The Elvin was particularly beloved of Livio Dante Porta for two reasons: first, it offered (theoretically) precise control both of amount and pattern for coal delivery, and second, it did not involve those steam-mass-and-enthalpy wasting, secondary-air displacing steam jets in the firebox.
There were other designs -- Detroit Stoker had one for marine applications -- that used the same 'flinger' principle. I have long had the impression that the actual designs to 'pick up' and pre-crush the coal in the tender, move it forward, and perhaps elevate it to the table were often highly dependent on patents ... either ones you owned the rights to, or those you'd have to license (or infringe upon!) to utilize ... for their actual detail design.
Personally, I can't imagine an Elvin-style design working for the purposes of the equipment involved in the question. One immediately critical design issue involves being able to see the coal being dispensed; another has to be whether a 'flinger' might throw coal right at where the fireman is watching. At least with steam jets you have some reasonable assurance that with the valves set a certain way you're getting a reasonable pattern and dispersion...
As another hint: the installations in question were described as a modification of Duplex stoker equipment. That is highly suggestive of where, and how, the equipment would be installed on a modern locomotive (representative wheel arrangements were 2-8-2 and 2-10-2)
The only "oddball" stoker I can find is the Elvin stoker used on some C&O engines. It appears to have a chain-type feed (similar to a manure spreader, with a chain on each side and crossbars to move the coal) to a screw which, in turn, feeds a "shovel" that throws the coal towards the front of the firebox. Perhaps steam jets were used to "float" the coal forward to get a fire close to the base of the arch.
There is considerable documentation of the existence of the things in several references, one of which is online; what is missing are the 'hard' technical details of the equipment, and the manufacturers of the components.
A surprising thing, to me, is that both the stoking and the coal-moving questions come out of the same book, a very common 'standard' reference for the motive power concerned. And yet, so little about either one appears to be recognized...
RMEthe "official" Yahoo Group for the railroad could only come up with one reference photograph in one book that showed some of the arrangement.
I think we're getting into the realm of guesswork if documentation is that scarce.
rcdrye RME If you want the longest possible combustion plume on a locomotive with a brick arch, where would you introduce the fuel? Since the arch - at least at the top - is in the back of the firebox, you'd have to introduce the fuel the the front of the firebox. This would require mounting at least some stoker components on the locomotive rather than the tender.
RME If you want the longest possible combustion plume on a locomotive with a brick arch, where would you introduce the fuel?
RMEIf you want the longest possible combustion plume on a locomotive with a brick arch, where would you introduce the fuel?
Since the arch - at least at the top - is in the back of the firebox, you'd have to introduce the fuel the the front of the firebox. This would require mounting at least some stoker components on the locomotive rather than the tender.
Time to give the hints away.
If you want the longest possible combustion plume on a locomotive with a brick arch, where would you introduce the fuel?
Wabash. Alcos. Speedy Gonzales. Surely someone will figure out why the B units couldn't lead. It was not because they didn't have cabs, or controls. It was something else.
BLS53- Nice of you to post back.
It certainly is quite sad to see a once great builder like Baldwin to disappear, but many of their switchers are still around here and there.
Same thing with Alco, although much later...I suppose you could say some legacy still lives at Bombardier.
Miningman Of course not ..visually they are fairly distinctive. Perhaps years of model railroading gives a person a nice 3D reference. In any case I posted a couple of pics for you. Sadly none of either locomotive were preserved.
Of course not ..visually they are fairly distinctive. Perhaps years of model railroading gives a person a nice 3D reference.
In any case I posted a couple of pics for you.
Sadly none of either locomotive were preserved.
I do appreciate the pics. Sorry if I came off wrong. I guess I'm just conditioned with responses that begin with either "Really?" or "Seriously?" on an internet forum as usually being an indication of confrontation. I apologize.
Miningman CSSHEGEWISCH- The links do not seem to work. BLS53- Really? A DL109 has a very distinctive knife point nose whereas the Baldwin baby face is very rounded. The carbody as viewed from the sides are vastly different as is the roofline. Plus the windows are altogether different.
CSSHEGEWISCH- The links do not seem to work.
BLS53- Really? A DL109 has a very distinctive knife point nose whereas the Baldwin baby face is very rounded. The carbody as viewed from the sides are vastly different as is the roofline. Plus the windows are altogether different.
Yes, Really. Or I wouldn't have made the statement. Is knowing the difference between two obscure locomotives, that have been extinct for half a century, a prerequisite for being a railfan in your world?
You now have all the pieces you need for the answer, but I will give you one more, senor: Alco.
Please keep going on the coal questions; I'll give you a book reference with them if you don't get stoked enough.
I vaguely remember a "Speedy Gonzales Cannonball Meteor Zephyr-Rocket".
MiningmanBeen a while now and no one seems to know what the answer is to the original question with the war time equipped locomotive firing and the showstopping coal pushing arrangement with the robust charm! Plus we still have the three blind mice hurling down the track at projectile speed somewhere in the mid-west, in a B unit nonetheless! Searching for a builder, model number and a reason!
