MiningmanHow about Fluke Transportation ... " if it gets there on time it's a Fluke"
Bobby was quite a character!
I note that as of August 2019 Fluke Transportation Group still gives this slogan pride of place on their site...
BTW, see if you can find any of the pictures of how PRR used those BP20 B units gainfully after the As went off to glory in New Jersey. Their dreadnought length is even more evident in that service...
Campbell Express was based lin my home town of Springfield MO, next to the Frisco tracks. We were laughing at that double-meaning motto back in the 50s. To make it even better, there was an adultery suit in court at that time involving people in their office.
Concerning the 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea ride, my son got out of the Navy in 1989 after spending six years on a fast attack sub. Then he got a job at Walt Disney World and his first assignment was attendant on that ride.
Overmod-- Culver City Meat... luv it luv it luv it.
How about Fluke Transportation ... " if it gets there on time it's a Fluke"
Pennsy have done everything they can to help Baldwin, from a fleet of T1 to a fleet of "Passenger Shark" and centipede...... it was tragic.
Jones 3D Modeling Club https://www.youtube.com/Jones3DModelingClub
Flintlock76Baldwin got their act together on 'em just a little too late, the race had already been lost.
Race was essentially lost when Baldwin chose a very heavy low-speed engine with inherent limited horsepower increase and truly awful precision-machining requirements (just look at the crank out of one of these, and recognize the practical horsepower limit even of the Belgian license-built engines). That was a good idea in the '30s when everyone put two motors in their passenger engines by necessity; not so good as your surprise 'fallback' when your free-piston future doesn't work out and a major competitor gets power from a single prime mover; not good at all by the late '50s when heavy turbocharging comes in and GE has the insight that the Cooper-Bessemer design can be pushed to surprisingly large power density.
It's not for want of trying: Baldwin had light high-horsepower designs that should have been reliable in the Thirties; they just couldn't make them at a price point railroads wanted to bother with. Had they marketed the Essl design, with a few refinements they'd have had remarkable production efficiency (x number of motor types, x number of frame and carbody configurations, x number of traction motors either in frame or bogie) but... BLH saw itself as a semi-custom builder right to the effective end and most probably wouldn't have benefited from high inherent standardization.
I thought (1) was a battery-electric construction locomotive, and that's exactly what it is: one of two built in 1905. They didn't have third-rail shoes because they'd be done working before any energized rail would be available ... this may have been related to their blistering 7kph ... yes, that's under 5mph ... top speed. It appears the battery chemistry, and perhaps no little part of the battery construction, was the same used in contemporary submarines (and derived from American practice!), so there is a kind of moral link to later FM power...
(Incidentally, I believe the guys who built these are responsible for one of the first, if not in fact the first, true 'production' HEP application, before the turn of the 20th Century.)
My first thought was fire in that gondola! Probably loaded up with trash, and primary air increasingly delivered through rust holes or bad seams down low for that blast-furnace effect. You see the same thing happen with dumpsters.
Alternatively this type of damage could have happened in an industrial-plant accident, where the car was exposed to massive flame heat, but the type of damage indicates 'internal' to me ... internal involving the whole of the inside load, at depth.
Could also be heavy, loose scrap banging around in there -- or severe wreck damage, which I think is the likeliest thing. Note something that isn't busted: the paint. Unusual to see this degree of heat distortion with the painted information still clearly legible like that, so I'm naturally suspicious...
Note the interesting placement of the dynamic-brake blister on the rebuild ... and the absence of porches. This opens a question, because it would not use DB in the absence of a lead unit so equipped ... which would likely be six-axle, so why would it be relocated in the wreck rebuild rather than put in a 'factory' location? I suspect these and other answers are known to Soo ... or EMD ... aficionados.
I purposely left Campbell to the end. In the old days, "humpin'" was an expression much like 'getting on the ball' (my suspicion is that it came, at least in part, from caterpillars as well as dromedaries), and just as with expressions like "ballin'" (as in ballin' the jack, which means running ('highballin') a locomotive fast), it naturally came to be used, probably with some back-formation excuse for, say, body parts, for other forms of strenuous exercise. (I'm still surprised that hot-rodding, another railroad-derived term, didn't take its place in the pantheon...)
