rrgeneral Recently read the following in John White's History of the American Locomotive: "Driving-wheel brakes were virtually nonexistent on American engines before 1875. Reversing the locomotive was considered adequate to slow or stop its motion." Surely the engineer didn't deliberately spin the wheels backwards, except in an emergency??? Does this mean that introducing steam on what had been the exhaust side of the cylinder slowed the locomotive?
Recently read the following in John White's History of the American Locomotive: "Driving-wheel brakes were virtually nonexistent on American engines before 1875. Reversing the locomotive was considered adequate to slow or stop its motion." Surely the engineer didn't deliberately spin the wheels backwards, except in an emergency??? Does this mean that introducing steam on what had been the exhaust side of the cylinder slowed the locomotive?
I have a 12" gauge railroad on which I run a couple of live steam locomotives, neither of which have brakes. Both engines are equipped with slide valves and Stephenson valve gear. The railroad has grades up to 3-1/2%, a bit steep but they aren't too long.
I don't think it is any more difficult to smoothly control the speed of the train downgrade using the throttle and Johnson Bar than it is to control the speed of the train upgrade. I like to have a bit of steam going to the cylinders with the cylinder drains open, and use the Johnson bar to fine-tune the braking. Working a bit of steam also helps to keep from creating a vacuum and sucking cinders into the cylinders from the blast pipe.
Now, at no time should there be so much steam admitted to the cylinders that the drivers slide, or (heaven forbid) spin in reverse. Sliding or spinning wheels don't have as much braking force as one rotating at track speed, not to mention the extra stress that such a thing puts on the machinery.
The big problem with doing this is the lack of braking power as compared to having air brakes on every single wheel of the train. However, if the locomotive has enough tractive effort to take the train up the grade, it will have enough tractive effort to control the speed going downgrade... just not as quickly as conventional air brakes. I suspect it is somewhat comparable to dynamic brakes on a diesel.
Obviously, the weight and resulting magnitude of the forces on a full size train are considerable larger than on my little 12" gauge stuff. But remember, the time frame when this was done would have had short trains made up of relatively light weight equipment at low speeds... somewhat comparable (in scale) to my little railroad. As weight, speed and train lengths increased, so did the need for more effective forms of braking.
Also, the Rio Grande made some use of the water brake on some steamers. A small amount of boiler water is admitted to the valve chest with the cylinder drains open, and the braking force regulated with the Johnson bar... very similar to using the throttle, except that use of the water helped the cylinders run cooler than with the steam. This device helped keep the tires on the drivers from overheating and coming loose due to excessive use of the engine brake on grades. Google "locomotive water brake" to find more information on the subject.
Hope that helps...
- James
SunnylandI know brakemen did have to turn the hand brakes on cars to slow the train down, jumping from car to car. That had to be horrible in the winter with ice and snow on top of cars. My grandpa started with Frisco that way, I have an old pic of him standing on top of a car by the hand brake. Don't know who took it, Mom had it and now it's mine.
Not pre 1870 as it is 1898 but brakemen are toping the cars
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
I know brakemen did have to turn the hand brakes on cars to slow the train down, jumping from car to car. That had to be horrible in the winter with ice and snow on top of cars. My grandpa started with Frisco that way, I have an old pic of him standing on top of a car by the hand brake. Don't know who took it, Mom had it and now it's mine.
Getting back to the original topic...
According to John H White's book, the normal way of stopping prior to 1860 was to reverse the engine, not easy with the then-common hook motion reverse gears. Other than some early experiments with steam brakes, the first engine built with brakes (apparently hand actuated) was a Baldwin flexible-beam 0-8-0 for the Mine Hill Railroad in 1860. More examples followed in the mid 1860s by which time they were a common addition to heavier locomotives (Lehigh Valley's original "Consolidation" of 1867 had them). By 1890 virtually all road locomotives were brake equipped and they were required by law after 1895.
Miningman Would not touch that comment with a ten foot pole, pun intended.
Would not touch that comment with a ten foot pole, pun intended.
Still OT, and then?The Cat wants to know if the ten footer is from Warsaw?? ( Groan. )Thank You to Mr. RME, who cleared up the BLW repowering. I had read somewhere, Sy Reich?? PRR had repowered some minority power w/251.Many roads did, a story in itself.CN repowered four 244 cabs w/ 251 to see if a Psgr version would work = first FPA/B4s, then TRUE Factory FPA/B4s followed in number. As 244.http://www.trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/photos/cnr_diesel/6710.jpg As 251.https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5545/11332688733_f64b24abd4_b.jpg True FPA4 has louvers under shutters. http://www.trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/photos/cnr_diesel/6779.jpgThe four 4 244 PMs were incorporated into CNR 1800s from MLW. Electrical Cabinet is in SHORT Hood.http://www.cnrphotos.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=45576'Sweeps.' SW+GPshttp://www.canadianrailwayobservations.com/croarchives/june2025.jpgThank You, Sir.
