, then it should be stenciled CSTR... though I'm sure NS would pick it up and take it regardless.

[viperman]

Its not a locomotive, but here is a former NS covered hopper with new tags:


And a former CNW locomotive with a UP patch:




A former SP locomotive with UP patch:


And don't worry, I am the photographer of all these pictures

[faraway]

Thanks a lot for the backgrounds.
The ATSF CF-7 engines got CSTR patches under the road numbers.