Yeah, added 2 more. Single driving wheel right under the engineer. Long way to the cylinder!
Wowee! 19th Century steamers!
I'm not sure, but the first one looks like the C.P. Huntington. Whatever it is, it's cute as a button!
The second, the Pioneer, is still around and in a museum, I don't remember which one. Believe it or not it was steamed up and run as late as the 1940's.
From 2012: In December, the city's Bureau of Street Services announced that it would remove the railroad tracks
Flintlock76the compounding worked all right but it was a maintenance headache.
The interesting thing here is that Erie apparently bought a lot of Baldwin Atlantics with that system as late as 1902, then had 'em all converted by 1905 or so. I suspect there is an untold story, and I am already suspicious that I know some of the reasons for it, behind Erie buying this wonder power and quickly giving it up as an expensive bad job. Surely there will be an account in the trade press somewhere about the Erie conversion 'kits' and their planning, and some discussions about why that response was needed...
This was far from the last time a Great Baldwin Innovation would prove to be pretty much a long-term maintenance disaster: they played a version of 'you bet your company's life' with that technical wider, Caprotti valve gear, in the late Twenties and, as far as I know, had to see every single one rebuilt -- even narrow-gauge.
Not too surprised the Erie "went retro" with slide valves replacing the Vauclain compound system, the compounding worked all right but it was a maintanence headache. Railroads don't like maintanence headaches.
The Erie's Camels have a reputation of being the ugliest Camels ever built, but this one looks pretty good in that head-end shot, and not too bad in that 3/4 shot either.
Note the peculiar relationship between the valve chests and cylinders, and the relative size of the valves. These engines were built just after the turn of the century as Vauclain compounds -- Erie apparently had quite a few Atlantics of different classes built as such, most or all of which were simpled within about 3 years (one source indicating that standardized conversion 'kits' were made up for at least some classes). As the 'heart' of a Vauclain Conpound was its piston valve, these have to rank among the very, very few engines converted from piston to slide valves; this work being done several years before relative perfection of the Schmidt superheater and its progressive implementation on North American locomotives. These engines ran all the way into the early 1930s, so might have been rebuilt again not much later than the picture date with retrofitted superheat and piston valves of some kind... it may be Mike time to find later detailed pictures of E-2s.
As with the "what's in a picture" thread over on MR, the more you look at these the more details you notice. See the cinder hopper and drop pipe for smoke box cleanout? it looks almost as if this is an external hopper, whereas many contemporary engines used a simple cylindrical 'can' under the smokebox. Air tanks are torpedo style, up over the firebox. Look at those snazzy loops down to the paired check valves on the boiler side... injector arrangements might be interesting.
Erie 4-4-2
Here's the infamous 5774 again looking a wee bit tired but not too bad.
Its April '63 so they must be near the end of their time. Pity one was not hidden away somewhere.
To tie into a discussion over on Trains about situational awareness by the engineer the engineer of 5774 crashed into the rear end of a troop train at quite a clip, telescoping the cars and killing many servicemen.
The engineer ran his train past a flagging brakemen sent out for protection ...who even threw his lantern at the locomotive hitting the front windshield when it became apparent he would not slow and stop. ... and there was a fireman too!
After reading the report it stated there was never a determination why that engineer did not stop and acted in the manner he did. The engineer was an old head. I believe the fireman attempted to intervene but it was far too late.
Devils and demons run the show.
SD70DudeThe locomotive appears to have derailed. They are likely trying to figure out how to get blocking and rerailers underneath it, a difficult task as there is now little (if any) room between the underside of the locomotive and the ground.
Looks to me as if they're looking at the end of the truck that might still have an axle on the rails, perhaps just having jacked or blocked and gotten the wheel back on at that end. It would not be fun re-railing one of these long-wheelbase drop-equalizer trucks.
Nothing 'baby' about THOSE, though - one source I know calls them 'fat sharks' which is uncharitable, but the two tugboat engines inside do not make them lightweight. You'd be better off with the previous passenger carbody a la CNJ or the Gerties and sing 'Ba-by-face-doo-doo-doo-do-do-do' (you couldn't with clear conscience sing 'you've got the cutest little...')
CV's own wide-vision cabooses had built-in markers, as did CN wide-vision cars. The cars carrying reflectors as markers were older steel CN cars on CN/CV/B&M pool service trains CVSP/SPCV and CVED/EDCV. The pool fell apart not too long before the Amtrak/CV takeover of the Conn River in 1987. Of course I can't find a picture of one...
Alas, I experienced neither the Ambassador nor the CV in general. The closest I came to the CV was when I was in Northfield, VT, mid 60's. I was in some .22 caliber competition. Saw the CV tracks, but no trains. I also missed out on the now defunct St. Johnsbury and Lake Champlain. I have had trouble logging in here all day. Somehow, I got to read a post by Dave Klepper of 2012 about. New England memories. I thank him for sharing those things I missed out on.
MiningmanTwo photos today, both Pennsy.
Let's see here...
Photo 1) Looks like the Pennsy is trying to put a brave face on things.
Photo 2) I wonder if those guys are humming...
"Baldwin Shark, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo!"
Sorry, couldn't resist!
Just in case everyone thinks I've lost it...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqZsoesa55w
Miningman Not sure what the fellas are doing in the photo but someone here will have a good idea.
Not sure what the fellas are doing in the photo but someone here will have a good idea.
The locomotive appears to have derailed. They are likely trying to figure out how to get blocking and rerailers underneath it, a difficult task as there is now little (if any) room between the underside of the locomotive and the ground.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Two photos today, both Pennsy.
The first is perhaps a promo picture for the new GP35. The interesting thing looking back, is the 'ranking'. The newer GP35 is the star, way in front and centre. Second place goes to the GP7/9's and close to them at third is the E. The infamous Baldwin Sharknose is in last place and the only one clearly not on a through track.
Seems they cleaned up the litter for the picture but the sand patches tend to take away a bit.
Second photo is is the Pennsy Bp20 Passenger Shark. The photo shows off their 'battleship' size. This is just not any old Bp20 either, it's the infamous 5774 which was the loco involved in that deadly crash we talked about years back that killed many military personnel.
The engineer ignored all warnings and signals, even having a lantern thrown at his window.
OvermodThe Russians did the same sort of thing with the Alco 539 engine. Trains did an article on one in Cuba which was so faithful (or witless) a copy that it reproduced Alco casting numbers in the block.
Not just that, but when the Russians copied the B-29 they copied it right down to the dents in the fuselage of the one they'd interned!
Hey, Stalin wanted an exact copy, and what Stalin wanted, Stalin got!
M636CThere are places of course where Fairbanks Morse locomotives are not a thing of the past:
Those are no more Fairbanks-Morse locomotives than the Tu-4 was a Boeing airplane. I'll grant you they copied the 38 8-1/8 engine, and I do enjoy them.
The Russians did the same sort of thing with the Alco 539 engine. Trains did an article on one in Cuba which was so faithful (or witless) a copy that it reproduced Alco casting numbers in the block.
Overmod On the other hand, there was no question a GP40P was a better answer, and in fact lo! these many years later a GP40P is STILL a better answer
Quite true. There's several GP40P's purchased by the Jersey Central in the late 60's still on the job and doing what they were meant to do.
As a matter of fact, here's two of them. One in the Jersey Central "Heritage" scheme and one in NJ Transit silver complete with "Disco Stripes."
Shot in December of 2019, Christmas is coming, there's snow on the ground, some in the air, and it makes me wish I was there in a comfy seat with a big mug of coffee and a good smoke. Would have made a good day.
"The cold doesn't bother me anyway..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0DyDutwwYY
For those who don't know, that's the old Erie mainline, and toward the end the Ridgewood NJ 1914 Erie station.
There are places of course where Fairbanks Morse locomotives are not a thing of the past:
A shot from 19 April 2020, two units running with clear stacks on a train of tank cars. Details at:
https://www.parovoz.com/newgallery/pg_view.php?ID=664965&LNG=RU#picture
Of course the other view:
This is an older shot, from 26 August 2014.
I believe the number of units built in Russia with FM engines is similar to the number of EMDs with 567 engines, and unsurprisingly a number are still around.
The listing here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TE10
Remembering the numbers are of two unit sets, the number of 2TE10Ls is similar to the number of GE ES44s.
Peter
Flintlock76... crews tried to run the Trainmasters short hood forward when they could, otherwise exhaust fumes would drift into the cabs nauseating the crew.
Part of this is due to high-horsepower and dubious supercharging from a two-stroke engine; part of it to additional oil 'blowby' from worn/sticking rings and pooling piston-cooling oil on the upper pistons. The early GM engines also produced nasty fumes; in fact, there was at least one case where fumes actually asphyxiated the crew of a consist of F units working with the wind blowing just the wrong way.
And it is just as much hell to run many GE locomotives with 7FDLs the same way, for similar reasons, and that's a four-stroke engine...
The OP's were oil-leaky...
Be careful here. Van Stonehocker, who was one of the original OP engine designers, didn't know of any oil 'leakiness' in the sense that Baldwins, for example, were leaky. My understanding was that FM in the detail design of the H24-66 carefully ensured there were few opportunities to develop either pressurized-oil or gasket leaks; of course, there are far fewer opportunities to lose oil on an OP engine, which has no cylinder heads or valve gear.
Did they use oil? yes, and as they got worn, to an infuriating degree. If I recall correctly volatilized lube oil, not unburned white-smoke fuel, was what made the dingy blue clouds that led one mountain railroad to 'plug in' one of its FMs over weekends to keep the engine warm without idling. Balt well remembers the fun if an older OP was kept idling for any length of time and then run up to full revs as in switching heavy cuts.
On the other hand, SP used them in perhaps the most demanding service any 2400hp OP-engined locomotive encountered (with the possible exception of the LIRR) and I don't remember hearing vile comments about blue smoke on acceleration or other showstopping problems, even though you had the engines going from idle to full acceleration to idle multiple times per hour. And those stayed in first-line service well up past Amtrak day, replaced in no small part because SP had surplus SDP45s, a much more modern locomotive, to replace them...
... and maintenance headaches. Nowhere as easy to service as the GM engines.
This too has to be put in perspective (with a big heads-up nod to Kettering, Dilworth & co. who figured out what actually mattered).
Most of the stuff that has to be 'serviced' on GM 567/645 engines doesn't even exist on OP engines, and is much more complicated to work on when it needs attention. What GM did that made so much sense was incorporate all the fancy stuff into a relatively small and (relatively) easily-exchanged 'power assembly', which could be popped out and its piston and rod relatively easily extracted after that if more damage had to be addressed. Note the facility with which the rod bolts on fork or blade rods could be accessed 'from the side' without worrying about dropping them blind into a windage tray or whatever.
And while you're there, you can pull and service the liner with some additional tools and equipment. That is NOT the case for liners in the OP engine; to do one you have to pull up the entire crankcase and upper crank, opening up the drive gearcase as you go. Now this could be reduced to something of a science, and on roads that followed the general N&W shop theory it was pretty easy ... with a proper set of overhead rails and a couple of chain hoists or whatever. If you didn't have that, pulling teeth would be little more painful. Same for rings on an upper piston... and it was the upper pistons, I recall, that preferentially coked and stuck, for a number of reasons.
Even so, I think the real nail in the coffin for the OP, technically, was the development of a for-profit aftermarket alternative to 'genuine EMD parts'. One wonders what would have happened had FM effectively competed with upgraded versions of the OP engine (which BTW is now rated around 8400hp for locomotive service) rather than giving up the ghost to companies that would ultimately forego any railroad use of the powerplant at all in favor of the 251 line.
I've read there was a Jersey Central Master Mechanic that, as soon as he was in a position to do so, got rid of the Central's TM's almost overnight.
Thanks Peter!
Yeah, the poor old Trainmaster. If I remember correctly only around 127 or so were sold to various railroads. The concept promised much but just didn't pan out, the OP engines not being well suited to over-the-road use.
Road crews didn't like them much, if Mike Bednar is to be believed, and I don't see why not, crews tried to run the Trainmasters short hood forward when they could, otherwise exhaust fumes would drift into the cabs nauseating the crew. The OP's were oil-leaky, and maintanance headaches. Nowhere as easy to service as the GM engines. I've read there was a Jersey Central Master Mechanic that, as soon as he was in a position to do so, got rid of the Central's TM's almost overnight.
Lionel's Trainmaster series of models were a hell of a lot more successful than the real ones ever were! I've got one, VERY impressive on the layout!
Fr.AlDidn't FM's Trainmaster come out at about the same time? Weren't they at least moderately successful?
They were the first effective high-horsepower single unit -- you could add the C-liner 2400s to that as being four-motor versions of the same thing.
They would likely have been far more successful than they were if there hadn't been a crippling strike just at the wrong time. Not sure that would have been so good in the long run, as few things pose more fun than one of these OP engines as it ages, clearances open up, and stuff begins to collect on the bottoms of the upper pistons...
I still find it fascinating that FM was able to use these prime movers in low-profile lightweight high-speed locomotives.
This is indeed a C-Line unit.
It is CPA24-5, one of the first single engine 2400 HP units built anywhere.
You can just see the two equalising beams on the rear truck in this view.
NYC had eight of these, eight 2000 HP cabs and eight 2000 HP boosters.
EMD only offered 2000 HP or 2250 HP during this time even with two engines.
The equivalent four axle units were re-engined with EMD engines by NYC but none of the five axle passenger units were rebuilt.
Didn't FM's Trainmaster come out at about the same time? Weren't they at least moderately successful? BTW, on the regular Trains forum, there is a discussion about the big center cab units.
Penny TrainsHow am I ever going to explain being rammed by a tugboat? That's it, I'm going home.
Could be worse. Could be a LOT worse! How about a ship with a guy at the helm who can't parallel park?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Dpy7xcd1E4
rcdryeWhile neither was stunningly successful...
I'd argue that they were quite successful given the necessity of their time; if you wanted 2500hp on six axles you'd have a double-motor unit; if you wanted visibility and bidirectionality with that, it would be a center-cab. Note how little traction the EMD alternative (TR units with Blombergs, presumably) got in that space.
What changed the world, of course, were second-generation units that could make 2400 reliable horsepower out of one turbocharged prime mover. With reliable electrics, and consistent build quality ... and ongoing manufacturer support, which Baldwin wouldn't supply after Westinghouse quit the railroad-traction market.
PRR's RT-624 transfer units were Baldwin's way of finishing PRR's order for Lima-Hamilton LT-2500 transfer units. While neither was stunningly successful, the Baldwins at least stayed in service until their trust ertificates ran out, handling coal and ore trains at various places around the system, and working as pushers. The Lima units were in the same service except for a few without dynamic brakes, which were used in transfer service in Chicago.
How am I ever going to explain being rammed by a tugboat? That's it, I'm going home.
Trains, trains, wonderful trains. The more you get, the more you toot!
And now for the rest...
Photo 2) A center-cab so clean you could eat off it. Back when keeping up appearances meant something!
Photos 3 and 4) Centipedes! WHAT were they thinking?
Photo 5) Don't feel bad, he's gotten me too on occasion!
Photo 6) "Do not go gentle into that good night." Not giving up without a fight, those steamers!
Photo 7) Too bad those C-Liners (or Erie-builts if I've mis-identifed it) did't work out as good as they looked.
Photo 8) "Unlimited Power" obviously didn't apply just to locomotives!
SD70Dude Miningman Diesel Edition 1) Now then what do you think the story is here? Determined stride, dangling smoke, likely an official by the way he's dressed. At the very least is just begging for a caption. Or a Conductor who has shed his hat and coat on a hot summer's day. "That lazy Switchtender never lines us up. Oh well, guess I'll do it myself."
Miningman Diesel Edition 1) Now then what do you think the story is here? Determined stride, dangling smoke, likely an official by the way he's dressed. At the very least is just begging for a caption.
Diesel Edition
1) Now then what do you think the story is here? Determined stride, dangling smoke, likely an official by the way he's dressed.
At the very least is just begging for a caption.
Or a Conductor who has shed his hat and coat on a hot summer's day.
"That lazy Switchtender never lines us up. Oh well, guess I'll do it myself."
How about...
"It followed me home Mom! Can I keep it?"
[quote user="SD70Dude"]That lazy Switchtender.../quote]
more likely Bridgetender, no?
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