Hi I am wanting to know if doghouses were ever streamlined? Also what were the uses of them? Could they have been retrofitted to act as a cab for multiple unit diesel control?
Steve
If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough!
I may be wrong but...if I were to make an educated guess I'd say that most streamlining was designated for passenger service and most doghouses were found exclusively on freight steam engines.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Streamlined and semistreamlined steam locos were passenger locos or occasionally dual service. Streamlining was rarely if ever applied to engines that were strictly in freight service. Passenger engines did not need doghouses because the head end brakeman generally rode in the baggage car or coach. In the latter years of steam, some passenger engines were reassigned to freight service. The N&W J's were the only streamlined engines that I know of that received doghouses when this was done. If a J with doghouse ever pulled a passenger train, it was probably a rare occasion, due to a diesel failure.
Well yes your right! But then comes question 2 could they have been added to passenger locos to control diesel helpers?
cascadenorthernrr Well yes your right! But then comes question 2 could they have been added to passenger locos to control diesel helpers?
We've been over that. No need to pursue it further.
ACY cascadenorthernrr Well yes your right! But then comes question 2 could they have been added to passenger locos to control diesel helpers? We've been over that. No need to pursue it further.
O ye of no imagination! It is possible please revisit that thread the GCRR has done it as well as the CP! Also please refer to my signature and the constitution and bylaws of the CNRR!
Also I am a visionary and optimist therefore I like to think of what could have been in addition to the facts! Also model railroading is about having FUN!
Finally ACY, I politely request that you remove yourself from this conversation and discontinue replying to my threads. Thank you!
cascadenorthernrr Also please refer to my signature and the constitution and bylaws of the CNRR!
Also please refer to my signature and the constitution and bylaws of the CNRR!
cascadenorthernrr Finally ACY, I politely request that you remove yourself from this conversation and discontinue replying to my threads. Thank you!
Steve,
I think you need to cool your jets. You posted your query on a prototype forum about what the prototype did. What you do on your personal railroad at home is your perogative and business but that jurisdication does NOT pertain; nor does it carry over to conversations here on this forum.
So, if you don't like that approach, I politely request that you remove yourself from this conversation and discontinue replying to your own threads. Thank you!
I would like to clarify that I accept any and all opinions but I feel that ACY's comment "We've been over that. No need to pursue it further. " was rude and unappreciative of different opinions. Thank you very much!
You can request all you want. You've been told by me and others that you will be making a new version of history if you pursue your scheme. If you review my many very patient answers to your naive newbie questions, you will see that I have answered your questions with forebearance and the best, most reliable info I can provide.
You have been given honest answers by me and others. They have been the products of well over 50 years of model railroading and first hand observation of railroad practices. There's no reason to get snippy when the truth doesn't suit. You can run your trains any dang way you like.
Now I will do as you ask. Find your answers elsewhere, and go ahead and ignore those answers. It's your railroad.
(Amended to put some salve on bruised feelings)
First I would like to point out that you are in violation of the MRR forum policies (the part about foul language) and second I appreciate replies and expert advice my only problem lies with your comment "We've been over that. No need to pursue it further. " and anyway I believe its called freelancing when you are not following prototype to the letter but I guess that thats a concept that you are unfamiliar with!
And thank you!
I would like to apologize if my words before were a bit harsh but I came to this forum expecting to find nice friendly people willing to share information with others clearly some do not agree with that. I am truly sorry and hope that the forums can continue to be a tool to forward the world's greatest hobby!
cascadenorthernrr...people willing to share information with others clearly some do not agree with that....
Excuse me? You got a polite and knowledgeable answer which was not to your liking. As was said, this portion of the forum is about the prototype and apparently the prototype didn't do what you want. There's no reason why you can't do so on your layout, though. There's lots of good information available on this Forum, but attitude like you're displaying isn't apt to garner many responses, no matter how many threads you start.
As you've learned, B-units, when used in conjunction with steam, were controlled from the steam locomotive's cab...pretty easy to model. If you want to do it another way, do so.
Wayne
doctorwayne As you've learned, B-units, when used in conjunction with steam, were controlled from the steam locomotive's cab...pretty easy to model.
As you've learned, B-units, when used in conjunction with steam, were controlled from the steam locomotive's cab...pretty easy to model.
That was my original intentions but some people thought that was not right!
And I appreciate your comments and apologize for the attitude people are perceiving. I would like to point out though that I am not upset with anyone's answers but how ACY commented "we've already been over that, no need to discuss it further" or something like that, was a little rude response to someone who is just curious and in favor of a controversial topic. But thank you.
I don't want this thread to be shutdown. I think you guys should apologize to each other. There is no need to cope an attitude. The purpose of this site is to have discussions, not win arguements.
Treat others the way you want to be treated. Don't put others down just because you disagree with thier point of view.
ATSFGuy I don't want this thread to be shutdown. I think you guys should apologize to each other. There is no need to cope an attitude. The purpose of this site is to have discussions, not win arguements. Treat others the way you want to be treated. Don't put others down just because you disagree with thier point of view.
