Hello, I am building my first HO layout at 71 years old. It is a small layout with tight curves so all my motive power are 0-4-0 and 0-6-0 locomotives without tenders. Did these burn both oil and coal? If they used coal, how was the coal loaded? By hand, some sort of conveyor or something else?
Thanks for the help.
Dr_ Bullit. Welcome to the Forum.
Not sure how they worked in the U.S.A., but here 'over the pond' the 0.4.0s and 0.6.0 steam locomotives without tenders or coal bunkers carried sacks of coal on the footplate.
Some such locomotives going on longer journies carried more sacks in (mainly) three plank open wagons. The fireman transferring the sacks to the locomotive as and when required. (For example at stations on the way.)
Not sure how oil fired locomotives worked, but I am sure an answer will be posted.
David
To the world you are someone. To someone you are the world
I cannot afford the luxury of a negative thought
I have a PRR B8 tank "shifter" as a switcher was known on the Pennsy.
PRR_B8b_tone by Edmund, on Flickr
Some of these were modified with a tall, boxy funnel just behind the cab roof which was designed to facilitate coal loading from an overhead chute. Otherwise coal would have had to be loaded by buckets or hand shoveling from a nearby deck.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/alcomike/6973063965
I'm not sure of any oil fired tank engines in the eastern U.S but they were somewhat common on the western railroads.
Good Luck, Ed
Welcome.
Tank switchers did not stray far from a water source. Usually used for moving locomotive and rolling stock around the shop areas. More common in the UK but runs were very short. In the US they were mainly used as shop switchers and pushing a few hoppers for the coaling tower and ash pits. The 0-4-0s used in city industries would be the tender type.
Coal bunker would be near the rear of the locomotive and probably hold up to 500 pounds of coal on the largest of tank switchers. They would require a lot more water than fuel.
Pete.
Hello All,
to the forums.
Your first few posts will be moderated so they will be some delay in viewing them.
Dr_BullittDid these burn both oil and coal?
No, it was an either-or situation.
I primarily run diesels but I do have two (2) steamers; a USRA 0-6-0 with a Vanderbilt tender and a 0-6-0 Side Tank Porter, both converted to burn oil.
The Vanderbilt tenders coal bunker was retrofitted to haul the oil.
Vanderbilt tenders were manufactured in different sizes.
For short hauls, a smaller four-axle tender was used while for longer hauls, and bigger engines, a larger six-axle version would be used.
Because of the tight 15-, and 18-inch curves on my pike the smaller, four-axle version is used.
I don't know if it's true to scale but my four-axle tender measures 26-feet from footboard to footboard.
For longer hauls, I have a second four-axle tender that can be added on.
On the Bachmann 0-6-0 Side Tank Porter, just behind the cab is a space for the fuel of choice.
A coal load is modeled in this space and a cover plate with an oil filler is provided- -so you can model it for either coal or oil.
Side Tank Porters were used for switching in ports- -hence the name.
As has been noted...
wrench567Tank switchers did not stray far from a water source.
This was true for fuel; coal or oil, as well.
On my pike, it is used as a helper up the 3% grade. Then it is backed down and topped off for the next run.
Again, never far from a fuel oil and water source.
Hope this helps.
"Uhh...I didn’t know it was 'impossible' I just made it work...sorry"
It was primarily determined by which railroad you're looking at, rather than the engine type. If a particular railroad, or division of a railroad, used oil instead of coal for their steam engines, then generally all their steam engines, large and small would be oil burners.
jjdamnitSide Tank Porters were used for switching in ports- -hence the name.
That, and there was the H. K. Porter Company.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.K._Porter,_Inc.
Cheers, Ed
gmpullmanThat, and there was the H. K. Porter Company. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.K._Porter,_Inc.
Again I stand corrected!
Thank you for the clarification.
Hello! The answer is, it depends on the Railroad. Many western railroads such as the ATSF, SP, and UP quickly converted all their steam engines to run on oil, since coal wasen't as prominent in the west coast as it was in the East. Instead, the west has easy access to oil, hence why many of their engines were designed to run on oil.
ATSF 9000 class 0-6-0 (ex 2000 class)
Southern Pacific S-12 class:
I am unaware of any oil burning 0-4-0s. There may very well be one out there.
Hope this helps,
Charles
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modeling the Santa Fe & Pennsylvania in HO
Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLb3FRqukolAtnD1khrb6lQ
Instagram (where I share projects!): https://www.instagram.com/trainman440
There were always exceptions - such as some logging railroads - but generally in the US small tank engines were only used either by the railroad in it's shops area - moving equipment from one building to the other etc., or in places like waterfronts with super-sharp curves. In the UK, tank engines were much more common on freight and passenger trains than here, particularly on branch lines.
Unless a steam engine has a very short connection to the tender, or you're using very very sharp curves (under 15" HO), an 0-4-0 or 0-6-0 with a tender should run fine.
wrench567The 0-4-0s used in city industries would be the tender type.
Dr. Bullitt: Welcome. Don't be afraid to ask questions because there are dozens of folks lurking who have the same questions but won't ask. You'll get all sorts of answers, most all of them right. There is no one correct answer, because there were so many different prototypical applications.
For example, coaling a 0-4-0 or a 0-6-0 depends on what you are modeling. Are you going to have a large engine facility that services many locomotives? Then you might see a coal tipple, serviced by a trestle for coal hoppers. Some facilities had augers or conveyers that took coal from a bin under the rails of a hopper and moved it up to the tender on the next track. I have seen pictures of a small shortline in my hometown that used a small jib crane to move a large bucket of coal into the tender (it was a 2-8-0). The bucket was loaded on a platform and was filled by workers shoveling coal into it. I have also seen pictures of short line railroads that had workers shovel coal from adjacent coal hoppers on an adjacent track. Some modern tourist operations use a front end loader to fill the tender.
You have lots of choices, I am sure there are others. Pick whatever you feel comfortable modeling and have fun.
Double post!
Welcome! I will starting my 71st orbit in December.
As to oil/coal fired ... it is your railroad. I handled this by having the railroad buy and/or aquire existing equipment and RoW, then allowing the railroad to create modifications to existing steam to make them all oil fired. Did it with Givens/Druthers adding the legaleze for just that. Sure, some tender modifications on my part, but what the hay!
Later
Todd Hackett
Libby, Montana 59923
I take only pictures then leave footprints on railroad property that I know is not mine, although I treat it as such...
Thanks for all the responses. I guess there will be a combination of both oil and coal burners.
The premise for my railroad is a poor short line trying to survive running coal and the occassional log load. It uses equipment cast off from richer roads so there will be many road names on the rails.
There is a small engine/caboose service area. As there is not room for a full size turntable, I am using an N scale turntable that is modified to handle the 0-6-0 and 0-4-0 engines. It accomodates them well.
The layout, which came out of my imagination, has a coal mine, a coal/oil dealer, passenger station and a small freight yard.
Thanks again for all the responses. If I fugure out how to post photos they will be added later.