Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
"Double Heading" with steam engines back in the early days...?
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">Your'e welcome Quentin. </span><span style="font-size: small;">Y</span><span style="font-size: small;">es, it does look like a rather frail coupler link, but I would guess that the link & pin coupler era, where this type of front coupler rod was used, did not entail much pushing with locomotives as helpers on the hind end of trains.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I had not really thought about that until now, but I don’t recall ever seeing a 4-4-0 of this era pushing on the train.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, I suppose the front coupling bar was used for switching operations, which would have entailed shoving cars.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I think where it was commonly used was for double heading where it would have been in tension.</span></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I am not exactly sure if there was a clear standard on this, but link & pin couplers were not as adept at withstanding shoving force, as are the automatic couplers that replaced them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>With link & pin couplers, many cars had dead blocks on the end sills.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So when you shoved on a cut of cars, the slack bunched against the dead blocks rather than bunching the couplers together.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The couplers were only subjected to tension force of pulling the cars.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It was similar to the European system that uses buffers for the compression or shoving force.</span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Theoretically, link & pin couplers should withstand compression force directly through their coupler bodies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But couplers of the link & pin era varied greatly.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They were not even standardized necessarily well enough to always mate together.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So the dead blocks eliminated at least the compression part of the coupler task.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But like the variation in couplers, the dead blocks were not universally applied to any standard either.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">With the long coupling link on the front of engines with long cowcatchers, and nothing on the engine to engage any opposing dead blocks, I would think that shoving, especially more than one or two cars, could have easily jackknifed, maybe derailing the engine or the car it was pushing. </span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The #999 was indeed famous for setting a speed record, but alas, that one too has been “debunked” by the modern “experts.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But even though its speed title has been besmirched, it was undisputedly the most handsome locomotive ever built.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But like the speed record, its striking appearance was lost in a rebuilding at some early point.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">There are some excellent photos of #999 if I can figure out a way to post them or link to them.</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span> </span></span></p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy