Hi,
I wanted to know if double stack containers will fit under Walthers HO modern coaling tower #933-2903?
Want to have a train of double stacks in the future.
Thanks, Sheldon
Sheldon
I have to ask why you would be running a train of double stacks under a coaling tower. To my knowledge these were used to coal steam locos and were not located over the mainline. Somebody correct me if I am wrong or misinformed.
Joe
There was plenty of coaling done on mainlines and there still is many coaling towers still on mainlines today that modern trains pass under. I don't have any well cars or containers to do my own test that's all.
Not too mamy standing straddling the main where double stacks run - for the very reason that there was insufficent clearance. Those heavy concrete coaling towers, they really hate to take those down, it takes a lot of demolition. Like most railroad structures, they were built to last. There are plenty still standing where they don't interfere with mainline traffic, because of the high cost associated in tearing them down.
This was a major issue in the Northeast, most of the tunnels and other infrastructure had insufficient clearance for double stacks, so they ran them with just the bottom layer of containers until adjustments were made. Many tunnels were signle tracked, with the signle track dead center so there was enough clearance. Overhaning signal bridges were replaced. Among other things. Now double stacks can run coast to coast - that wasn't always true.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Canadian Big Boy I don't have any well cars or containers to do my own test that's all.
I don't have any well cars or containers to do my own test that's all.
From Wikipedia: CSX uses a clearance of 20'-2" (that's 2.78" for HO). Surely, that's from the rail top. And containers are 8' wide (1.10" HO). You'll need a little more than that sideways, of course. The prototype would likely be comfortable with 6" on each side (1.24" total, HO).
Here's a link to a more conservative clearance (20'-8" by 9'-6")(2.85" x 1.31" HO):
http://www.google.com/url?url=http://54.172.27.91/transportation/rail/NECR1999/NECR_DoubleStackClearance1999_3_PlateH.pdf&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwj6__G8vI7KAhVR-GMKHe5lASw4ChAWCCgwAw&usg=AFQjCNGSkAuq5RocrkXO4tB73LOK4B5bLw
I'll note that UP, when cutting double stack clearance in their tunnels, used a 3" clearance from the container corners.
Of course, all the above is for the prototype.
It looks like you can pull it off if:
1.) You pull the inside coal chutes WAY up.
2.) Build up the tower's foundation some.
Ed
Thanks Randy and Ed for the info.
Sheldon,
One more bit of info. I found that well decks are 12" above the rail. So if you put two high-cube boxes in a well, you get:
9'-6" + 9'-6" + 1' = 20' (2.76" HO)
If you want to make sure models will fit, I'd consider adding a foot in vertical clearance: 21' (2.89" HO). If your cars can't fit that, you've REALLY got to work on the cars.
Should you find you can't make that clearance, you could consider making your trackage for "low-clearance" double stacks. The most extreme case would be to only allow double stacking non-hi-cube boxes. This will lower the height by two feet.
8'-6" + 8'-6" + 1' = 18' (2.48" HO)
So, adding a foot for clearance would give you 2.62" HO. You could still haul hi-cube boxes, but only single stack.
All 20' boxes are low-cube. "Most" 40's are too. Atlas and Intermountain supply these. Athearn does hi-cube 40's. I believe all containers over 40' are hi-cube.
I think that this "rule" could make for some interesting train set-ups.
When steam was in place (pre1960), there were no overly tall cars in use, other than the exceptions - usually drop center flats hauling extra tall pieces of machinery or the like. Routing for those cars was done so as to not pass under mainline coaling towers or other potential obstructions.
Post 1960, coaling towers were often leveled, but given that some were of seriously reinforced concrete, it was cheaper to just let them be - BUT - the potential obstructions of the metal coal slide assemblies, etc., were removed. This of course allowed most future railcars to pass without interferrence.
Some of the best examples of this is on the IC lines from Chicago south.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Mobilman makes a good point about removing the coal chute.
I suppose you could argue that you've got a much more serious clearance obstruction elsewhere, so it makes no sense to mess with the chutes. I suppose. There's no doubt for me that, in the modern day, a railroad would pull the chutes out anyway, 'cause if they accidentally dropped down........
I propose an alternative(s):
1.) Make the coal tower removable. Just lift that bad boy up and out for "later days". Build a foundation for it to rest on, and that stays behind. The foundation represents what was left over after removing the tower.
2.) Similar idea, but you could have TWO coal towers that lift out--then switch them. One is for the olden days and "works". The other represents one still standing but unused--take off the chutes and anything else strippable and leave the hulk.
After looking at the instruction sheet, I'd leave all the "metal" fittings off, like the chutes and everything, and do some creative splicing to extend the legs. Look how tall this one is: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=552494
Or, I'd go a completely different route. Start here https://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/933-3042 and end up here http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=546268
Neat pix!
Hi again,
Yup, the concrete coaling towers could be absolute HUGE! Assuming you are modeling a class 1 railroad setting, know that any of their coaling towers that were on a mainline were especially big and as the pic points out, very tall to allow that extra clearance.
Have to say, the OP's point of installing a coaling tower that is out of use and obsolete is the first I've every known (on a layout).
That prototype photo is cool looking, but I agree with mobileman. Don't see the point in the old coaling tower.
Michael
CEO- Mile-HI-RailroadPrototype: D&RGW Moffat Line 1989
This thread has been interesting for me and I learned something from it. Thanks for posting the question.
mobilman44 Have to say, the OP's point of installing a coaling tower that is out of use and obsolete is the first I've every known (on a layout).
No problem Joe,
Learnt a few things myself.
It will fit but these "things" for loading coal (sorry but I don't know how to call it in English) have to be in max top position.
Thanks for the photos Arras!
One day, and it may never come, I may get tired of watching my steamers go round and round and want to shelve them and run modern diesels and double stacks and now I know what I have to do to be able to leave the coaling tower in place on my main.
Thanks everyone for the info, Sheldon
Just to add:
The sheet metal was removed in the interest of safety and to recover some modest scrap return, the discharge pit would be filled and all discharge rails removed, as was the case of the the SP example in Mescal Az., UP imploded this imposing tower in 2004 for issues of safety. The path to demolition was delayed over a year as UP had to evict transiants that had taken up residence in the structure!
Dave