I thought I had read that there would be live streaming of the 4014’s run yesterday, on Trains’ FB page and on UP’s FB page.
I was away yesterday, but figured when I got home those videos would be online for viewing. I also expected that many individual railfans would have put up YouTube videos.
But I am finding nothing. ???
It occurred to me that maybe UP or certain companies have an exclusive on this. But how this could concievably be enforced is beyond me. Not to mention how that would be received by thousands of railfans!!
What‘s up?
Still in training.
There's some videos linked on the "Just A Preview...Of 4014" topic.
I don't know if that's what you're looking for but they're worth viewing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR7Q27cIEvo
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Is this what you're looking for?
It's 30 minutes of 4041, 844, the SD70 and consist heading out of "Chi-Yan."
The actual trip starts at 6'50". Ed Dickens does so much whistle action at the beginning I thought he was going to de-pressurize the boiler!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4-pql_G8Rg
It's amateur video, but not bad. And 4014 drew one helluva crowd!
Thanks for posting those, guys.
Flintlock76 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4-pql_G8Rg It's amateur video, but not bad. And 4014 drew one helluva crowd!
Sounds to be a lot of 'clanking' in the 4014's operation on this video.
Also notice the piston rod on the front engine extends about 2 feet from the cylinder before it is attached to what I will call the crosshead. The rear engine piston rod only extends about a foot. I would have thought both running gears would have been constructed to the same specifications.
BaltACDAlso notice the piston rod on the front engine extends about 2 feet from the cylinder before it is attached to what I will call the crosshead. The rear engine piston rod only extends about a foot. I would have thought both running gears would have been constructed to the same specifications.
Just a guess on my part, but I think it may be a clearance issue. The front cylinder is centered between the wheels of the leading truck.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
[quote user="Paul of Covington"
BaltACD Also notice the piston rod on the front engine extends about 2 feet from the cylinder before it is attached to what I will call the crosshead. The rear engine piston rod only extends about a foot. I would have thought both running gears would have been constructed to the same specifications.
Just a guess on my part, but I think it may be a clearance issue. The front cylinder is centered between the wheels of the leading truck.[/quote]
You'll see this also on the PRR T1 vs. predecessor S1. When high-speed balancing a simple articulated (or when designing for expensive-parts commonality) there are advantages to having all four sets of rods, including the mains, identical. To do this with a four-wheel lead truck, maintaining identical rod angularity on the same pair as mains, implies an extended piston rod and usually extended cross head-slide structure. This is a design characteristic inherent in the 'Challenger' design (and a Big Boy is an only-slightly-bigger Jabelmann Challenger in design detail) -- compare it with what 'comes naturally' to the running gear in a N&W A or an Allegheny.
One big issue comes with the use of hollow piston rods in this arrangement: even slight issues with thrust or piston tribology rapidly produce bending-related failure which at high speed can be spectacular...
On an articulated locomotive like the Big Boy, Challenger, Mallet, etc., my understanding is that the whole front engine (drivers, cylinders, valve gear, rods) is sort of like a truck (in the railroad sense) in that it pivots.
But can the aft engine also pivot? Or is its relationship to the boiler fixed? I think that relationship is fixed, but I guess I'm not sure about that.
Only the front engine pivots, the aft engine is fixed to the frame, that's typical with articulateds.
There MAY have been some pioneering "twin-engine" types with pivoting fore and aft engines back in the 19th Century, but I'm not sure about that. I think Ross Winans came up with one in the 1850's.
Flintlock76Only the front engine pivots, the aft engine is fixed to the frame, that's typical with MALLET-TYPE articulateds.
Fixed that for you. Recommend a refresher reading of Wiener; I think you're beginning to need it... (Note to participants in this thread: here's a copy for $20 delivered for anyone who needs or wants one...
