In the decade prior to WWII after the first streamlined road diesels appeared, railroads began putting streamlined shrouds over the steam locos on their premiere passenger trains. Was this done solely for cosmetic reasons or were there studies that indicated the streamlining had a significant effect on the speed of the locos?
If you really want knowledgeable information on a subject like this, you would be far better off checking reliable sources on the Internet.
Streamlining of steam engines mostly took place between 1940 and 1950, so no one on this forum can address the issue with first hand knowledge.
I typed 'streamlining steam engines' on Google and found several credible sources that address this issue.
Rich
Alton Junction
NYC's three streamlined designs were all applied prior to WWII and much of it was removed as scrap iron was in demand during the war. I haven't studied other railroads but my guess is their streamlining was also done pre-war as doing it during the war would have been an unnecessary use of much needed metals during the war. Post war, railroads resumed dieselization that had been slowed by war demands. There wasn't much streamlining during that period although the N&W which clung to steam longer than any other class 1 railroad continued to streamline their steamers as late as 1950.
Two reasons: The Depression and the success & popularity of the Burlington Pioneer Zephyr.
The Depression hit the railroads hard - like everyone else. They were looking for ways to boost revenue to their waning passenger services. The Pioneer Zephyr was released by the Budd Co in May '34. It proved both popular and successful for both it's speed, as well as it's unique and sleek art deco-style design. The railroads saw this as a opportunity to cash in so they began streamlining their steam engines by the mid-30s.
The NYC came out with the Commador Vanderbilt, the Mercury, and then the icon Dreyfuss Hudson in '38. Sales skyrocketed and it helped the railroads through the rest of the 30s, 40s, and into the early 50s. Cars and planes were the ultimate demise to passenger service, as well as the more efficient diesel to the steam locomotive.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
I'd forgotten the Mercury which was similar in design to the 5344 for the Commodore Vanderbilt so NYC had four streamlined designs.
Don't forget the role that the French played in streamlining steam, particularly their 4-6-2s. And domestically the Milwaukee Road also needs to be mentioned particularly since both their 4-4-2 and one class of 4-6-4 were "factory streamlined" rather than retroactively. Milwaukee Road would also be a good example where the retroactive streamlining they did to older locomotives was cosmetic in nature and closely mimicked their Hiawatha 4-4-2s.
But as historian and architectural theoriest Sigfried Giedion pointed out in his epoch book "Mechanization Takes Command," so much streamlining (trains, automobiles, furniture, buildings, even househld appliances such as toasters) often just made things look bulky rather than sleek and aerodynamic. It was he alleged a form of pseudo streamlining. He did not mention them but I'd nominate the Union Pacific attempts at streamlining steam locomotives as Exhibit A.
Dave Nelson
To answer the OPs question. Purely aesthetic. The look of modernization and to compliment the all steel fluted or smooth side passenger cars. Streamlining really doesn't work for the under 100mph speeds of the times. Added weight and obstruction of maintenance quickly made it obsolete. Even on truly modern equipment like the PRR T1 and S1 saw a great reduction in shrouding and eventually scraping and the eventual end of steam using nearly forty year old two cylinder locomotives.
Pete.
There were claims at the time that "scientific studies" showed streamlining engines and cars cut down resistance and made fuel savings, but in retrospect I think as Pete said that there was really no difference. Unlike it's Burlington and Milwaukee Road rivals, C&NW competed on the Twin Cities - Chicago run in the 1930s with upgraded but otherwise convential steam and heavyweight cars with their "400".
https://streamlinermemories.info/?p=211
wrench567 To answer the OPs question. Purely aesthetic. The look of modernization and to compliment the all steel fluted or smooth side passenger cars. Streamlining really doesn't work for the under 100mph speeds of the times. Added weight and obstruction of maintenance quickly made it obsolete. Even on truly modern equipment like the PRR T1 and S1 saw a great reduction in shrouding and eventually scraping and the eventual end of steam using nearly forty year old two cylinder locomotives. Pete.
Of course, this is largely correct. However, it should be noted that the fastest steam locomotives ever built were all streamlined (officially measured, LNER's Mallard with 126 mph and the German 05 002 with 125 mph; inofficially, Pennsy's 6100 is rumored to have run at 141 mph). Also, the fastest steam engine currently still running, the former East German 18 201 (which reached 113 mph), has some streamlining. The driver diameter is more than 7 1/2 ft. Isn't she a beauty?
