Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
SP Cab Forwards - an idea not that widely used[?]
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
> This class was used between El Paso and Tucumcarrie and burnt coal, not oil. <br /> <br />By necessity, a Cab Forward was an oil burner (no way to move the coal from the tender at the rear to the front of the engine easily. The only engines that weren't rear cab that burned coal were the camel back's, prodominantly used on eastern lines that burned anthracite (hard) coal. This was due to the massive size of firebox needed as hard coal burns much slower than soft (bituminous) coal. As for helpers pushing on the rear, many states had laws banning helpers behind the caboose (unless the caboose was unnoccupied-easily done by having the occupants ride in the cab of the helper). The roads that did couple after, however, required the caboose to have a steel underframe (irregardless of steel or wood body). If the caboose had a wood underframe, in order to prevent crushing it, it had to be dropped, and the helpers inserted between the last car and caboose. <br />
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