Trains.com

Coal for the B&O Royal Blue Line Question

2778 views
4 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Coal for the B&O Royal Blue Line Question
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, April 7, 2008 1:04 AM
The B&O did not generally use Wooten fireboxes,   The single exception were the camel-back (center-cab) switchers that provided freight service on the Staten Island Railway, and worked at some other locations in New York and New Jersey.   The Reading and Central of New Jersey used Wooten fireboxes on all their steam locomotives.  So I conclude the Reading and CNJ used different coal than the B&O.  So, were the B&O Pacifics coaled in Jersey City?  A separete coaling facility?  Or did these locomotives leave Ivy City engine terminal with enough coal for a round trip and did not require additional coal in Jersey City, only water and sand?
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • 2,366 posts
Posted by timz on Monday, April 7, 2008 4:51 PM

CNJ had some USRA 2-8-2s, didn't they? And maybe other engines with conventional fireboxes. Far as I'm concerned the question is, did the CNJ still burn any anthracite in late steam years? How about DL&W? Or RDG? Any reason why a wide firebox wouldn't burn soft coal?

We could look for pics showing the tenders of B&O engines departing Jersey City, but I'd guess it's a safe bet they did take coal there.

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 803 posts
Posted by GP40-2 on Monday, April 7, 2008 10:02 PM
In the late steam years they all burned bituminous coal in their locomotives. Central Appalachian bituminous coal (aka Pittsburgh Coal) has nearly the same BTU content per pound as Anthracite, but burns much faster. The faster you burn the stuff per unit of time, the more power a locomotive makes.
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: heart of the Pere Marquette
  • 847 posts
Posted by J. Edgar on Monday, April 7, 2008 10:22 PM
also earlier....when the Wooten boxes were "en vouge"..... anthracite was cheaper to the lines that used that firebox account mines on line
i love the smell of coal smoke in the morning Photobucket
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 4:29 AM

I had forgotton about the CNJ 2-8-2's, and you are correct.   But I do not recall any CNJ passenger steam locomotives that did not have Wooten fireboxes.   In addition to the Wooten firebox Pacifics, they had gobs of caamelback ten wheelers.  And I wonder why the Reading continued to build/buy locomotives with Wootens if they were no longer necessary, the postwar Pacifics.  But then the Reading 4-8-4's had regular fireboxes!   Or so it appears.  Strange.

But I guess the earlier question is answered.   All used the same kind of coal which worked OK in all types of fireboxes.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

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