I have an old rubber band drive HO Gauge Husler (4 wheel industrial diesel). On our old club layout that we took to shows, we had a 30 foot straight with 2' radius curves at each end. For a bit of fun we'd run the husler flat out down the straights and see it we could tip it onto 2 wheels around the corner. We couldn't do it with any of the geared locos because when they tipped and lost power they'd fall off because the wheels stalled , but the rubberband drive didn't have this problem it would fly around the bend too. It usually resulted in someone asking if we could run the 30 car freight train at the same speed. We would point out that the husler was doing over 300MPH and freighters seldom went over 60. Besides we didn't want to have to re-rail a 30 car freight train. The husler had a very low centre of gravity and was almost like a slot car the way it cornered, we did have scenery on the outside of the curves so that when it did derail it didn't hit the floor.
cheers
Alan J in sunny Queensland Oz
Alan Jones in Sunny Queensland (Oz)
NeO6874 I read somewhere (maybe on the forums here) that a steam loco's drivers made a pretty good approximation of how fast its top speed would (could?) be -- on the order of 1MPH per 1" of diameter.
I read somewhere (maybe on the forums here) that a steam loco's drivers made a pretty good approximation of how fast its top speed would (could?) be -- on the order of 1MPH per 1" of diameter.
Now, this could be completely wrong
but on the off chance it is right, there were a *lot* of locomotives with that could attain 60+ MPH...
shayfan84325There is no doubt that many steam locomotives could go 60+, but when we consider all the narrow gauge locos, switch engines, geared locos, etc. I still think I was correct to say most couldn't go that fast...
There is no doubt that many steam locomotives could go 60+, but when we consider all the narrow gauge locos, switch engines, geared locos, etc. I still think I was correct to say most couldn't go that fast...
marknewtonshayfan84325 There is no doubt that many steam locomotives could go 60+, but when we consider all the narrow gauge locos, switch engines, geared locos, etc. I still think I was correct to say most couldn't go that fast... No, you're not. Narrow gauge and geared locos were a drop in the bucket compared to overall domestic US loco production. Big railroads like the NYC had more fast passenger and dual-service locos than the entire roster of US narrow gauge and geared locos. Once again, you don't know enough about the subject to speak authoritatively.Mark.
shayfan84325 There is no doubt that many steam locomotives could go 60+, but when we consider all the narrow gauge locos, switch engines, geared locos, etc. I still think I was correct to say most couldn't go that fast...
Given that you are such an authority, it should be simple to provide actual numbers and sources to support your position. If you don't come up with the numbers, I'll have to assume that you are simply blowing smoke.
Phil, I'm not a rocket scientist; they are my students.
I think running trains like slot cars is probably one of my biggest pet peeves when it comes to the hobby. I hate going to a train show and seeing a beautiful layout set up with beautiful models on it all running at the speed of sound.
Granted, when I was a kid and all of my stuff was Tyco, I did run things a bit too fast. Since moving from toy trains to model, I prefer to run things at more realistic speeds.
My younger brother, on the other hand, likes to speed things up. Even on my current layout when he and my parents are visiting, he'll sometimes sneak his hands over to the power packs when I have the momentum turned on and crank things up.
Kevin
http://chatanuga.org/RailPage.html
http://chatanuga.org/WLMR.html
tatans Well, it seems there are a few detractors of the "go as slow as possible without reversing school" that is the MR's who have come up with the unfounded theory that macro-slow is the key to model railroading (where or when did this start?) from a few of the last posts it seems a few people have actually seen steam locomotives (not shays) travelling in and above the 60mph speed, myself included, just how did the U.S. manage to move so much "stuff " around the U.S.A. at 24 mph?? c'mon guys, they went a lot faster than that, how about those electric engines, take a look at a video of a NYC passenger steamer picking up water from a trough, I think that's a little faster than 24mph. Please let us know where this edict of slowing trains originated, I repeat, this does not encourage lightning speeds of trains, but of a slightly increased movement that seems more natural.
Well, it seems there are a few detractors of the "go as slow as possible without reversing school" that is the MR's who have come up with the unfounded theory that macro-slow is the key to model railroading (where or when did this start?) from a few of the last posts it seems a few people have actually seen steam locomotives (not shays) travelling in and above the 60mph speed, myself included, just how did the U.S. manage to move so much "stuff " around the U.S.A. at 24 mph?? c'mon guys, they went a lot faster than that, how about those electric engines, take a look at a video of a NYC passenger steamer picking up water from a trough, I think that's a little faster than 24mph. Please let us know where this edict of slowing trains originated, I repeat, this does not encourage lightning speeds of trains, but of a slightly increased movement that seems more natural.
Let the railroads speak for their selves.
http://www.railroadpm.org/Performance%20Reports/NS.aspx
Railroads never did move freight in a time efficient manner.
Passenger trains was faster then freight.
Both the PRR's Pennsylvania Special (renamed the Broadway Limited in 1912) and NYC's 20th Century had 20-hour schedules between New York and Chicago in 1902.So the speed was there for the Flagship trains.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Chuck/Mark,
Thanks for the clarification(s) on that rough estimate I had referenced. I didn't realize how far off said estimate could have gotten as technologies had improved...
As for running my trains, I like running them *close* to the correct sMPH, though since I don't have any scenery or anything, I tend to run things a little fast (yay for an oval of track). on that note, I need to build a real layout....
-Dan
Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site
shayfan84325Given that you are such an authority, it should be simple to provide actual numbers and sources to support your position. If you don't come up with the numbers, I'll have to assume that you are simply blowing smoke.
Unfortunately for you, I am an authority on steam. I have the succesful restorations, operations and publications to show for it. (Search this forum for my posts on steam, FWIW.)
As such I usually avoid "blowing smoke" - my firing technique is way better than that. And to be frank, any assumption on your part, even about the veracity of my statements, is nothing more than that. You've repeatedly shown that you don't know enough to make an informed comment, let alone acknowledge someone else's superior knowledge and experience.
Your debating technique is pretty poor, too. When challenged about posting this nonsense before, you resorted to the most childish personal attack I've seen in this forum for a long time. And there's your sheer effrontery in demanding sources and numbers from me, when you've made no attempt to back up your own position. Where's YOUR evidence, numbers or sources that support YOUR silly claims? What experience do you have of running or maintaining steam locos? So far the only source you've cited is John Allen! LOL!
But that's okay, even though you're a dilettante, and certainly not someone whose knowledge of steam loco design and practice I take seriously, I'll do a bit of research, find the numbers that confirm my position, and shoot you down in flames when I have time and inclination to do so.
I have combined a rather lengthy slot car road with my HO layout, and revamped it so that cars an trucks can go in opposite directions (at scale highway speed) The dogbone "slot-car road" connects two towns that are 15 ft. apart. My question is, "Where can one purchase "old version" HO scale trucks and cars? I would like to add to my ancient fleet of cars and trucks. Bob Hahn
marknewtonshayfan84325 Given that you are such an authority, it should be simple to provide actual numbers and sources to support your position. If you don't come up with the numbers, I'll have to assume that you are simply blowing smoke. Unfortunately for you, I am an authority on steam. I have the succesful restorations, operations and publications to show for it. (Search this forum for my posts on steam, FWIW.) As such I usually avoid "blowing smoke" - my firing technique is way better than that. And to be frank, any assumption on your part, even about the veracity of my statements, is nothing more than that. You've repeatedly shown that you don't know enough to make an informed comment, let alone acknowledge someone else's superior knowledge and experience. Your debating technique is pretty poor, too. When challenged about posting this nonsense before, you resorted to the most childish personal attack I've seen in this forum for a long time. And there's your sheer effrontery in demanding sources and numbers from me, when you've made no attempt to back up your own position. Where's YOUR evidence, numbers or sources that support YOUR silly claims? What experience do you have of running or maintaining steam locos? So far the only source you've cited is John Allen! LOL! But that's okay, even though you're a dilettante, and certainly not someone whose knowledge of steam loco design and practice I take seriously, I'll do a bit of research, find the numbers that confirm my position, and shoot you down in flames when I have time and inclination to do so. Until then, all the best, Mark.
shayfan84325 Given that you are such an authority, it should be simple to provide actual numbers and sources to support your position. If you don't come up with the numbers, I'll have to assume that you are simply blowing smoke.
Until then, all the best, Mark.
Mark, have you ever admitted you were wrong about anything?
(I know you haven't done so on this board--I was just wondering whether your superior attitude carried over into real life.)
marknewton Unfortunately for you, I am an authority on steam. I have the successful restorations, operations and publications to show for it. (Search this forum for my posts on steam, FWIW.)
marknewtonYou've repeatedly shown that you don't know enough to make an informed comment, let alone acknowledge someone else's superior knowledge and experience.
marknewton Where's YOUR evidence, numbers or sources that support YOUR silly claims? What experience do you have of running or maintaining steam locos?
marknewton ...even though you're a dilettante, and certainly not someone whose knowledge of steam loco design and practice I take seriously, I'll do a bit of research, find the numbers that confirm my position, and shoot you down in flames when I have time and inclination to do so.
If you want to "shoot me down if flames", give it your best shot. I don't have any weapons that could hit you from where I sit, and I'm pretty sure that you don't have any that could hit me either. Such weapons do exist; I used to teach folks how to build them. They are out of my price range and I assume they are not in your inventory for the same reason.
There, I'm done. Let’s get back to the original topic.
Medina1128 Yeah, what's wrong with you? Everyone knows that a bordello is a lumber store in Mexico... " src="http://cs.trains.com/trccs/emoticons/icon_smile_big.gif">
Yeah, what's wrong with you? Everyone knows that a bordello is a lumber store in Mexico... " src="http://cs.trains.com/trccs/emoticons/icon_smile_big.gif">
shayfan,
At first I thought there was no way a majority of the steam in the US couldn't do 60 mph. But after thinking about it you are probably correct. The most common steam loco in US history was the 4-4-0 American. Those didn't do 60 mph in normal operation. So while I would say that most locos in 1930 could run at 60 plus, if you look at the entire US history of steam locos you are probably correct.
Just my completely uneducated observation, I really don't want to get caught up in a debate.
Check out the Deming Sub by clicking on the pics:
el-capitan Shayfan, At first I thought there was no way a majority of the steam in the US couldn't do 60 mph. But after thinking about it you are probably correct. The most common steam loco in US history was the 4-4-0 American. Those didn't do 60 mph in normal operation. So while I would say that most locos in 1930 could run at 60 plus, if you look at the entire US history of steam locos you are probably correct. Just my completely uneducated observation, I really don't want to get caught up in a debate.
Shayfan,
No, some 4-4-0s did considerably more than 60mph in normal operation. That 1MPH per inch driver diameter was a recognition of the ability of the American standard to roll at speed on comparatively rough track. There were a LOT of 4-4-0s built with drivers larger than 60" diameter.
When given smoother track - well, NYC #999 rolled her original 86" drivers to a speed well in excess of 100mph. (112mph claimed, but it was hand-timed between mileposts.) Now, on exhibit at the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry, she stands on 68" drivers - rebuilt for reasonable power on locals, rather than sheer speed with two wooden cars behind. Given NYC schedules and track quality, I'd wager that she frequently exceeded 60mph when making up time.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - a place where NOTHING exceeded 60mph)
One issue that doesn't get mentioned when discussing model RR speeds...well unless I mentioned it in an earlier post...relates to model railroad curves. Keep in mind that the sharpest curve you'll find on a prototype mainline is the equivalent in HO of about a 33" radius curve - and real trains would be limited to 20 MPH on such a curve!! So even if our model trains are going 60 MPH on the straight away, just like the real ones, they could never go that fast thru the curves of a model railroad - even one with broad or super-broad (36"+R) curves. Seems to me it makes more sense to slow everything down a little to allow for something more like a realistic speed thru the curves.
Besides running a little slower makes the layout seem larger.
Stix,
I agree but you also need to have easements. My minimum mainline radius is 72" in Oscale, which equates to 40" in HO. Even with a wide radius the trains look unatural entering and exiting curves without easements.
Again we see speeds posted for actual steam engines roaring down the tracks at the incredible speeds of 14 to 24 mph, Going around a curve at 20mph???? imagine slowing down from 24 mph to 20mph, my goodness, the excitment, C'mon guys, living on the prairies we cruised around in 40's and 50's cars and often tried to keep up with them on straight roads, in Many cases we were left behind, 70-80mph was not uncommon. where are all the ex steam engineers to exclaim the speed of steam. Model railroading speeds I question are macro-slow speeds as opposed to slightly higher speeds, NOT slot car speeds.
Midnight RailroaderMark, have you ever admitted you were wrong about anything?
Fellas, the Pennsy alone had over 400 Pacific 4-6-2 engines with 80" drivers. These were meant for speed and passenger service. Prior to them came the Atlantic 4-4-2's also with high-stepping drivers. Much earlier, the American 4-4-0 had, like its successor in the early 1880's, the 4-6-0 Ten Wheeler, the capacity to pull several loaded passenger cars up to between 80 and 100 mph. The later models of the 4-4-0 produced 550 hp at track speed, so they could pull themselves, a tender, and three cars at well over 60 mph on level track. We shouldn't forget the 2-8-2 Mikado engines that probably outnumbered any other two models combined in terms of their shear numbers. They were on line just after the turn of the century, and were considered fast freight haulers if need be. Fast freight at the time included meat and silk. Those two train loads, in order, were accorded priority status on the mains, even over the most prestigious passenger trains. They were both perishable and in high demand...so they had to travel fast.
-Crandell
el-capitanAt first I thought there was no way a majority of the steam in the US couldn't do 60 mph. But after thinking about it you are probably correct. The most common steam loco in US history was the 4-4-0 American. Those didn't do 60 mph in normal operation.
At first I thought there was no way a majority of the steam in the US couldn't do 60 mph. But after thinking about it you are probably correct. The most common steam loco in US history was the 4-4-0 American. Those didn't do 60 mph in normal operation.
Mark, you might be correct.
marknewtonMidnight Railroader Mark, have you ever admitted you were wrong about anything? Often, Scott, often. But in this case, I'm not. I wonder, why do you reckon a bloke with 33 years as a boilermaker, boiler inspector and steam loco engineman is wrong, and a human resources manager is right? (I know you haven't done so on this board--I was just wondering whether your superior attitude carried over into real life.) If by "superior attitude" you mean I know when I'm right, and I'm not afraid to say so, yes. It's a character trait that's well regarded where I come from. I keep forgetting how many Americans think maintaining a civil discourse is more important than actually getting to the facts. Mark.
Midnight Railroader Mark, have you ever admitted you were wrong about anything?
Yes. We call it "being polite." I wasn't aware that basic civility was of so little value in your country.
It is possible to make a point without being rude or condescending.
selector Fellas, the Pennsy alone had over 400 Pacific 4-6-2 engines with 80" drivers. These were meant for speed and passenger service. Prior to them came the Atlantic 4-4-2's also with high-stepping drivers. Much earlier, the American 4-4-0 had, like its successor in the early 1880's, the 4-6-0 Ten Wheeler, the capacity to pull several loaded passenger cars up to between 80 and 100 mph. The later models of the 4-4-0 produced 550 hp at track speed, so they could pull themselves, a tender, and three cars at well over 60 mph on level track. We shouldn't forget the 2-8-2 Mikado engines that probably outnumbered any other two models combined in terms of their shear numbers. They were on line just after the turn of the century, and were considered fast freight haulers if need be. Fast freight at the time included meat and silk. Those two train loads, in order, were accorded priority status on the mains, even over the most prestigious passenger trains. They were both perishable and in high demand...so they had to travel fast. -Crandell
Let's not forget PRR's T1s that was well known for high speed running between Crestline and Chicago.Then you had the NKP Berks that was well known for fast speeds.
Of course one John Luther Jones is well known for his high speed running prior to his famous wreck at Vaughan Mississippi.
Although "Casey's" normal assigned engine was a 2-8-0, not the 4-6-0 he died in.
Actually Casey had to leave his beloved 638 when he transferred from Jackson,Tennessee to Memphis Tennessee when he entered passenger train service and was assigned 384..
Midnight RailroaderYes. We call it "being polite." I wasn't aware that basic civility was of so little value in your country.
Mark--
Just wondering, so I thought I'd ask you. I understand that some Eastern European countries, particularly East Germany, during the steam era had some ten-coupled locomotives capable of much higher speeds that we in America seem to think a 2-10-0 or 2-10-2 would be capable of without the dynamic augnment of the drivers tearing up the track.
I know I've seen films of rather large East German (before the reunification) 2-10-0's running at what we in the US would consider passenger speeds, and running very smoothly with what looks to be hardly any pounding on the tracks.
I know here in America, the 2-10-0, 2-10-2 locomotives were intended as 'drag freight' locomotives, even though here on the West Coast, both Espee and Santa Fe used them as medium speed heavy freight haulers, well exceeding the usual 30mph max. Seems to me that ten-coupled locos were capable of a lot more speed than we Americans think.
Do you agree? Just curious.
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
shayfan84325You've mentioned your expertise before. Does anyone besides you recognize your authority?
I've restored a Volkswagen, operated a Volkswagen, and published articles on the processes involved. That makes me an authority on one Volkswagen, not an authority on all of them.
By the way, you've made misstatements yourself - on at least one occasion you've indicated that you know more than me; you did not qualify your assertion as being limited to knowledge of steam locomotives. I'd be interested to see how you quantify that. How can you possibly know the quantity of knowledge that I possess? How would you measure it? What is the unit of measure of knowledge?
Perhaps I made a misstatement about the speed capabilities of 50+% of the total number of steam locomotives produced - that is yet to be determined.
I made an assertion; similar to a hypothesis, an assertion is accepted as true until it is disproved. So far, you are the only one to even suggest that the assertion is false.
This whole debate has been an unfortunate deviation from the original topic which had to do with visitors commenting that our trains don't move fast enough, and how we respond to such comments. You took issue with the response that I give such visitors.