kgbw49Wizlish, thanks so much! Awesome stuff! And thanks for expounding in a way that even a layman like me could understand!
Looking back at that post, there is a lot that laymen probably wouldn't get unless they knew the 'salty' secret lore ... and perhaps not then. That does not make it difficult, just arcane. PM me if there is anything in there that doesn't make sense or isn't adequately explained.
WizlishI see no reason why a 78"-drivered locomotive with a strong main wheel could not be made to reach the 'magic speed range' of Mallard's record. Yes, it would be easier for 3463 to be driven at that speed
Again, where in the US would you propose running a steam engine at those speeds?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
There is only one 'safe' place (at that only relatively speaking) to do it on rails: the fast loop at TTCI in Pueblo.
The likely 'alternative' is to use some version of dynamometer, probably an 'offshoot' of test-plant-style equipment where the drivers rest on relatively large-diameter braked drums, and the locomotive or tender drawbar pull is measured. As noted elsewhere this does not account for a number of locomotive characteristics, for example guiding and suspension at high speed (cf. the T1 high-speed slipping issue) and it is doubtful any 'speed' obtained from this testing would count as a record in the usual sense. However, for many of the objective questions involved in locomotive design, the answers provided from this kind of test would be valuable -- for example, establishing that the HP output at speed of a particular design would likely permit it to reach an actual speed or range of interest if allowed to do so.
It is only slightly less unlikely for a restored locomotive to be permitted to run at more 'customary' speed on an excursion. There are many stories (some involving ex-C&O 614 being particularly colorful) about amazingly high achieved speeds 'back in the day' when no one was watching carefully. Those days were long gone even before the advent of strict PTC, crazy insurance limits, and the current climate of litigation -- let alone the idea of subjecting a historically significant 'artifact' embodying many thousands of dollars worth of work to being derailed at high speed.
Expect the thing to be instrumented out the wazoo and carefully monitored in a bunch of different ways if it is given authorization to run at high speed on someone's track.
Wishlish et al.,
Seems quite odd to me that Pennsylvania railroad and the elaborate test and design department never bothered to run a test of the T-1 at speed. They did test the T-1 in elaborate indoor dynamometer tests.
Somewhere on this forum I recall the Pennsylvania Railroad borrowing a Norfolk and Western 600 series "northern" and testing it at high speed to the point that the valve cages siezed in their cylinders from high heat and poor lubrication.
Makes one wonder where is all the test data from the elaborate design of the T-1 4-4-4-4, the duplex 6-4-4-6, the 6-8-6 is - do these records not exist anywhere?
Surely Pennsy must have run some high speed tests of its own locomotives, besides the tales and stories of trainmen making up time on standard schedules?
While not per se a test for a World Record, Pennsy must have had some idea of the speed capability of a T-1, this data must exist somewhere!
Doc
Dr DSomewhere on this forum I recall the Pennsylvania Railroad borrowing a Norfolk and Western [class J] and testing it at high speed to the point that the valve cages siezed in their cylinders from high heat and poor lubrication.
To avoid what I suspect will be the usual consternation: This wasn't "poorly-designed lubrication" -- just insufficient for what was essentially an overspeed condition. And unless I'm mistaken the 'valve cage' doesn't move, it's part of the cylinder liner, and it's the valve or spool that moves.
You're not the only one wondering this, and in fact IIRC it was brought up in one of the T1 threads recently. My opinion, which is not worth much, is that PRR did their 'scientific' testing on the plant rather than by using a dynamometer car, and saw no need to corroborate with 'less-precise' sorts of road test. (One problem being that you don't see the effects of poor trackwork or other conditions on things like instantaneous adhesion...)
It's possible that some on-road testing rsults are in the collection at the Hagley Museum in Delaware. The custodian Chris Baer might know something likely or specific about this; you might want to ask him directly.
4960 is m second c,b & Q locomotive of all time. I want to scratch build her when I get the time. Right know I am kit bashing three bachmann 0-6-0,s. A n,c & St.L 0-6-0 a union Pacific 0-6-0. And turning a smokey mountain express into a southern 0-6-0 so she looks like 4501 before the change to black paint. The one thing I hated the the grand canyon did the the 4960 was when the conversion to recycled waste oil was done. The didn't,t fix her stack. So it looked all wrong. I loved her look with her stack originaly. I am so happy that the have given her a proper stack finally. But she is beautiful in both rebuilt and as the way the c,b&Q had her. She and 5632 will always be my two favorite c,b& Q steamers.
Pre-BNSF, BN did a survey of all displayed steam from its predecessors (Q, GN, NP) and found the most likely candidate for restoration to service would indeed be a Q Hudson for two good reasons: comparatively 'new' locos AND 5 preserved compared to 4 Northerns & 4 older Mikes (1 Mike of course is now operating: ex-4960 @ Grand Canyon). Parts would be easier to 'steal' - as I recall the one that at the time was in the best shape was 3006 displayed @ Galesburg while 4000 at No. LaCrosse was the last one upgraded when it was used with sister 4001 as a protection engine to Twin Cities passenger traffic in early Twin Zephyr days.
Gerald Edgar
I did finally hear from the La Crosse group that are the keepers of CB&Q 4000 aka Aeolus the famous CB&Q "Hudson" locomotive. I am sure we will all be glad to hear that the locomotive accessories, headlight, MARS light, numberboards etc are in possession of the group and are being left off of the locomotive for security purposes.
While the group is very open to the restoration and operation of Aeolus they do discribe the location as in a "busy area of the city." David Novak is doing a cosmetic restoration and it is of some opinion that a new boiler is needed. The jacketing was removed in 2004 or so and no mention was made of a boiler ultrasound. Some estimates were in the $6 million range to get it running. The group would like to afford a canopy over the locomotive. They did offer to put me in touch with David Novak for a more detailed report.
I will see if I can follow up on the details.
The locomotive is separated from the nearest active rail (CP) by approximately 8 blocks.
It is too bad about the boiler if true as it is a very nice-looking unit.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/La+Crosse,+WI/@43.8406106,-91.2487442,18z/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x87f954df6732b395:0x7fa98815193722b0
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.