I'm quite sure the 'other implied meaning' was in there by intent, with the camel cleverly used to show...
... well, if you want a better double-entendre, look no further than the old Culver City meat company, which when I had offices there could still be seen to advertise a historic boast:
It was rebuilt from a wreck as a cabless booster. Do not think it was a standard production model but I'm sure EMD or GMD would be happy to build one if required.
What a shame about those Baldwin "Sharks." Good locomotives, but Baldwin got their act together on 'em just a little too late, the race had already been lost. Cool-lookin' diesels!
Interesting, I didn't know there was an SD40 "B" unit.
1) They had to elongate the locomotive to fit in the railroad name. Honest!
2) I can sympathize.. Somedays I really feel like this.
3) Have to be careful here.... don't we all?
4) Man oh man those PRR Passenger sharks were big units.
Even the B Unit was ginormous.
5) Speaking of B Units how about this Soo Line SD40. Acting like they are just like the real big big guys.
Oh wow, now I really wish I'd sweated out the line for the "20K" ride!
The film quality was just fine! Thanks for that Becky!
Hey, wouldn't it have been cool if Disney had James Mason do the narration? The definative Captain Nemo!
And what a shame about the "Nautilii." What a waste. Coolest sub ever!
Flintlock76Sure wish I sweated out the line for the "20,000 Leagues Under The Sea" ride!
Here's a compilation video from several sources that does a good job at giving you a feel for the ride. It was, of course, a notoriously difficult ride to photograph with the film and video cameras of the day. The films usually were just shadows if you were lucky and the CCD camcorders usually made everything look blue-green.
Unlike steam locomotives that are lucky enough to retire to museums or excursion organizations, the WDW Nautilii are quite literally "dead and buried". Here they are prior to their entombment:
And that's ground up and put into sealed containers because of lead contamination by the way.
Trains, trains, wonderful trains. The more you get, the more you toot!
Another look at street running in the Big Apple, brakeman up top the cars, great sightseeing!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SECM3ufU9M
Yikes! Looks like that Erie caboose crew left the ham n' eggs on the stove a little too long!
More strange things:
1) And where would you like to go sir.. we go everywhere!
2) Erie fans ( that's you Wayne) avert your eyes... the Erie's on fire!
3) This loco seems to have a real move on. Get the blazes out of the way!
4) Well not everything on the Santa Fe was classy. Seems BNSF got pretty frugal as well, they really cheaped out on the fix.
5) Well not everything on the New York Central was beautiful. I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder but this may be their ugly duckling.
6) The Milwaukee Road, stunning in its greatness and reach. What's so strange ?... all this is gone that's what.
That was an interesting clip. It's been a long time, 44 years, but it looks like they've installed a few more lights since I was there. All I remember except for the light tunnels is dark!
I don't remember any background music either. The only sounds I remember are blood-curdling screams! Some of them were mine!
Sure wish I sweated out the line for the "20,000 Leagues Under The Sea" ride!
It's been about 28 years for me and about all I remember was that it was hard to see anything but white dots on a black background. More like this:
That red tube is called the "Speed Tunnel" by the way.
Mamma mia!
It's a lot less scary with the lights on, but I still need to have a smoke after watching that!
I remember that red tunnel! Jeez!
How about with the lights on?
Sixteen times on a rollercoaster?
Mr. Jones, you're a braver man than I am! I hate the things!
The last rollercoaster I was on (because I had NO idea what I was getting into) was "Space Mountain" at Disney World Orlando in 1975. It took me a half-hour and five cigarettes to calm down and stop shaking! Good thing there weren't any such things as "Smoke Free" zones back then, even in Disney World!
Flintlock76 Boys, we are truly privileged, a peek at Becky's holiday layout is as reliable a harbinger of the approach of Christmas as the "Star of Bethlehem!"