The "coal-moving" arrangement resembled a model railroader's answer for how to move coal to the front of the tender without touching the coal.
The firing arrangements, on the B&O, resembled a stoker ... in a somewhat unusual place. Railroaders familiar with some forms of Canadian oil firing will know where that place is. Astute readers will then know what kind of stoker was the design basis...
In case you were wondering, there's a sort of elaborate analogy between the 'projectile' name for which the railroad was known, and the characteristics of the mouse in question, who was known for extreme, extreme speed. Something about the mouse is also the reason for the B-unit status.
CSSHEGEWISCH DL-109 http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/show/Picture.aspx?id=135780 "Baby Face" http://www.rrpicturearcihves.net/show/Picture.aspx?id=4552909
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=135780
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=4552909
I never saw either one, but I did see many pictures of both, and, as Miningman wrote, there was quite a difference between the two.
Johnny
BLS53 I can never tell the difference between an ALCO DL-109, and a Baldwin "Baby Face".
I can never tell the difference between an ALCO DL-109, and a Baldwin "Baby Face".
Maybe we should move back to the String Lining thread if we continue along with these items?
Great stuff by the way NDG.
Been a while now and no one seems to know what the answer is to the original question with the war time equipped locomotive firing and the showstopping coal pushing arrangement with the robust charm!
Plus we still have the three blind mice hurling down the track at projectile speed somewhere in the mid-west, in a B unit nontheless! Searching for a builder, model number and a reason!
Confused? Don't be.
Thank You.
A lot of railroads just omitted hostler controls on their B-units. Soo Line (WC)'s four freight A-B-A F3/F7 sets 2200A/C/B to 2203A/C/B (B-units were "C") had a spare B-Unit 2204-C which was the only one of the five freight B-units with hostler controls. None of the six passenger B-units had them.
NDGNow, a True B-Unit as in Cab Unit, probably would NOT have a pilot nor footboards on either end, and there would be a hazard running that way if you hit a rock or deep snow. No Bell, but small horn w/valve by Hostler's Control, Plug in headlamp on bracket, maybe?
Here is one of the things about the GP9B (and ATSF's GP7Bs): they have the end platforms, footboards, and headlights of 'normal' Geeps; only the cab and its associated paraphernalia is "missing".
I do not think EMD consciously intended that a hood B-unit be capable of 'leading' in a road consist, and that it is likely 'circumstantial' (as an economy of production) that they have the footboarding and road lights -- but, as NDG has noted, for long 'backing' moves those things are an advantage, and there is also the interesting possibility of a B-unit Geep coupled to the cab end of a nominally long-hood-forward GP9, giving the moral equivalent of one of those centercab transfer switchers beloved of some first-generation-dieselizing roads without some of their usual drawbacks...
A number of roads had "headlights" on their covered-wagon B units, some of them of full reflectored road size instead of a single sealed beam or equivalent. I don't know anything about why this was done, or whether it involved operations or just something like hostling safety. That does not get around the safety implications of no pilot or footboards ... although I shudder at the idea of someone having to ride footboards on a B unit, giving hand signals 'around the corner' to someone leaning backward out of a cab with their eyes off the controls behind them and quite possibly with their hands not conveniently reaching them either. Much better to do it as NDG indicated, as if controlling a passenger consist backing move with a monkey tail.
(But doesn't it presume that the covered-wagon B unit itself has been turned so that the 'horn' end is trailing? Otherwise the 'hostling' trainman wouldn't have a much better view of the things in front of the train, out his little window, than the enginemen would...)
NDG- Very informative on how that all comes about and works. Great information.
It is so much easier to have someone who actually did these things relate them this way than read it in some rule book.
RME I think the Trenton local, in the PC era at least, regularly went out of Morrisville with a GP9B "leading" like that ... on the same main with 100mph Metroliners.
That practice lasted into Conrail. I saw a GP9B leading the local out of Mo'ville quite a few times in the late '70s.
Always had the thought that Overmod and RME could be the same person, so I'm close! Not quite in that instance , but in the ballpark.
Yes it is funny with the GP B unit in front. A bit terrifying but funny.
Maybe the future of railroading?...Uber & Drone Railroad!
That was my son posting using my former account.
Fun, wasn't it? I think the Trenton local, in the PC era at least, regularly went out of Morrisville with a GP9B "leading" like that ... on the same main with 100mph Metroliners.
But when I say "lead" I mean control. My understanding is that the hostling controls in a GP9B are not capable of full control of a consist - in the picture, it is likely being controlled from a unit with a full cab. Think a road switcher with a very long articulated long hood...
"No, when I say B unit, that's exactly what I mean: a unit that cannot lead a consist. "- RME
A while ago on the forum a picture was posted of a Pennsy GP7 B leading a train at speed on the mainline. Quite a stunning picture .I think it was posted by Overmod.
I replied that I would try it out on the guys at an NTrak meet to see their reaction. Have 2 of them, one in brass and one kitbashed.
There was a train number and location given, along with a promise of how this came about, the reason why, ...definitely got the impression it was a semi-regular practice. There was a vague promise of further explanation but then Overmod just disappeared. It was definitely on the Classic Forum.
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