Now you are going to HAVE to review it, in some detail. (Use PM if you don't want to put it in a general post )
Ok thank you Overmod, that was my take as well but was not sure but I'm thinking we both can't be wrong ( wait and watch...we will both be wrong!).
Having stated all that I just got back from a live stage play, the only one performed by adult locals, an annual event,... and I suppose one of the cultural highlights up here. Three people I work with are deeply involved on stage and off. It is something that a person in my position needs to be seen at.
It was loooooong and mind numbing as in like an anesthesia. It's a good thing our local paper went belly up 2 years ago and I do not Face Plant (and also, thankfully, no one around here knows what a Classic Trains Forum is so will not read this), because I would write a super heated steam scalding critique, vehemently objecting to everything about it including the incredible length of time it took, which as horrible as that was, is a minor point against 5 major ones. Also it's good because there would be pitchforks and torches heading straight at my house in no time flat, then tied up and put in a canoe and sent down the river ...and the river is frozen!
The point is I do have a question in mind and will post it either later tonight or in the am....just need time to let some steam escape and cool down a bit so I don't say something more stupid than usual.
MiningmanSo??...am I correct or is this not what you're looking for as an answer?
I took his previous post about the interesting part of the photo to be a 'yes'.
So??...am I correct or is this not what your looking for as an answer?
The "Creek" cars were updated versions of the prewar "Brook" 12DupSR 5DBR cars. Each "Creek" car had two double bedrooms with lengthwise beds and two with crosswise beds, in addition to six each upper and lower duplex single rooms. The "Brook" cars were assigned to second-tier trains from the beginning, but the "Creek" cars made it onto the Broadway and the Spirit of St. Louis.
MiningmanBoth photos are Creek series....perhaps there is something odd about College Creek in the series.
That's what makes me nervous, like a Christian Scientist with appendicitis, when I see Mike MacDonald ask a question like this. The obvious answer looking at a Walthers model of "College Creek" that is probably derived from a common Creek shell, the picture easily found in a few seconds via a Web search, is too easy to generate.
Of course I could just be overthinking.
Miningman, College Creek seized this scene by being something odd.
https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28736/m1/1/zoom/?resolution=1&lat=2203.5&lon=750
https://books.google.com/books?id=HVPQTanDDAkC&pg=PA90&dq=%22from+pullman+standard+came+unusual+cars%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-hJ6suMXaAhVFrlkKHQqSBz0Q6AEIJzAA#v=onepage&q=%22from%20pullman%20standard%20came%20unusual%20cars%22&f=false
Both photos are Creek series....perhaps there is something odd about College Creek in the series.
As an aside, I saw one of these in Bristol, Va., in the fifties; somehow, I was in town when the Pelican came in one morning and dropped one of these, instead of the 10-6 that usually ran between New York and Bristol. I stepped on board and looked in one of the duplex rooms.
Johnny
That's too simple. Who has a picture of the other (less 'interesting') side?
Six windows in line.
P-S "Creek" Series 12 Duplex 4 Bedroom Sleeper, Plan #4130. Lot #6792
How many windows had College Creek in line with PENNSYLVANIA?
Wanswheel--1:34 am Timestamp
rcdrye--7:27 am Timestamp
I hereby declare Wanswheel the winner and give a large and appreciative nod to rcdrye for the fabulous further information on it's connections both bridge wise and railroad wise.
It is, unfortunately, no longer in CP hands, it is now CN.
http://ss.sites.mtu.edu/mhugl/2016/10/16/3312/
http://www.mikelclassen.com/Headlines_of_the_Past.php
http://www.gendisasters.com/michigan/13692/sault-ste-marie-mi-train-bridge-collapse-oct-1941
lots of different construction techniques in one place...
Strauss 'trunnion' design.
Certainly a good approach for a bridge that is normally closed.
I think you're referring to one ofthe Sault Ste. Marie Bridge Company's International bridge spans between the cities of the same name in Michigan and Ontario. A doulble leaf bascule built in 1907 by the Dominion Bridge Co. Lim'd, it spans the North Soo Canal , opening to permit the passage of lake boats. The Bridge company was owned by Canadian Pacific, connecting CP (and Algoma Central) with the Soo Line and DSS&A. One of a series of bridges crossing the Soo Canal, the older Sault Ste Marie Canal and the St. Mary's River, it is the only one of its type. It used to have, and may still have, a significant weight restriction.
Working from south to north, the crossing has a large vertical lift bridge, the double leaf bascule, a series of truss bridges, a short stretch on an island, and a swing bridge which is configured with its pivot on one side of the canal, so it closes over the canal on one side and land on the other.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcokyT70wlU
OK here's a hint.