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
A big cause of drag is the gap between cars. A few trains in the Thirties had full width diaphragms, but the vast majority didn't (plus there is drag caused by the undersides of the cars not being streamlined. Skirting and full width diapraghms were maintenance headaches, so they disappeared in WW2 and immediately after. Cars built with skirting (there were even skirted trucks) had it trimmed back or removed
BEAUSABREA big cause of drag is the gap between cars. A few trains in the Thirties had full width diaphragms, but the vast majority didn't (plus there is drag caused by the undersides of the cars not being streamlined. Skirting and full width diapraghms were maintenance headaches, so they disappeared in WW2 and immediately after. Cars built with skirting (there were even skirted trucks) had it trimmed back or removed
Calthrop's patent of 1865, developed by analogy with a crew shell, was notably intended as functional. (Turn down the hokey music while you watch this):
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ry54IG972LI
The Canadian NRC did sensible work in streamlining, nominally in large part to address smoke lifting and slipstream management, as early as 1930. Kantola's shroud (as on the Commodore Vanderbilt) was supposed to be good for around 400hp worth of drag reduction (according IIRC to people at the Case School of Science in Cleveland that did part of the design and analysis) which begins to be significant if the engine is valve-limited. (Note that the C&NW E-4b, with 84" drivers and neat streamlined appearance, couldn't even break 100 with the AAR test train in 1938...)
The 'poster child' of scientific application of streamlining was on the German BR 05s -- all the discussion you need on the pros and cons of true high-speed streamlining on working locomotives has probably been done, in one or another context, concerning them.)
Alfed Bruce of Alco noted in 1952 that the Milwaukee As were good for 128+mph, something I doubt they would reach without streamlining and frontal-area minimization.
A review of the Quadrant Press streamlined-steam book and the Trains article on the subject in the '70s will establish how much (most) "streamlining" was actually esthetic only. The weight gain was not trivial. In fact ATSF class leader 3765 was designed to be streamlined, likely as a West-end counterpart of the 3460-class Blue Goose, but the 17,000-odd lb. would have required significant compromise of the actual locomotive's design. Ed will have pictures of 3765's tender which show the flush rivets where the stainless-steel band was supposed to go.)
Bear noted
And I’ve also read that even with the best will in the world, soot etc could collect under the streamlining, hence more unnecessary maintenance.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NZR_K_class_(1932)
but the recess around the light became a sink for all sorts of cinders and trash that would blow out without warning when the engines came up to speed...
As I understand it, stream lining was gradually removed during WW2, not because of the scrap value of the metal, but because the lack of manpower made taking off and on streamlining for maintenance purposes a big and unnecessary waste of time. And I’ve also read that even with the best will in the world, soot etc could collect under the streamlining, hence more unnecessary maintenance. Cheers, the Bear.
According to a book I have on the NYC, the skirting on the streamlined Hudsons was soon removed to make it easier to do routine lubing and other minor maintenance. The 20th Century Hudson streamlining was removed for WWII scrap iron. I believe at least some of the Empire State Express streamlining survived the war and those last saw service on the James Whitcomb Riley.
Seems every other month this past year I see a photo of a streamliner, fail to recognize it, and when I investigate it's a whole 'nuther road. There were scads of 'em! Is Bachmann the company that just issued the Penny's streamlined K4 or whatever? That was news to me at the time. Canadian National made a stab at it for a while.
I believe BLI released a streamlined PRR K4, Crandell, with a Paragon3 decoder. I know that Alco Models did one in brass. There's one currently on eBay.
tstageI believe BLI released a streamlined PRR K4, Crandell, with a Paragon3 decoder.
Bachmann did one, too:
https://www.trains.com/mrr/news-reviews/reviews/staff-reviews/product-review-bachmann-ho-scale-prr-streamlined-k4s/
What's good for the goose —
The Bachmann one represents a slightly different, and later, version of streamlining.
Cheers, Ed
OvermodIronically enough, this problem plagued the 'normal' K locomotives more than the 'streamlined' one. W.W. Stewart noted that the (substantial) headlight was recessed into the smokebox front -- see the Wikipedia account for one version of the 'reason'...
Selector - It was a fad, call it Art Deco or Moderne (PRR's "Fleet of Modernism" was perfectly timed to come into being just as the movement/fad/whatever flamed out), where everything down to your stove and washing machine had to look like it was about to depart at a high velocity. Most lines had just one or two machines to try and capture the glamor of "being a streamliner"
And some art deco is just beautiful to look at, too: