Virtually every account I've ever read about the 9000s featured the "lopping" exhaust. The steamlocomotive.com article is the only place I've ever read that says they had "a very even 1-2-3, 1-2-3 beat." Hence my curiosity to hear what a 9000 sounded like when it was "in spec."
-ChrisWest Chicago, ILChristopher May Fine Art Photography"In wisdom gathered over time I have found that every experience is a form of exploration." ~Ansel Adams
Phew, now that's what I call a sweeping statement.
Have you any experience, or sources, to back these observations up ?
Martin
John -
I understood what you said...and read the article at Steam Locomotive.com. All I'm saying is that I'm guessing there were a lot of out-of-spec 9000s (more and more as the UP dieselized) out there and so the sound on the Fogg recording is probably pretty representative, even if it's not what a well shopped 9000 should sound like. I'd just like to hear one that was "in spec" for comparison purposes.
Thanks,
Chris
Working on that third cylinder was a maintenance nightmare, requiring access from under the loco. In Great Britian, where all the "labour" was grudgingly provided by government employees, this was not a problem, except when "labour" was on strike.
Hays
UP 4-12-2 CAZEPHYR Yes, the three cylinder locomotives had six chuffs per revolution. The third cylinder was connected to the second axle for most of the USA steam locomotives. The third cylinder was tilted up at an angle also but the outside two cylinders were horizontal to the rails. This did cause the exhaust from the third cylinder to be off beat and at speed, the roar runs together more than a two cylinder locomotive. See the link below and click on the sound file. It is a Union Pacific 4-12-2 locomotive in 1954 and you can get the feel for the off beat sound. http://www.cowboystrainzstation.com/union_pacific_9000.htm That sound is not representative of a normal 4-12-2, but one in bad shape needing an overhaul. Refer to the discussion at www.steamlocomotive.com where it explains the Fogg recording of 9009 in 1954 is of a badly out-of-time 4-12-2. Toward the end of steam, maintenance of the middle cylinder suffered greatly as shop forces tended to "pass the buck" on down the line to the next shop. The resulting wear to bearings, drive boxes, etc. contributed to the out-of-sync sound.
CAZEPHYR Yes, the three cylinder locomotives had six chuffs per revolution. The third cylinder was connected to the second axle for most of the USA steam locomotives. The third cylinder was tilted up at an angle also but the outside two cylinders were horizontal to the rails. This did cause the exhaust from the third cylinder to be off beat and at speed, the roar runs together more than a two cylinder locomotive. See the link below and click on the sound file. It is a Union Pacific 4-12-2 locomotive in 1954 and you can get the feel for the off beat sound. http://www.cowboystrainzstation.com/union_pacific_9000.htm
See the link below and click on the sound file. It is a Union Pacific 4-12-2 locomotive in 1954 and you can get the feel for the off beat sound.
http://www.cowboystrainzstation.com/union_pacific_9000.htm
That sound is not representative of a normal 4-12-2, but one in bad shape needing an overhaul. Refer to the discussion at www.steamlocomotive.com where it explains the Fogg recording of 9009 in 1954 is of a badly out-of-time 4-12-2. Toward the end of steam, maintenance of the middle cylinder suffered greatly as shop forces tended to "pass the buck" on down the line to the next shop. The resulting wear to bearings, drive boxes, etc. contributed to the out-of-sync sound.
http://www.steamlocomotive.com/4-12-2/
under ''Lopping'' Exhaust, abour 2/3 of the way down the page.
Chris--
It seems perhaps you are misunderstanding what I wrote above.
Refer to the link in the post below.
Respectfully submitted--
John
Edit: this link, 2/3 of the way down the page, under "Lopping" Exhaust:
UP 4-12-2 That sound is not representative of a normal 4-12-2, but one in bad shape needing an overhaul. Refer to the discussion at www.steamlocomotive.com where it explains the Fogg recording of 9009 in 1954 is of a badly out-of-time 4-12-2. Toward the end of steam, maintenance of the middle cylinder suffered greatly as shop forces tended to "pass the buck" on down the line to the next shop. The resulting wear to bearings, drive boxes, etc. contributed to the out-of-sync sound.
While it might not be "correct," from what I've read it was "normal." The late Don Ball, Jr. always referred to the 9000s as sounding like a washing machine or a sewing machine. I seem to recall Jim Boyd mentioning that they had an offbeat sound as well. You don't happen to know of any recordings of a "correct" sounding 9000, do you?
.
UP 4-12-2 the "modifications" to the Gresley gear (am still reading Volume 2)
timzmost? other UK 3-cyl engines used divided drive, with the inside cylinder driving the lead axle.
How about Germany and the rest of Europe-- did their 3-cyl engines have inclined center cylinders?
I do not know about the "modifications" to the Gresley gear (am still reading Volume 2), but 8 or 9 UP 4-12-2's were converted to double Walschaerts motion on the right side, with the Gresley gear completely removed and the air pumps moved from the smokebox door to the side of the engine, resulting in the "bald faced nine" look.
According to www.steamlocomotive.com, some of the Gresley-equipped engines were not set-up correctly after major shopping by the UP maintenance forces, and for that reason would have been more "out of time" than others. Lubrication of the middle cylinder suffered because they didn't want to crawl under and around the front axles to get to the crank on the second axle--and as a result, bearings, etc. got worn--further contributing to the "offbeat" sound. It's more than just the different stroke length--but offbeat exhaust is also affected by the closer proximity of the exhaust passage from the third cylinder to the smokestack.
UP 4-12-2The middle cylinder had a different length of stroke than the outside cylinders, so this would have contributed to the off-beat rhythm.
UP 4-12-2they say the valve events were different--which also contributed to the offbeat sound.
CAZEPHYR The ButlerDid a three cylinder locomotive have six "chuffs" per wheel revolution? Also, was the third cylinder connected to the first drive axle like an automobile's piston is connected to its crankshaft? Yes, the three cylinder locomotives had six chuffs per revolution. The third cylinder was connected to the second axle for most of the USA steam locomotives. The third cylinder was tilted up at an angle also but the outside two cylinders were horizontal to the rails. This did cause the exhaust from the third cylinder to be off beat and at speed, the roar runs together more than a two cylinder locomotive. See the link below and click on the sound file. It is a Union Pacific 4-12-2 locomotive in 1954 and you can get the feel for the off beat sound. http://www.cowboystrainzstation.com/union_pacific_9000.htm
The ButlerDid a three cylinder locomotive have six "chuffs" per wheel revolution? Also, was the third cylinder connected to the first drive axle like an automobile's piston is connected to its crankshaft?
Yes, the three cylinder locomotives had six chuffs per revolution. The third cylinder was connected to the second axle for most of the USA steam locomotives. The third cylinder was tilted up at an angle also but the outside two cylinders were horizontal to the rails. This did cause the exhaust from the third cylinder to be off beat and at speed, the roar runs together more than a two cylinder locomotive.
The middle cylinder had a different length of stroke than the outside cylinders, so this would have contributed to the off-beat rhythm.
Also--there is a lot of misinformation about the 4-12-2's even quoted in usually fairly reputable online sources like www.steamlocomotive.com. For example, the middle cylinder on the UP 4-12-2's was inclined at 9.5 degrees and not 8 degrees as often reported. (Kratville and Bush, UP Type, Vol. 1)
William Kratville and John Bush wrote two excellent books on the UP 4-12-2 that also include much information on the UP 4-10-2 (both as built and as later rebuilt). They are among the finest books ever written on any locomotive type, and are filled with lots of drawings and engineering data, and interviews with the men who designed, built, and maintained them.
Kratville and Bush discuss the offbeat exhaust. In addition to having a shorter stroke (31" versus 32" of the outside cylinders), they say the valve events were different--which also contributed to the offbeat sound.
The UP wanted much faster locomotives able to pull a much longer train much farther distances. Alco believed the 4-12-2 should be only a 35 mph standard operating speed locomotive. UP, as well documented by Kratville and Bush, had absolutely no intention of operating 4-12-2's at 35 mph, but planned from the outset to operate at significantly higher speeds--regardless of what Alco's recommendations were--they were trying to slash schedules and speed up trains as Santa Fe was already doing.
Additionally, the UP was facing a traffic crunch and somewhat rushed the testing period of the "demonstrator" 4-12-2, number 9000. The operating department was absolutely thrilled with the dramatic cost savings and speed/tonnage increases of the 9000 relative to all previous motive power--so any and all concerns about increased maintenance costs were greatly outweighed by the overall freight schedule improvements. Unfortunately, the 4-12-2's were not designed with as much consideration to long term maintenance as perhaps they should have been, and there was much pressure within the UP operating department to keep them on the move--such that maintenance of the middle cylinder often suffered.
The UP 4-12-2's lasted till very nearly the end of all steam on the UP, and even as late as 1952, the engineering department planned to keep the last 25 4-12-2's (which had one piece cast frames) operating through the targeted end of steam, estimated to occur during 1965. Subsequent events (nationwide recession) and diesel deliveries moved the end up by several years.
tatans3-cylinder engines had an off-beat exhaust caused by the middle cylinder being canted 8 degrees from horizontal.
Reading about English engines, you don't see constant references to Gresley Pacifics sounding offbeat.
mhurley87f3 cylinder locomotives in the UK normally had the inside cylinder drive on the second driving axle
HEY ! HEY ! Just found an article in MR June,1984, re: D&RG getting a new 4-8-2 mountain steamer in 1926 in Denver, it's a 3 cylinder monster, and a great looking locomotive, it's a Baldwin. The article goes on to a very intersting point: quote: : Sound enthusiasts should note that 3-cylinder engines had an off-beat exhaust caused by the middle cylinder being canted 8 degrees from horizontal. The sound timing was "long,medium,short, long,medium, short" for each driver revolution, rather than 6 equal beats. very interesting.