Boys, we are truly privileged, a peek at Becky's holiday layout is as reliable a harbinger of the approach of Christmas as the "Star of Bethlehem!"
Indeed! Becky's layout reminds me of that year when I celebrate my 16th birthday. My best friend and I went to the amusement park and took the rollercoaster 16 times in a roll for celebration. It was a weekday, so we didn't need to queue up. We repeated the same thing to every thrill rides in the parks. Good times! I love and enjoy the feeling of centrifugal force if only those machines could sprint (or actually fly) faster! We did go to visit the cute dolphins though.
It's scheduled to replace the rapidly disintegrating Astro Orbitor:
It was a good model in it's day but it really doesn't appreciate being shoved into a box every January.
So I decided it was time to go retro and build the Apollo inspired Rocket Jets of the 1966 Tomorrowland revamp:
Including the Peoplemover on such a small scale is the tricky part.
Penny Trains I can understand that feeling! My first 3D project was a highly detailed fantasy long-distance-travel-trolleybus base on a German proposed 6-wheel Double Decker Trolleybus. I also made some vehicles that were supposed to be imported to a game, so that I could drive them in the game, roaming around the 3D city but turn out, the hard disk suddenly down! I had many stuff like custom made textures, TONS of different skyscrapers floorplan for my family business in that Hard Disk. Not all data was backup or saved....... I still keep that hard disk in my safe. I can recreate them anytime I want, but it is like painting, the original is always better than a copy of it. I had a bad habit of storing files in vulnerable directories. Now I backup, backup, backup! My current modeling project: Problem is, it has to go from CGI to real world in an annoyingly short amount of time.
I can understand that feeling! My first 3D project was a highly detailed fantasy long-distance-travel-trolleybus base on a German proposed 6-wheel Double Decker Trolleybus. I also made some vehicles that were supposed to be imported to a game, so that I could drive them in the game, roaming around the 3D city but turn out, the hard disk suddenly down! I had many stuff like custom made textures, TONS of different skyscrapers floorplan for my family business in that Hard Disk. Not all data was backup or saved....... I still keep that hard disk in my safe. I can recreate them anytime I want, but it is like painting, the original is always better than a copy of it.
I can understand that feeling! My first 3D project was a highly detailed fantasy long-distance-travel-trolleybus base on a German proposed 6-wheel Double Decker Trolleybus. I also made some vehicles that were supposed to be imported to a game, so that I could drive them in the game, roaming around the 3D city but turn out, the hard disk suddenly down! I had many stuff like custom made textures, TONS of different skyscrapers floorplan for my family business in that Hard Disk. Not all data was backup or saved....... I still keep that hard disk in my safe.
I can recreate them anytime I want, but it is like painting, the original is always better than a copy of it.
I had a bad habit of storing files in vulnerable directories. Now I backup, backup, backup!
My current modeling project:
Problem is, it has to go from CGI to real world in an annoyingly short amount of time.
Lovely! I guess this thrill ride will become a fantastic addition to your amazing layout, isn't it? It seems the red carriages would be lifted up and attached to the rockets, the rocket will be rotating around the main tower at the speed of 156mph, then the main tower will raise together with the rockets. Exciting! Looking forward to the 3D print-out of it. (I wish it will be steam-powered)
Back up and save, back up and save! I wish there was a save point in real life so that I can choose millions of paths through one life. Or maybe there were save points that I never notice them.
M636C There was a fleet of these Purrey steam trams in Rockhampton Queensland on 3'6" gauge which lasted until 1938. The rails were still visible in suburban streets in 1972 when I lived there. One steam motor has been restored to working order. These were built as cross bench cars but a number had saloon bodies not unlike those illustrated. None had upper decks by the 1930s. Peter
There was a fleet of these Purrey steam trams in Rockhampton Queensland on 3'6" gauge which lasted until 1938. The rails were still visible in suburban streets in 1972 when I lived there. One steam motor has been restored to working order. These were built as cross bench cars but a number had saloon bodies not unlike those illustrated. None had upper decks by the 1930s.
Peter
I saw some YouTube videos of the Rockhampton steam trams, can't stop watching them. Less smoky than I imagine, and it sounds like a diesel engine. The power generated by that small firebox and boiler is amazing.
"Double-decker steam tram travels south on Elizabeth Street, Sydney, at the intersection of Market Street c. 1890s [RMS Image Library]"
Jones1945 Penny Trains I lost my data on it years ago but somewhere I have printed renderings of some of the other crazy 3D models I designed. One was a gigantic 6 legged steam powered weapons platform with a lot of latticework in it's construction. I also did a full model of that train complete with track and landscaping. But then my computer crashed and....well. You know how that song goes. I can understand that feeling! My first 3D project was a highly detailed fantasy long-distance-travel-trolleybus base on a German proposed 6-wheel Double Decker Trolleybus. I also made some vehicles that were supposed to be imported to a game, so that I could drive them in the game, roaming around the 3D city but turn out, the hard disk suddenly down! I had many stuff like custom made textures, TONS of different skyscrapers floorplan for my family business in that Hard Disk. Not all data was backup or saved....... I still keep that hard disk in my safe. I can recreate them anytime I want, but it is like painting, the original is always better than a copy of it.
Penny Trains I lost my data on it years ago but somewhere I have printed renderings of some of the other crazy 3D models I designed. One was a gigantic 6 legged steam powered weapons platform with a lot of latticework in it's construction. I also did a full model of that train complete with track and landscaping. But then my computer crashed and....well. You know how that song goes.
I lost my data on it years ago but somewhere I have printed renderings of some of the other crazy 3D models I designed. One was a gigantic 6 legged steam powered weapons platform with a lot of latticework in it's construction. I also did a full model of that train complete with track and landscaping. But then my computer crashed and....well. You know how that song goes.
OvermodNow, the stuff I designed in the very early '70s explicitly made use of the principle of the Giesl ejector (which had been touted in Trains as the absolute ne plus ultra of the front-end world, and who was I at 12 years old to question that?) and this of course is very long and relatively thin, using a fan-shaped array of exhaust nozzles to generate a very long lateral entrainment region -- it is not "that" difficult to extend the design to multiple sets of nozzles, if you have room for the longer smokebox, which as it happens I did. (There were attempts to run Giesls, and a couple of other arrangements, in 'parallel' to increase the ejected mass or provide less 'impingement' on overhead structures ... perhaps the less said about these, the better.) Now, Giesls have the implicit characteristic that the stack 'length' at the ends is greater than that in the middle of the fan, so we can (at least, theoretically) apply Jos Koopmans' rule that multiple jets work as if the comparable number of long, thin chimneys and average over the length as a series of long, thin interpenetrating jets with good turbulent entrainment at their 'sides' and perhaps in the regions between them. In theory you could absolutely minimize the visible stack height using this, and that is what I did -- and was very strongly criticized for not having enough height above the boundary flow over the smokebox to get decent lifting at 'minimum' back pressure. I was able to explain some of my way out of this, but not all -- in part by positing that the 'surplus' exhaust from high-speed running which can't be vented effectively through a fixed-dimension front end would be ejected 'behind' the stack to 'lift' the plume (we were all 'green' on effective fluid dynamics once!) but I have come to the conclusion that you want the longest possible stack you can arrange, yes, tilting it if necessary, and do whatever outside shrouding you need to accommodate it in your streamlining (and provide external airflow correction to give proper plume clearance and lifting!) A_M_A_Z_I_N_G, Mr. Overmod. Yes, the ATSF 3460 Blue Goose had an air-operated extensions on its smokestack. I don't know if it was an as-built feature or installed after she started serving. Although it looked odd on the Blue Goose, the unique air-operated smokestack extension was probably the reason why ATSF never install NYCRR-style elephant smoke deflector. If the extension wasn't an as-delivery feature, this implies the streamlining, probably designed by Baldwin (which cost ATSF $1400), wasn't good enough for smoke lifting. But the proposed streamlining of the ATSF 3765 and the streamlined 3460 was probably motivated by the 1939 World Fair instead of trying to prove how aerodynamic theory works on a steam engine like the NYC Commodore Vanderbilt and PRR Loewy K4s. \Who put that wig on the watermelon-like nose? Jos Koopmans? The author of 'The Fire Burns Much Better...'? Two hundred years of steam locomotive exhaust research? OH MY! Two hundred years! Give me more time so that I can read them all! Speaking of fluid dynamics, I found this page: https://www.autodesk.com/solutions/simulation/cfd-fluid-flow It would be interesting to see how good or bad different streamline shroudings design worked in our railroad history by using computer software. Steam tram of Paris.