There is an additional exceedingly rare and significant aspect to this bridge. Note that when this bridge is closed it looks like a single span Pennsylvania through truss. This is unlike bascule bridges in Chicago such as the La Salle Street Bridge. With those bridges in Chicago, the trusses are deepest (tallest) at the abutments, indicating that each span acts as a cantilever and holds weight independently of the other, in a cantilever type of fashion. Standing on such a bridge when a heavy truck goes over, you can feel the bridge move as the truck crosses from one leaf to another as the weight shifts. In contrast,, the bridge functions as a single span simple Pennsylvania through truss when it is closed. Special load-bearing locks had to be designed to link the bridge halves together securely and allow them to transfer live loads to the chords of the truss. This complex design was a solution to the need for a very wide and unobstructed clear channel, while also meeting the needs of the railroad for a rigid structure. Railroads usually like single leaf bascule bridges. Nearly all double-leaf bascule bridges are highway bridges. Recall that shifting weight scenario described above with the La Salle Street Bridge. Trains will not operate well if the bridge is shifting constantly as each train car crosses the bascule span. They need a bridge that will remain rigid and unmoving under the heavy loads. Creating a bascule span that operates as a single span through truss when closed (rather than two cantilevers reaching out from each abutment) keeps the bridge rigid. However, the needed span was so long that the traditional way to make a bascule span function like a single span truss, by designing a single leaf, was not feasible. This bridge is the solution xxx came up with to provide a double-leaf bascule with the function and rigidity of a single leaf bascule.
....I "redacted" key names
It is still very much with us. It is rather important and famous for its unique engineering and the last extant example left anywhere.
A particular problem had to be solved and it was done so with a fairly complicated solution.
Is it still with us, or has it already met its demise?
Perhaps in an accident involving a ship?
EDIT: never mind, the one I was thinking of was double track.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
What is this Broadway bridge stuff? No.no, no...what I have to give hints already?
Single track.
Too early to talk span(s).
Do you mean the longest single-span bascule bridge?
The Broadway bridge has dual spans.
No not a trick question at all. Big Railroad, Big Bascule Bridge.
Is this a trick question?
The Broadway Bridge over the Willamette in Portland, if I recall correctly, never handled any 'railroad' larger than streetcars. Are you confusing the type of mechanism, Rall, with 'rail'?
When completed in 1913 this became the longest Bascule Bridge in the world.
Name the Railroad and the location i.e. What did the bridge span?
MiningmanNo grate ... fascinating.
It most certainly had a grate ... what it did not have was an ashpan of conventional arrangement. And this was in my opinion one of the reasons it did not, and would not, 'scale' to the locomotive size that was by the early 1900s becoming characteristic of many North American railroads.
Most coal-fired marine work with things like Scotch marine boilers involves the inherent ability to rake ash out from under the fire independent of ship speed at the time required. This is not a trivial thing on a locomotive, particularly when the ash raked out has to be disposed of in the space between the rear of the firebox and the tender, effectively below 'footplate' level.
Go ahead and ask the next question.
Thank you Overmod for that. No grate,,,fascinating. Perhaps my last attempt at explaining it came the closest.
Seems that Cornelius III got a very raw deal for Daddy, yet he remained married to his wife for his lifetime...and nothing shabby about the Order Of Cincinnati either.
I'm grateful for the look of the Vanderbilt tender. Big power on the GTW and CNR, C&O, B&O, Southern Pacific, and others all evoke that imagery. Have read that he was quite influential in bringing designs to the New York subway system as well.
Strange enough how other major roads, NYCentral, CPR, Pennsy, shunned these tenders.
Should I ask the next question?
The big thing about the Vanderbilt firebox, which was directly adapted from a marine 'equivalent', was that it was fully cylindrical: there was no 'grate' opening or waterleg space with open air and an ashpan underneath. That meant there was a full 360 degrees of equal waterspace and pressure-balancing effect 'all the way around', and of course nothing but easily-inserted and easily-caulked radial stays everywhere in the box structure.
Now if you asked me if this design was suited to locomotive service I would start giving you extensive evidence as to why it couldn't possibly be. But the design was remarkably good -- for that transition age at the turn of the 20th Century when the boiler was still considered as the source of the effective steam, and the firebox was water-SHIELDED without much respect or even recognition of the contribution of what would become Stefan-Boltzmann thermodynamics to steam generation.
Even the issue of ash vs. primary-air distribution under the grate in one of these things was not considered dramatically difficult -- perhaps because of the limited run between division points that one of these locomotives would 'see'.
It did not take long to realize, however, that the advantages of deep fireboxes (and later, wide deep fireboxes, as distinct from wide shallow ones) gave dramatic performance improvements in practical high speed steam generation. That might be considered one of the last preliminary steps required for Schmidt-type superheaters to come into their own as "game-changing" performance enhancing systems. And at the required water rate and fuel rate more modern combustion systems could produce, there was little place for artificially-constrained geometry at smaller scale no matter how good the maintenance records could be.
(As an amusing comparison, look at Strong's duplex firebox vs. what Cornelius the younger developed...)
Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!
Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter