I have thought in the past that steam switchers had a slope back tender to aid in vision to the rear when backing up. Now the Proto 2000 0-6-0 has a "regular tender.
Are both types correct for 0-4-0 and 0-6-0s?
73
Bruce in the Peg
Either type tender could be correct depending on the prototype modeled. I suspect that sloped back might have been more common, but don't know for sure. Also tenders are not actually part of the locomative. They can be changed, so a particular locomotive could have had both types over its lifespan.
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
And some steam switcher tenders had higher coal boxes to hold more coal.
Usually someone helped the engineer to couple the switcher onto cars so I'm guessing having a clearer rear view wasn't that essential.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Bruce, there are thousands of pic's on the B.C. Provincial and Vancouver City Archives and I spend a lot of time on there having a look. There are photo's of the same loco's with different tenders on them obviously taken at different times. There is also lots of aerial views of the CPR yard/roundhouse online and there are tracks near the roundhouse that just have tenders sitting on them. I would assume from the photo's that mix and match was the order of the day when it came to pairing them back up after servicing.
You could check to see if Manitoba and/or Winnipeg has online photo Archives if that is the geographical area you are modeling.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
It's interesting that 0-6-0's had both sloped and square tenders, but it looks like very few 0-8-0's had sloped tenders.
Looking at sloped tenders, I'm not sure how the slope was used for vision. The engineer had to be at the throttle, and looking over his shoulder would gain him no increased view--he'd just see the front of the tender. Even standing up and leaning out the cab window doesn't take advantage of the slope. I expect the fireman or brakeman would likely climb up the tender front and share his opinions about the inclement coupling.
I'd sure like to hear from someone who worked a slope back tender, and could reveal all. Also, there's probably a photo somewhere illustrating its use.
So, I had a quick look, and found this one:
I don't see how you can be in the cab and make any use of the slope. Climbing up the front of the tender gives a good view, though. But it can't be the engineer.
And, ain't that a great photo!
Ed
7j43k
Ed, I think it was on the "Old Time Trains" website where I read about how the sloped back tender made life a whole lot easier on the crews doing the switching as it was easier to move around on the tender/loco itself.
I am wondering what that thing on the LH side at the back of the tender is. It looks like a fan housing, though I doubt that is what it is. I need to learn something today.
A big engine uses a lot of fuel and water, so it needs a big tender; a small engine needs less, so it gets by with a smaller one. A slope-back tender will obviously hold a lot less water than a rectangular tender. Switchers that stick close to the yard generally have access to water, but it's time-consuming and inefficient to stop what you're doing and make frequent runs for water, even if the water plug is close. In general (and generalizations can be dangerous), slope back tenders were not used on extremely large engines. The tenders of larger engines may have had rectangular or cylindrical tanks, but their fuel bunkers were usually cut back to provide better rearward visibility.
At least one road bought a second-hand 0-8-0 with a slope-back tender. Shortly after the purchase, the road modified the tender into a rectangular shape. Until the engine was retired, the tender displayed a diagonal rivet line showing the old shape of the sloped tank. PRR C1 0-8-0's were built with rectangular tenders. When Washington Terminal purchased a few C1 0-8-0 copies, they specified slope back tanks, presumably because the engines would never be far from a water source and the rear visibility was considered more important than the capacity.
Yes, rear visibility was important. In the days before radios (i.e., the steam era), it was essential that the engineer and fireman be able to see the men on the ground to receive hand or lantern signals, judge distances, etc. When used with switchers, most rectangular tenders had narrow fuel bunkers, and were usually called "clear vision" tenders. B&O's two Class U 0-10-0's had extremely long clear vision tenders. In fact, in the last days of steam one of B&O's L-1a 0-8-0's was assigned to local work on a line where all water plugs had been removed. She got a very long clear vision tender that looked like it was actually two old tenders grafted end-to-end into one.
If I had to generalize, I'd say 0-4-0's often had slope back tenders; 0-8-0's and 0-10-0's usually had rectangular ones; and it could go either way on 0-6-0's.
P.S. I think that's a housing for a hose reel on the U.P. switcher.
(edited)
Tom, Regarding that NYC switcher. Notice the coal bunker is rather narrow so the engine crew can see down the sides of it. If the engineer is too lazy to lean out for your signals, just run him into a cut pretty hard a few times. Then he will learn to cooperate.
