Trains.com

Northern Pacific cab forwards

1011 views
10 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2011
  • 122 posts
Northern Pacific cab forwards
Posted by IA and eastern on Tuesday, March 23, 2021 3:22 PM

I asked about Northern Pacific cab forwards and got little info. Then i found in the book railroad shutterbug on page 147 a diagram of a Northern Pacific 4-8-8-2 cab forward steam locomotive. Gary

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 895 posts
Posted by NP Eddie on Tuesday, March 23, 2021 4:21 PM

Please post a picture of that. I am an NP veteran and have not heard of an NP cab forward. The SP cab forwards all burned oil, but the NP did have a few oil burners.

 

Ed Burns

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 15,997 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, March 23, 2021 4:35 PM

Plug for anyone who wants to find out:

http://store.nprha.org/railroad-shutterbug/

I don't think this is the first time this question has come up.  For example:

http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/740/p/274942/3141260.aspx#3141260

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 895 posts
Posted by NP Eddie on Tuesday, March 23, 2021 6:22 PM

Another suggestion is to contact the NPRHS. Also,,  Mr. Schenk has an excellent book on Northern Pacific Supersteam.

 

Ed Burns

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,236 posts
Posted by NKP guy on Wednesday, March 24, 2021 6:51 PM

   May I ask a sincere, if ignorant, question?

   Once the cab-forward locomotive, which I always associate with SP, was introduced and (I assume) perfected, why weren't all steam locomotives built this way? This design always seemed to me to make sense even for eastern railroads.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 20,389 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, March 24, 2021 7:04 PM

NKP guy
   May I ask a sincere, if ignorant, question?

   Once the cab-forward locomotive, which I always associate with SP, was introduced and (I assume) perfected, why weren't all steam locomotives built this way? This design always seemed to me to make sense even for eastern railroads.

Eastern roads prefered coal - which many had in abundance on their property.  Switching to oil would have raised their infrastructure costs.

In today's world of steam locomotives, it is harder to source the proper grade of coal than it is to convert a firebox and tender to oil.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,236 posts
Posted by NKP guy on Wednesday, March 24, 2021 7:44 PM

   Thanks, Balt.

   I am embarassed beyond words to realize now those cab forwards were oil burners.  Hand me the dunce cap.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 15,997 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, March 24, 2021 7:56 PM

NKP guy
 I am embarassed beyond words to realize now those cab forwards were oil burners. Hand me the dunce cap.

No dunce cap for you.  A number of the coal-burning solutions in the '40s and '50s were cab-ahead-of-boiler: take the PRR V1 and C&O M-1 in the former era, and the BCR coal turbine and the N&W 2300 in the latter.  Sara can tell you about using pulverized coal in place of stoking to be able to run the fastest locomotive in the world cab-forward.

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • 940 posts
Posted by Erik_Mag on Wednesday, March 24, 2021 10:03 PM

IA and eastern

I asked about Northern Pacific cab forwards and got little info.

I wonder if you were referring to the North Pacific Coast cab-forward that may have been the inspiration for the SP cab forwards? This was an experiment by the master mechanic of the line, using a water-tube boiler and oil fired.

  • Member since
    February 2021
  • From: Germany
  • 122 posts
Posted by Sara T on Wednesday, March 24, 2021 10:50 PM

Overmod:  >>Sara can tell you about using pulverized coal in place of stoking<<

Ueeeh? can I tell?  No, not really. This was my twisted and contorted stage, no real memory of this, only it was a time of agony, never came to nothing-not-at-all. (if this sentence sounds wrong somehow, this is how it should)

From my view now, I can only say: pulverized coal is not suited for loco firing because it produced a lot of burned dust that covers the loco first and then the rest of the line. See the Wendler pulverized coal burners on East-German DR: all sooty and grey-brown. You would have to install complicated secondary appliances to pull the cinder particles out of the combustion gas. But for this you know more about it, Overmod, including things I have not heard of (most of it).

Greeting

                  Sara in winter storm

 0S5A0R0A3

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 12,119 posts
Posted by wjstix on Wednesday, March 31, 2021 3:47 PM

IA and eastern

on page 147 a diagram of a Northern Pacific 4-8-8-2 cab forward steam locomotive.  

Key is "a diagram". Yes, NP considered building cab-forward engines and had drawings / diagrams made etc. They even did some test runs with Z-6 5117 (a 2-8-8-4) running backwards pulling a train through tunnels. But none were ever built. (They also considered electrification like GN or Milwaukee did.)

See pg.163 of Frey and Schrenk's book "Northern Pacific Railway: Supersteam Era 1925-1945".

Stix

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