Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Tight Curve Experiences by Owners of Rivarossi Allegheny's ?

1890 views
5 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2009
  • 1,983 posts
Tight Curve Experiences by Owners of Rivarossi Allegheny's ?
Posted by railandsail on Wednesday, March 21, 2018 1:37 PM

Looking for feedback from owners of Rivarossi Allegheny steam locos.

What are the minimum radius curves you have been able to operate on without derailments?

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,897 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Saturday, March 24, 2018 9:48 PM

Brian,

I can't offer any specific answers to your question, I have an Allegheny, but as you know my curves are big......

But, I will share another basic principal of railroad physics often missed about steam locos and curves.

The most important factor for steam locos and curves is the rigid wheel base of the drivers. This controls minimum radius more than any other factor.

So, for example, the Allegheny has a very short rigid driver wheel base for such a large loco, only 11.83' for each three axle set. This makes the loco very nimble for its size. Especially considering the double swivel design of the model.

The Allegheny will work better and look better on any given curve than, for example, the C&O 4-8-2. Why?, because the Mountain has a rigid driver wheel base of 18.25'.

Here on the ATLANTIC CENTRAL, even with 36" radius curves, I limit steam loco rigid wheel bases to 21', with a few USRA 2-10-2 lights being the longest rigid wheel base. 

Examples of locos prohibited due to length:

SP GS4 4-8-4 - 21.5' rigid wheel base

B&O S1 2-10-2 - 22.30' rigid wheel base

Here is an example of how driver diameter effects rigid driver wheel base:

USRA 2-8-8-2, 57" drivers, 15.5' rigid wheel base

Compared to that GS4 above, 80" drivers, 21.5' rigid wgheel base

Eastern prototypes tended to have smaller drivers and were more suited to sharper curves.

A story from the prototype: The B&O has two main routes west, one directly west from Baltimore to Cincinnati, it is very curvy, and has many up and down grades. The primary large steam on this line were the 2-8-8-0's and the EM-1 2-8-8-4's, rigid wheelbase, 16.50'. Longest locos commonly used on that run, T-3 Mountains, 18.25' driver wheel base.

The other goes north thru Pittsburg to Chicago, it has longer, straighter, fewer (but just as steep) grades, and much broader curves. The primary steam on this line were the famous S1 2-10-2's, 22.30' driver wheel base.

At one point someone thought it would be a good idea to try an S1 on the line to Cincinnati - they put the loco on its side in a curve.........and put another on the ground on a different try........twice was enough.

This is exactly why the LIMA built the Allegheny as an 2-6-6-6, because they wanted larger drivers, they knew they would get better performance with a short wheel base, so this just put the max axle load on 6 drive axles rather than spread over eight like a Big Boy. Same is true of the N&W Class A.

While the C&O had ok success with the LIMA 2-10-4's built in the 1930, notice how they did not build more, but rather opted later for the Allegheny and the 2-8-4's - because the 2-10-4's were hard on the track, and hard on themselves in the curves.........

Way before these modern locos the C&O had a fleet of nearly 300      2-6-6-2's, not much more powerful than a 4-8-2. Why have the complexity of articulation for only that much power? Because they were more nimble, rigid wheel bases all around 10'. Worked so well they build the last ten in 1949......

I have lots of these on the ATLANTIC CENTRAL as well:

All of these prototype facts apply to your models as well.

So you can have big locos, on smaller curves, just pick the nimble ones......

Sheldon 

    

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 2,771 posts
Posted by snjroy on Sunday, March 25, 2018 8:03 AM

Hi there. There is a MR review dated 2002 that says that the manufacturer recommends 24". The reviewer states that it can handle 22". I have a Rivarossi Big Boy and a Mallet and they can handle these no problem. Of course, this assumes that all other factors are in check, such as good track, no s curves, etc..

Simon

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, March 30, 2018 10:31 AM

You also need to consider boiler swing (and cab swing if the pivots are both in the center).   Keep an eye out for obstructions the loco can strike in these areas, run back and forth before placing buildings, bridges near curves, curves near walls, etc.

  • Member since
    February 2009
  • 1,983 posts
Posted by railandsail on Friday, March 30, 2018 3:43 PM

BMMECNYC

You also need to consider boiler swing (and cab swing if the pivots are both in the center).   Keep an eye out for obstructions the loco can strike in these areas, run back and forth before placing buildings, bridges near curves, curves near walls, etc.

 

Wouldn't that be covered by some of these clearances needed for steam locos,
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/88/t/267707.aspx?page=4



You can see that the rear cab of this Allegheny loco sticks out fully to the mid point between these two tracks. That track spacing is 2+1/2" between CL's. Thus this loco requires a minimum of 1+1/4" clearance at its outer side on this 28.5" curve.

Note that another Allegheny, or one of the longer freight cars, could be traveling on that outer track and still NOT interfere with this inner Allegheny.

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, March 30, 2018 5:26 PM

railandsail

 

 
BMMECNYC

You also need to consider boiler swing (and cab swing if the pivots are both in the center).   Keep an eye out for obstructions the loco can strike in these areas, run back and forth before placing buildings, bridges near curves, curves near walls, etc.

 

 

 

Wouldn't that be covered by some of these clearances needed for steam locos,
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/88/t/267707.aspx?page=4



You can see that the rear cab of this Allegheny loco sticks out fully to the mid point between these two tracks. That track spacing is 2+1/2" between CL's. Thus this loco requires a minimum of 1+1/4" clearance at its outer side on this 28.5" curve.

Note that another Allegheny, or one of the longer freight cars, could be traveling on that outer track and still NOT interfere with this inner Allegheny.

 

 

I was listing some things that would cause issues, I have not been following the other thread.

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!