Charlie
Charlie has a good point. It's not about long distance vision, it's for close in work, whether coupling, whatever, because it facilitates being able to see what's directly behind the tender. Safer also, because sometimes you want to be able to see stuff that should not be there
One example of how changing views by management leads to tender differences was the Rio Grande K-27 fleet. They were all delivered with slope-back tenders, but IIRC within a decade lost them to higher water capacity standard tenders.
0-8-0s likely had them less because they spent most of their times doing something other than spotting cars at industries, etc. Instead there was more long cuts, transfer work, etc. Doesn't mean they didn't get the slopeback, just at least part of the reason why so few.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
BATMANI am wondering what that thing on the LH side at the back of the tender is. It looks like a fan housing, though I doubt that is what it is. I need to learn something today.
I recall reading that it was for hose storage. Which brings up the question of what kinda hose doing what kinda job. I suppose it could be a gravity fed hose for the tender so you can dump some water on a fire trackside. Or cool a hotbox. Sure beats using a bucket.
charlie9 Tom, Regarding that NYC switcher. Notice the coal bunker is rather narrow so the engine crew can see down the sides of it. Charlie
Tom, Regarding that NYC switcher. Notice the coal bunker is rather narrow so the engine crew can see down the sides of it.
Good catch, Charlie. That would make sense.
Thank You.
The engineer could see the switchmen on the rear footboard better. The intent was not to be able to see the coupler, but to see somebody standing on the rear footboard to take signals.
Like most things, it was really useful at one time, then things changed. The capacity of the tenders increased, the amount of "stuff" on the tender deck increased, so the utility of the slope decreased.
Most 0-8-0's are newer than 0-6-0's and most 0-8-0's have bigger tenders so the usefulness of the slope was less, so fewer sloped tenders (the RDG had 0-8-0's with sorta sloped tenders).
Its just like the cupola on a caboose was great for watching the brakemen on the tops of the train, but when they got air brakes, raised the height of the cars above the tops of the cupola and got rid of the roofwalks, the need for cuploas went away (one of several reasons why the more modern cabooses are bay window designs).
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
The NYC switcher actually has a standard coal bunker with a cut down tender for better visibility.
I believe the Proto USRA engines use the "as delivered" c.1918 USRA switcher tender. I'm sure some (many?) railroads owing USRA 0-6-0 engines or copies later switched to using slope-back tenders. During their lifetimes, steam engines often went through many changes, so an "as built" picture of the engine is often very different from one taken 30-40 years later.
I'm ready to be corrected on this one, but I can't recall ever seeing a photo that showed a prototype USRA 0-6-0 (or a post-USRA copy) with a slope-back tender. The most common tender sold with the P2K USRA 0-6-0 is not the original USRA tender. It represents a modification of the original, with a narrowed fuel bunker for coal or oil, making it the much more common clear vision type, as shown on the NYC engine in one of the posts above. As such, it is a pretty good representation of most USRA 0-6-0's from shortly after construction to the end of steam.
Copies continued to be built for a number of roads through the 1930's (notably W&LE, later NKP, which put front end throttles and roller bearings on them). During WWII, the design was dusted off and used again for a whole flock of 0-6-0's built by Alco and Lima (and maybe others) for the US Army. Detail variations included combined steam and sand dome on the Limas, relocated air pumps, and other items that were secondary to the basic design. I suspect that prototype survivors today include more W&LE or Army copies than original USRA's.
The P2K engine represents the USRA engine as built. By the end of steam, few 35 or 40 year old engines looked exactly the same as they did on the day they rolled out of the erecting hall. In fact, the C&NW engine I mentioned earlier seemed to have a lengthened clear-vision tender. Individual modelers may want to change details appropriate to their favorite prototype.
The Model Railroader Cyclopedia, Vol. 1, Steam Locomotives, has drawings, plus photos of USRA examples as used on the ACL, B&O, PRR, CB&Q, Omaha (C&NW), and M&O (GM&O). NOT ONE is shown with a slope-back tender, although the original tender was cut down to a clear vision type in all those photos.
Your best bet is always to find a prototype photo or some other verifiable documentation and use that as your guide. If you just wing it, you can get in trouble with the Prototype Police!
Another important point: Many model 0-6-0's have no discernible prototype, so it's anybody's guess what would be "correct" for them.