Gentlemen, I have been studying North American western narrow gauge mining operations. I have consulted the huge Mines Register, History of the Nevada County Narrow gauge, and Death Valley Borax mining operations. I can find equipment rosters, and other pertinent information. I have a track plan for a branch line point to point, with connection to a mainline narrow gauge (dog bone). What I have not found is whether they turned their engines or ran them forward and backwards. The mining operation will be either gold ore or borax and very small, so I am thinking they did not go to the expense of turning. So, what did the small guys do. I am not a proto exact kind of person. If guests are over, and someone says "Hey, your running your train backward!" I may respond with "well that's the way they did it".
Any resources you know of would help tremendously.
Thanks
Steve
Life is tough, but it's tougher if your'e stupid.
Hi,
I'm not an expert on the subject, but have seen a number of western mining "RRs" over the years. To the best of my recall, they were of two extremes....... either small gas engine motored "locos" that never turned, or bigger steamers that typically had a Wye to allow for turning. I'm thinking of RRs from the late 1800s thru mid 1900s, and certainly not "modern" ones.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Mobileman44, thanks. That is exactly the era I was planning for. Hmmm, originally I had considered a wye, and I am glad you brought it up. I will look at my plan so far, and see if it fits. I guess it would not have to be very big to just turn and engine.
Steve,
I would doubt very seriously, that they would go through the expense and work to install a wye or run around track for any mining operations. Back in with empties, hook-up to loads, pull out loads, set on stub siding, spot emptys, hook back up to loads and pull away. KISS.
Take Care!
Frank
ndbpr, thanks. Excellent point. My grade is 5.8 and I will only be using shay/climax/heisler types. This simplifies things.
Thanks Frank. I like that operation. I have seen quite a few British videos, and they almost seem to prefer running forward and backward. Could not find anything on American west. Really did not want a TT, cept maybe for mainline.
I found a website with plenty of pictures of the Denver & Rio Grande Western, including one of a locomotive on a turntable.
Narrow Gauge Memories
Marlon
See pictures of the Clinton-Golden Valley RR
Ahhhh, good site Marlon. Thank you.
A lot of small mining railroads was operated on a shoe string budget and therefore there may not have been money for a "armstrong" turntable at the mine load out or there may not have been room enough..Remember when the mine(s) was worked out or was closed so went the small railroad.
As was mention if a steep grade(s) was involved the engine would not be turned for the reasons already stated by others.
For the record it was not uncommon for steam engines on mine runs in the coal fields to reverse move (tender first) out a coal mine load out located miles up some branch.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Thanks Larry. Makes sense. That operation appeals to me.
Just wondering if anyone knows of persons that have tried to model (by handlaying) the really &^%$$* rails you see in small operations? You know, the ones where there are ups and down with all kinds of wiggle. I've seen some videos that are truly amazing that the engine and cars don't derail. It would force very slow speeds. Hmmmm.
I am in the process of building an HOn3 shelf layout & will not turn the locos. A "Y" or turntable takes up more room than I can spare. I live by "The Gambler's Express" standard gauge line from Philadelphia to Atlantic city & they run a "push-pull passenger train about 10 times a day. No need to turn an engine especially on a short line.
WHEN NYCT ran steam powered trains on the elevated, they pulled forward from the north and were blocked by their own consist at the south terminal. The locomotive from the previous train would come around and running tender first hauled the consist back north, while the locomotive remined at the south terminal to power the next train.
The Fournies were built with this sort of opeation in mind. They had low tenders, and carried only enough fule and water for a single round trip. Once at the North terminal they were serviced before going south again.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
jerryl, I agree, TT's are cool and all, but seems they are high maintenance items. I was not aware that any standard gauge ran push pull. I thought about HOn3, but detail and Bachmanns Spectrum steam convinced me. Would love to see pics or plans of yours. I will post my plan as soon as I have a little more detail.
Thanks for the info.
BroadwayLion, very interesting, I could do that. Would need some sort of service at both ends. I like that.
Thanks for the information. You guys are great, and saving me a lot of research time.
Of course modern freight trains frequently run with locomotives at both ends, both as distributed power and as o convience on local runs.
A mine or logging operation might do this to overcome steep grades, and to facilitate car handling at either end.
It is your railroad, your, mine, or whatever, and if your manager thinks that this might be the easiest way to do things it would certainly make an interesting operation even if they did not do it exactly this wayBetcha some did do just that.
HA, BroadwayLion you are so right. Another interesting option.
Fouled Anchor jerryl, I agree, TT's are cool and all, but seems they are high maintenance items. I was not aware that any standard gauge ran push pull. I thought about HOn3, but detail and Bachmanns Spectrum steam convinced me. Would love to see pics or plans of yours. I will post my plan as soon as I have a little more detail. The CNJ (Central RR of NJ) Had a 4-6-4 tank that was made for commuter service & was made for push-pull,the tender even had a pilot on the back. I think you will find that many communter trains operated the same way....If it's good enough for the Big Boys, it's certainly good enough for us lowly narrow gaugers. As far as pictures etc. I post on another site because of the ease of posting pictures. Thanks for the info. Steve
The CNJ (Central RR of NJ) Had a 4-6-4 tank that was made for commuter service & was made for push-pull,the tender even had a pilot on the back. I think you will find that many communter trains operated the same way....If it's good enough for the Big Boys, it's certainly good enough for us lowly narrow gaugers. As far as pictures etc. I post on another site because of the ease of posting pictures.
In rugged terrain, where a road is pretty much compelled to negotiate grades in excess of 3%, turning wye's and such would be costly and difficult to situate. I have only been on one grade in excess of 3% (it was just a hair under 4%), and that was on the Alberni Pacific road between Port Alberni and the MacLean Steam Sawmill on Vancouver Island. The locomotive is a Baldwin 2-8-2T. It faces up grade all the time. It merely has a run-around track at the high point, which is where the sawmill is located. The locomotive leads up the grade, but also leads down the grade, just in reverse.
Interestingly, there is a plaque on the backhead beside the sightglass. It reads, "Maintain water level above this mark when climbing grades up to 9%." Nine percent!!!
-Crandell
Fouled Anchor Just wondering if anyone knows of persons that have tried to model (by handlaying) the really &^%$$* rails you see in small operations? You know, the ones where there are ups and down with all kinds of wiggle. I've seen some videos that are truly amazing that the engine and cars don't derail. It would force very slow speeds. Hmmmm. Steve
Yes. My first attempt at handlaying produced just those results. Not intentionally! Track did have ups and downs and wiggle. It would force...me to re-lay that section with Micro Engineering flex track.
My input on that is to keep your models operating as smoothly as possible. Giving them opportunities to derail and have coupling-uncoupling issues is more temptation than they can resist.
However, you could try playing around with that idea on a stub siding or other limited area.
Thanks Crandell. I have become convinced to operate always facing upgrade. And I was worried to be ridiculed for my measly 5.8%
Southgate, ya got me laughing out loud, frightened the stupid cat. I think I will do as you suggest, and will do it early in construction as a test. If it works, I can use it sparingly on other areas. Good idea.
So do, some don't. The Boston and Maine never bothered to turn their commuter trains. They ran 'em backwards on the way into North Station. The successor MBTA still does the same. Although steam engines would run in reverse quite happily, the tender was more likely to derail when being pushed, so speed was usually held down when running in reverse. Tank engines, and Shays, carrying their fuel on board, would run equally well in either direction. On lines with some grade to them, it was usual to have the locomotive in front, pulling, on the way uphill. Derailment is more likely when pushing up hill.
On the other hand I have seen photos and articles about abandoned turntables way, way out in the woods, to turn locos at the end of equally abandoned mining and logging lines. You can play it either way.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
Thanks dstarr. I can understand the pushing uphill likelihood of derailing. Do you think just as likely on our MR's?
I found a video on You-tube about the history of the Death Valley railroad that was built to haul borax from the mines to a connection with the Southern Pacific, but it does not show or explain if there was a turn-around wye at either end. Eventually, Borax Smith extended the line northward into Nevada to reach silver mines.
cacole, yeah, I'm strongly leaning towards the Borax ops. I knew they diversified, but am not sure if the demand dropped or the mines played out. Not sure if it was my grandfather (pretty sure) or great grandfather, but he drove a twenty mule team out there. My mother (90) has a very old picture of him driving.
Thanks, I'll look for the video.
Fouled Anchor Thanks dstarr. I can understand the pushing uphill likelihood of derailing. Do you think just as likely on our MR's? Thanks Steve
Yes, and even more-so.
Fouled Anchor Thanks dstarr. I can understand the pushing uphill likelihood of derailing. Do you think just as likely on our MR's? Thanks Steve Yes, the derailment problem is the same on the prototype as on the model. Granted the prototype used body mount couplers which aren't as derailment prone as truck mount couplers but, you still have a lot of side force on the couplers when pushing, particularly on curves. Enough side force will boost a flange over the railhead, and then you are on the ground. And the prototype used shallower flanges than our models.
Yes, the derailment problem is the same on the prototype as on the model. Granted the prototype used body mount couplers which aren't as derailment prone as truck mount couplers but, you still have a lot of side force on the couplers when pushing, particularly on curves. Enough side force will boost a flange over the railhead, and then you are on the ground. And the prototype used shallower flanges than our models.
dstarr, would two engines in push pull DCE help. There will be 22" and 30" curves, and over a trestle (30").