OvermodNow, the stuff I designed in the very early '70s explicitly made use of the principle of the Giesl ejector (which had been touted in Trains as the absolute ne plus ultra of the front-end world, and who was I at 12 years old to question that?) and this of course is very long and relatively thin, using a fan-shaped array of exhaust nozzles to generate a very long lateral entrainment region -- it is not "that" difficult to extend the design to multiple sets of nozzles, if you have room for the longer smokebox, which as it happens I did. (There were attempts to run Giesls, and a couple of other arrangements, in 'parallel' to increase the ejected mass or provide less 'impingement' on overhead structures ... perhaps the less said about these, the better.) Now, Giesls have the implicit characteristic that the stack 'length' at the ends is greater than that in the middle of the fan, so we can (at least, theoretically) apply Jos Koopmans' rule that multiple jets work as if the comparable number of long, thin chimneys and average over the length as a series of long, thin interpenetrating jets with good turbulent entrainment at their 'sides' and perhaps in the regions between them. In theory you could absolutely minimize the visible stack height using this, and that is what I did -- and was very strongly criticized for not having enough height above the boundary flow over the smokebox to get decent lifting at 'minimum' back pressure. I was able to explain some of my way out of this, but not all -- in part by positing that the 'surplus' exhaust from high-speed running which can't be vented effectively through a fixed-dimension front end would be ejected 'behind' the stack to 'lift' the plume (we were all 'green' on effective fluid dynamics once!) but I have come to the conclusion that you want the longest possible stack you can arrange, yes, tilting it if necessary, and do whatever outside shrouding you need to accommodate it in your streamlining (and provide external airflow correction to give proper plume clearance and lifting!)
A_M_A_Z_I_N_G, Mr. Overmod.
Yes, the ATSF 3460 Blue Goose had an air-operated extensions on its smokestack. I don't know if it was an as-built feature or installed after she started serving. Although it looked odd on the Blue Goose, the unique air-operated smokestack extension was probably the reason why ATSF never install NYCRR-style elephant smoke deflector. If the extension wasn't an as-delivery feature, this implies the streamlining, probably designed by Baldwin (which cost ATSF $1400), wasn't good enough for smoke lifting. But the proposed streamlining of the ATSF 3765 and the streamlined 3460 was probably motivated by the 1939 World Fair instead of trying to prove how aerodynamic theory works on a steam engine like the NYC Commodore Vanderbilt and PRR Loewy K4s.
\Who put that wig on the watermelon-like nose?
Jos Koopmans? The author of 'The Fire Burns Much Better...'? Two hundred years of steam locomotive exhaust research? OH MY! Two hundred years! Give me more time so that I can read them all! Speaking of fluid dynamics, I found this page: https://www.autodesk.com/solutions/simulation/cfd-fluid-flow It would be interesting to see how good or bad different streamline shroudings design worked in our railroad history by using computer software.
Steam tram of Paris.
Jones1945I wonder if there was any steam locomotive built without a smokestack on purpose.
There are several parts to this.
Some were built without stacks in 'the usual place', for example some of the British Franco-Crostis and the early Bulleid turf burner. Usually the idea was that the combustion exhaust exited 'elsewhere' and any induced-draft or lighting-up action would occur there, so why waste time and money with an additional 'front end' setup where no gas would need to be ejected?
Seems to me that the general consensus was that a full stack arrangement (perhaps with just a blower under it rather than a full 'front end') was still desirable "for lighting up" (and this might have been easily related to smokejack placement in roundhouses/sheds) and you often see these amusingy retrofitted.
(2) An engine like the Niagara represented about the 'ultimate' in practical stack reduction where a conventional induced-draft arrangement was installed. Note that here the idea was to run the boiler out to the practical limit of the loading gage while putting 79" drivers underneath, but some items (the sand arrangements and whistle being examples, the 'steam dome' as a collector, bell, and horn NOT examples) needed to be either atop or astride the boiler to work correctly. So if there were any reason to minimize the outside 'visible' portion of the stack on a high-power American locomotive, this would be it. Another prospective example is the arrangement on the German 05 class 4-6-4s, where if there were a reason to reduce stack height functionally to improve streamlining, it would very likely have been implemented.
Meanwhile, of course, some other large high-powered engines were actually increasing stack length (for the better performance it provides) -- ATSF went so far as to install air-operated extensions on some of its larger power to take full advantage of relatively unrestricted loading gage in portions of its route. Here I will digress slightly in noting that someone with patience should confirm that the 3460 Blue Goose had one of these for operation... most American streamlining was more for appearance than drag reduction, this being perhaps the most pointed (although certainly not pointy) example, and the areas of the country where the stack would be erected are NOT full of potential clients who would be wowed by slavish devotion to the horizontal line at the smokebox area...
Remember that the 'stack' is only the outward manifestation of a very small part of the internal arrangement from petticoat up at the nozzle, and the longer a carefully-designed internal stack is, the better the front end can eject combustion gas for a given mass flow and exhaust pressure of steam. This implies that every inch of available room above the shell of the smokebox will improve implicit smoke lifting in the exhaust plume (and reduce the need for external smoke deflectors, cowl scoops, or other artificial aids to control slipstream to keep smoke out of the view or the cab ventilation). This becomes particularly important when high-efficiency valve arrangements are in use to generate 'best' horsepower with minimum mass flow and water rate -- the UP, which had chronic trouble figuring out "innovations" in its front ends, got into a problem by the late 1930s where its engines were so efficient that the draft developed at 80mph or higher was insufficient to sustain the necessary firing rate (this being in part where the twin stacks on the FEFs, and the four-stack arrangement proposed for the FEF-4, came in).
Now, the stuff I designed in the very early '70s explicitly made use of the principle of the Giesl ejector (which had been touted in Trains as the absolute ne plus ultra of the front-end world, and who was I at 12 years old to question that?) and this of course is very long and relatively thin, using a fan-shaped array of exhaust nozzles to generate a very long lateral entrainment region -- it is not "that" difficult to extend the design to multiple sets of nozzles, if you have room for the longer smokebox, which as it happens I did. (There were attempts to run Giesls, and a couple of other arrangements, in 'parallel' to increase the ejected mass or provide less 'impingement' on overhead structures ... perhaps the less said about these, the better.) Now, Giesls have the implicit characteristic that the stack 'length' at the ends is greater than that in the middle of the fan, so we can (at least, theoretically) apply Jos Koopmans' rule that multiple jets work as if the comparable number of long, thin chimneys and average over the length as a series of long, thin interpenetrating jets with good turbulent entrainment at their 'sides' and perhaps in the regions between them. In theory you could absolutely minimize the visible stack height using this, and that is what I did -- and was very strongly criticized for not having enough height above the boundary flow over the smokebox to get decent lifting at 'minimum' back pressure. I was able to explain some of my way out of this, but not all -- in part by positing that the 'surplus' exhaust from high-speed running which can't be vented effectively through a fixed-dimension front end would be ejected 'behind' the stack to 'lift' the plume (we were all 'green' on effective fluid dynamics once!) but I have come to the conclusion that you want the longest possible stack you can arrange, yes, tilting it if necessary, and do whatever outside shrouding you need to accommodate it in your streamlining (and provide external airflow correction to give proper plume clearance and lifting!)
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