NDGWas the BLW RFB repowered to 251 by the mine, sounds very expensive?? or did the PRR do it.
PRR did it, or more precisely Alco did it; the intention being to have a combination of rock-solid Westinghouse TMs and Baldwin running gear and a practical diesel engine. If I remember correctly, 2 A units and one B to make a set, 1800hp nominal per unit; someone once said they were essentially like an FPA4 above the deck. ISTR they did quite a bit of elimination of the usual Baldwin points of failure (weird cable run locations, hoses to all the little pieces, etc.) as part of the 'lessons learned'. The Westinghouse main generator would have been incompatible with the 251 (wound for lower crank speed) and was replaced with GE.
Going from memory, the mine wired the thing up with an external power panel suitable for their intended uses, and put the rubber-tire bogie at one end to move it around easily. I have a dim memory from 1971 that it was up on blocks, like a little storehouse, at that time, and not on the movable underframe. The breaker people understood they could re-sell the Alco engine and GE generator on the aftermarket if they needed to get their 'investment' back out, and meanwhile there it was, in a reasonably weatherproof enclosure and good rigid bed frame, with all the tanks and controls 'free' (or easily adapted)...
It appears that Zugmann's commentary just got displaced.
( I just logged on after being out much of the day. )
DUH!!! THE other Word that comes to mind has a capital 'F' and 30 small 'u's about 5 small 'c' s and ends in Capital 'K' often proceeded by the word 'Dumb'Back in the day, mid 1800s, the employees performing the duty of manually securing train retarding devices were termed 'Brakesman/men'Ditto in old Telegraph/Telephone days the Employee/s was/were Linesman/men.I read out the post to the Cat, ( he was too lazy to jump up and read it himself), who has been a great companion since I fell on the ice.He was after his own needs, but, came up on the bed where I was lying semi comatose in pain and crawled beneath my hand.Of course he was after the Petting, and subsequent Purring it invoked, as in 'You scratch my back, and I will Purr '. On a harmonious day he would roll over and I would rub his tummy = play biting and licks. I'd laugh despite the pain it caused, and he knew he won! Felt good, and made me laugh.He'd then run to the fridge, a furry fridge magnet shaped like a Cat. After hearing the previous post, the Cat went into the front room, where there is wall-to-wall, for traction, and projectile-vomited a Mc hair ball, a TRUE Quarter-Pounder.Poor Cat.Now I will have to suck up or he'll shred something, later.Thank You.T'was nice while it lasted.Now, to shift subjects without a clutch. Grind 'em 'til you find them.Was the BLW RFB repowered to 251 by the mine, sounds very expensive?? or did the PRR do it. I understand PRR did SOME repowering?Abt. 40 years ago I viewed a poor 35 mm slide at a foamer slide fest of aforesaid BLW B on rubber. I found out about 5 years later I knew one of the First Responders of the 4 killed here by lack of O2, I being in Montreal when it happened.
Brakesmen? What the hell is that? What kind of grammar is that? And we whine about what our kids learn in school?
RME It was probably not too difficult for an experienced person to set the right degree of reverse to avoid breaking traction, and then open the throttle to run any slack in -- think of it as the opposite of what was required to accelerate the train in the first place.
Dynamic braking?
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Vacuum brakes were used on a couple of passenger trains, and found a little favor on steam-powered elevated railways (Lake Street, at least one New York line). Because vacuum brakes had a maximum usable pressure of around 15 PSI (normal atmospheric pressure) the cylinders had to be pretty large. The chief advantage was quick recharge - nice for frequent stops. Better compressors and actuator valves (both operator and "triple") in the early 1890s gave air brakes the edge in transit use, and federal law made air brakes mandatory for larger equipment.
Just some thoughts on handling a train by locomotive alone?? Circa 1860?Just thoughts, as never had an opportunity to try it, and would not want to.There must have been procedures on handling trains well before Air Brakes and Automatic ( Janney ) couplers, as trains did run long before their implementation.We know that trains ran downgrade to Tidewater with Mineral traffic, way back soon after trains came into use.One would assume a train would have sufficient 'Brakesmen' to hold the train on the severest downgrades encountered, and the locomotive and tender might be used to balance the braking force required.
Each Brakesman having three or four cars to watch.Probably they stopped or slowed way down at the top, and set handbrakes to balance the grade so the Engine would almost have to drag the train down, brakes set on train, and use reverse and tender for fine control of speed, or throttle if pull needed.The Brakesmen answering Whistle Signals as required.On the flat, the Brakesmen would release a few/all brakes, depending on topography. Trains ran for many years, day, night, summer, winter before Air Brakes were used, so some sort of 'Science' must have been in place re train handling with risks given.
Instructions may have been issued re weather and temperature.Reversing the locomotive too roughly could blow out a cylinder head, even with drains open, or if drivers 'grabbed,' bend or break main or side rods, and a bent rod would not be the same length as before between pins and/or crosshead. If drivers slid far, they would be skidded flat, which might be the recourse rather than a wreck. Engineers were cautioned to not apply sand to a slipping engine until slipping stopped by shutting throttle a bit and all drivers on sand re rods.I do not know how Driver tires were held on way back, but, on more modern power they were shrunk on by cooling after being flame-heated, and could work loose if driver air brakes held on too long and not bailed.A spinning in reverse wheel would heat up, too.Train Weight greater than the engine could pull uphill without slipping would overwhelm the locomotive downgrade beyond it's Driver adhesion.When using a locomotive as a compressor could air pressure generated be greater than steam pressure from boiler and throttle?I assume 150 PSI Saturated would be about tops c. 1860, given construction and oils available.Pressure on top of slide valve, steam or air would cause valve to drag on top of ports, more drag as lube oil used up.Way back, I understand the Tallowpot/Fireman walked up to front of locomotive when valves started to groan, and pour oil into cups on top of valve chest. The Engineer shut off steam, the stop valve beneath cup opened, and the suction pulled in the oil.He then repeated the procedure on the other side. If there was a feud going on, the Engineer would open the throttle and spray hot oil all over the Fireman.Going downgrade, the Valves and Cylinders would need lubrication right up to end of steam.With pressure, air or steam, on a flat valve, I assume the valve would drag, no matter what, even balanced and lubricated, there WOULD be a risk unlatching the Johnson Bar depending on oil and pressure.I understand Engineers Shut Off working steam when hooking up or down if there was any danger of drag, and he could watch slack in Johnson Bar latch teeth, if moving slow enough, and unlatch when the bar was moving in direction required hooking up or dropping down. Standing clear.
A Screw Reverse would be safer and allow finer adjustment Could air pressure back thru Dry Pipe open throttle and then exit thru safety valves? w throttle design c. 1860??If back pressure, could throttle spring open taking Engineer's head off.Think 'Blue Peter,' here re injuries on foot plate when engine lifted water. Was that high pressure steam coming back thru from Superheaters? or boiler steam lifting safeties after motion flew off??A locomotive ALONE running in grass OVER the rail head is very slippery, and Drivers will stop rotating on grass even tho' engine is moving when using too much Engine Brake. VERY SCARY! Just thoughts regarding light locomotives c. 1860s and not 250 tonners 70 years later.Just thoughts and generalities.Thank You. P.S. It is said CP 3000s as built would bend their Main Rods in Reverse if drivers slipped and grabbed.http://yourrailwaypictures.com/CPRsteamengines/CPR_Jubilee_3001-a.jpg
rrgeneralDoes this mean that introducing steam on what had been the exhaust side of the cylinder slowed the locomotive?
That's exactly what it means. And there are two ways to control it: with the reverse and with the throttle. It was probably not too difficult for an experienced person to set the right degree of reverse to avoid breaking traction, and then open the throttle to run any slack in -- think of it as the opposite of what was required to accelerate the train in the first place.
Now, Johnson bars are notorious for kicking when adjusted rapidly at speed, particularly over mid, and throttles can stick or come too far open unexpectedly. I assume that engineers in that era often made better preparations when oiling around or preparing for a run, to ensure that 'their' locomotive would respond as expected.
Power brakes in that era were not unknown - if you look in White's history of the American passenger car, you can see for example the Loughridge chain brake, which was actuated by a friction wheel on a rear driver that pulled tension on a chain connected down the length of the train which then actuated the various brake foundations on the cars. (White also described why the system did not really work as desired much of the time!)
Vacuum brakes were never particularly favored for train brakes (let alone independent brakes) in American practice, and I think that most of the early 'independent' brakes on locomotives would be steam (as that was easily available "free" and easily controlled even in relatively cold ambient conditions)
Not widely, if at all.
pre-Westinghouse, were vacuum brakes widely used in North America as they were in the U.K?
I believe that is correct. Must have taken some finesse! Looking at engines of that period I see most, if not all, had a manual tender brake wheel on a staff. Maybe that was of some helpcontrolling the engine or train. Very good question.
The Maine 2 footers used vacuum or steam brakes from what I have read. I'm not sure how those worked and whether they were for the tender & train or the engine drivers or not.
Roger Huber
Deer Creek Locomotive Works
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.