I agree with ATSFguy and hereby apologize to ALL parties involved!
That was easy!
Yes it was and thank you for your comment!
cascadenorthernrrHi I am wanting to know if doghouses were ever streamlined?
No. The closest you get to that were the tenders on some N&W Js late in the steam era.
cascadenorthernrrAlso what were the uses of them?
The doghouse was a place for the head brakeman to ride on a freight train.
cascadenorthernrrCould they have been retrofitted to act as a cab for multiple unit diesel control?
The control stand would physically not fit into the doghouse of a steam locomotive tender. Also the doghouse became quite inhospitable during weather extremes.
If you do a google search for steam locomotive doghouse, you may find a thread on this forum from several years back.
As far as I can see you have 1 locomotive that was modified in the 1970s to do what you are trying to accomplish. This is adequate excuse to model this on your railroad if you wish. The reason people keep telling you that it wasnt done is because it wasnt done in the era youve stated. You asked for prototype information and youve gotten it over and over again.
I have not seen any concrete cited resources that says this was a widely used practice.
As for a feasibility of this on a model is concerned: What system are you planning on running your railroad with and which manufacturer are you going to purchase your SP GS-4 and Alco PB from? <- This is an important choice because it effects the feasibility of what you are trying to do with the model. Also as far as I know only one manufacturer makes a PA in HO (the make a PA/B set). If you run a GS-4/PB/PA consist there is nothing to figure out.
As others have stated it is unlikely that you would find a lone PB with out its A unit. If the railroad bothered to purchase the B unit, it was because they needed the extra power to haul the assigned train.
I see thank you!
I think you will be able to find a P2K PB unit as a separate item on feebay. Maybe harder to find it painted as SP Daylight but I have seen them listed.
As to the N&W J. They did add a doghouse to some of them near the end after they were bumped to freight service by the ACL and RF&P E-units they leased. However the doghouse was the standard N&W freight doghouse used on all other tenders. It is available from PSC in brass and I have seen the plastic ones by AHM/Rivarossi on feebay also. Whole AHM/Rivarossi N&W Y-6b tenders seem to be on there frequently.
The closest I have seen to a "streamlined doghouse" would be the Pennsy J1 2-10-4. It was a large & more angular type than most.
Roger Huber
Deer Creek Locomotive Works
Okay, thanks!
What provisions would have to be made to add a doghouse to any tender? Also how big would a doghouse need to be to be used as a diesel control cab?
I will add one more practical note. Agian, your model railroad, you can do whateve ryou want, but from a prototype standpoint - about the craziest idea would eb to put diesel MU controls in the doghouse on a tender.
One problem is communications with the steam loco engineer
ANother problem is total lack of feel for what the diesel is doing - if the controls are integrated and you are operating in the manner of a pair of steam locos, with whistle signals to indicate intention, it is important for the engineer controllign the helper loco to have a feel for what the train and his loco are doing. If you remotely control a diesel helper liekt hat you are at best goign to cause a very rough ride and more like cause a lot of jolting and wheel spin, and maybe not even be able to get the train moving on a grade where the power of both locos is needed due to lack of coordination in applying that power.
Finally, many B units already had a small control stand to hostle the unit around in the service area when seperated from the A unit.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
cascadenorthernrr Also how big would a doghouse need to be to be used as a diesel control cab?
Also how big would a doghouse need to be to be used as a diesel control cab?
As far as I know there is no data for this, because the prototype did not do this (someone please cite a source if they did). The two examples we have found have both been cab located control stands. The reason for the cab control stand is that it does not make any sense to have 2 people controlling the train when 1 would do. The person riding in the doghouse would have to be a qualified engineer. He would dispace the head brakeman, whose job it was to watch for hotboxes at the head end, etc. Doghouses usually were not found on passenger locomotives. Those that had them were locomotives that were displaced by E units, PAs and others.
Again as many and myself has said in previous posts: Its your railroad, do as you please. But you are posting in the "Prototype information for the modeler" section. Therefore the forum members here are giving you prototype information. Your thread has been very informative, as I did not know about the control stands in the two steam engines we have found so far.
Personally if I wanted to model a diesel controls in a steam locomotive, I would mount a little styrene box on an angle that pokes down from inside the cab roof and be done with it (see photos from B&O RR museum). You might be able to get someone to 3-D print the thing (although it might be too small to get resolution in HO scale).
That sounds good I will probably do that, thank you!
You could also add the appropriate connections for the B unit to the locomotive tender:
http://www.trainweb.org/sp5623/detail1.htm
If you click on the green "here" midway down the page you will see which hoses do what.
Just out of curiosity, how long of a passenger train are you planning on running, and have you considered the length of your train vs total main line length? It sounds like quite an impressive train you are assembling (GS-4-PB-PB-PB is quite a bit of pulling power). When you finally put it all together you should upload some photos.
In retrospect I realize a GS4-PB-PB-PB lashup might be a little overkill but it'd still be an impressive sight!