This is a place where knowledge of the prototype is NOT assisted by knowledge of models, particularly O-gauge models. It is 'not uncommon' for both engines to be pivoted to allow the model to negotiate ridiculous curve radii: in fact, several designs of PRR T1 have both engines pivoted where the prototype has NO articulation.
The genius of Mallet's original idea (which by his own desire was strictly restricted to compound locomotives) was that the rear engine was fixed to the boiler, hence there was no need for flexible joints in the high-pressure steam piping. Only the LP exhaust needed to be carried to the 'hinged' engine.
As a kind of fringe benefit (although, to my knowledge, not rigorously mathematically worked out) the tracking of the forward engine had comparable physics to a Bissel leading truck (usually with an additional separate Bissel leading the hinged engine). This made for very good default guidance, even if hampered in most early prototypes by the "mistake" of putting both horizontal and vertical hinging in the forward engine's chassis. Less obvious, unless you have read Fryer's book on experimental steam, is the consequence of "hinging" or pivoting both engines of a Mallet: it would reduce the effective guiding wheelbase to zero without necessarily introducing the flexible stability of a full articulated underframe (as for example on a PRR GG1 or NYC P-motor). That is a BAD idea, especially on large and heavy power with a long rigid boiler, but not any of the firebox, over the engines.
One 'answer' in Wiener is the sensible alternative to a Garratt: the use of the (Kitson) Meyer configuration, which uses a boiler with a drop firebox and one engine tucked under the boiler (pivoted as for its counterpart on a Mason Bogie, probably) and the other one immediately behind the firebox. This has a longer working wheelbase than a Mallet, but nowhere near the requirement for length and carrying axles imposed by a Garratt, while preserving both the flexibility of motor bogies and probably minimized swing of the boiler on curves.
Hmmm, thought I caught my "Mallet type" error myself. No matter, as long as someone caught it!
Do you know if I was right about Ross Winans? I haven't hit the books yet, too much to do this morning.
Weiner? I've never heard of him. Up 'till now a weiner was just something I enjoyed with mustard on it and a side of fries.
And maybe a beer, if I happened to be in THIS place...
https://www.bringfido.com/restaurant/3928
Anyway, I've mostly concerned myself with the history, lore, and poetry-in-motion of steam, I'm not ashamed to admit sometimes the engineering makes my head swim!
Speaking of Wiener, he reserves the term articulated to mean locomotives where both trucks pivot, and uses semi-articulated for those like Big Boy and Challenger that have one engine fixed to the main frame and the other pivoting.
Flintlock76Do you know if I was right about Ross Winans? I haven't hit the books yet ...
I don't remember Winans anticipating the Fairlie, but it's likely that if he did it would be covered in Sinclair's Development of the Locomotive Engine.
You need to stop reminding me of Hiram's. Bringing up Alison Steele was bad enough.
At least Hiram's is still around Mod-man, praise be!
Like Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, Yosemite, or Grand Teton, just knowing they're out there is a comfort, even if you never get to see them.
RIP "Nightbird," taken from us too soon.
Flintlock76Ed Dickens does so much whistle action at the beginning I thought he was going to de-pressurize the boiler! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4-pql_G8Rg
I just have to keep coming back to this clip just for Mr. Dickens' Casey Jones on the whistle impersonation! With the volume maxed out of course!
Trains, trains, wonderful trains. The more you get, the more you toot!
Penny Trains Flintlock76 Ed Dickens does so much whistle action at the beginning I thought he was going to de-pressurize the boiler! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4-pql_G8Rg I just have to keep coming back to this clip just for Mr. Dickens' Casey Jones on the whistle impersonation! With the volume maxed out of course!
Flintlock76 Ed Dickens does so much whistle action at the beginning I thought he was going to de-pressurize the boiler! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4-pql_G8Rg
I am thinking from where his eyes were during the 'whistle concerto' that Mr. Dickens was glancing at the steam gauge to see just how much effect his concerto was having on maintaining steam pressure.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.