That list is pretty much the kind of population that I had in mind. Do you have any idea how many of each railroad's type were 3-cylinder ? I'm not recalling that any railroad had a huge fleet, other than UP.
I almost mentioned the IHB 0-8-0, but wasn't sure about that - maybe I was thinking of its booster engine instead. One of the best locomotive photos and David P. Morgan 'frontispiece' essays is -
The grandest 0-8-0 of all Trains, January 1968 page 18 Indiana Harbor Belt 3-cylinder 0-8-0 ( 0-8-0, FRONTISPIECE, IHB, "MORGAN, DAVID P.", STEAM, SWITCHER, ENGINE, LOCOMOTIVE, TRN )
- Paul North.
Three-cylinder steamers were tried by more railroads than you might think. Some that I am aware of; Union Pacific (4-10-2, and 4-12-2 types), Southern Pacific (fleet of 4-10-2 types), D&RGW (4-8-2 std gauge). Missouri Pacific (2-8-2), Lehigh Valley (4-8-2), Lackawanna (4-8-2), Indiana Harbor Belt (0-8-0), Union RR (0-10-2), Norfolk & Western (4-8-2). I am probably missing some too. Many of these lasted their service lives in this configuration, but some were rebuilt.
Edit- scratch N&W from this list.
mhurley87f [snip] 3 cylinder locomotives in the UK normally had the inside cylinder drive on the second driving axle, [snip]
A perceptive question ! I believe this was also the case with UP's 4-12-2's - but with them, the first axle also had to have a bend in it to clear the driving rod that ran back to the 2nd axle's 'crankshaft'. I'm not near my copy of Brian Reed's Locomotives in Profile book that discussed the 4-12-2's in depth and maybe some other US 3-cylinder types, so I'm not recalling much else. My vague recollection is that several other US railroads tinkered with 3-cylinder locomotives, mainly as 'one-of' experiments - and then usually rebuit them into or back into a conventional 2-cylinder drive. No doubt Robert A. LeMassena had something to say about them sometime in Trains, but I'm not recalling a specific article.
Martin, are you familiar with that series ? It only lasted for 2 volumes, if my understanding is correct - but they are extremely detailed and well-written. They are likely easier to obtain on your side of the Atlantic.
And then there was the Delaware and Hudson, which built a bunch of compound 2-8-0's, including some with 4-cylinders - but that's a different topic. Or maybe not - I would think that a simple 3-cylinder would be as loud as a simple 2-cylinder, but a compound 3-cylinder would be quieter than either, because all of its steam from the primary 2 cylinders would be used a 2nd time in the 3rd cylinder before being exhausted - hence the exhausted steam would be at a lower presssure and so less 'crisp' and less loud ?
Yes, they would have 6 exhaust beats per revolution.
3 cylinder locomotives in the UK normally had the inside cylinder drive on the second driving axle, but, given the number of 3 cylinder locomotives built worldwide, I wouldn't be surprised if someone might come up with an example where the first axle was connected.
Just to add to complications possible, the UK Southern Railway's "Lord Nelson" 4 cylinder 4-6-0 express locomotives were "quartered" so that there would be 8 exhaust beats per revolution !!
Hwyl,
mhurley87fsnip... but it's also true that 3 cylinder locomotives did have a softer exhaust beat than 2 cylinder examples. Hwyl, Martin
James
Yes, it does sound a bit rich, but it has been quoted in quite a few books I've read.
The railway company involved, the Southern Railway, which existed between 1923 and 1947, did design 3 cylinder humping locomotives for use at its Feltham Yard in London's well heeled but built up south western suburbs, and elsewhere on its system.
Railway companies were masters of spin to get good news angles, and this may well have been and a major consideration, but it's also true that 3 cylinder locomotives did have a softer exhaust beat than 2 cylinder examples.
I would question whether or not a railway would ever consider the well being of citizens living close to the tracks, " Listen guv' maybe we should redesign this locomotive so it runs a little quieter eh? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha ! ! "
The Loading Gauge in mainland Britain was constrained by our high level platforms at stations, and 3 and 4 cylinder locomotives offered greater power within that Loading Gauge. The additional cylinders would have been placed between the frames.
The Loading Gauge at Goods stations, however, were commonly even more restricted, and the use of inside (two) cylinder locomotives to shunt such places had to be resorted to.
3 cylinder locomotives were also popular with certain Railways on the grounds of a more even torque, and also at certain yards in built-up areas, as the softer exhaust beats caused less of a noise problem to local residents.
I understand that 3 cylinder engines have great power AND better starting effort then 2 cylinder of the same size and weight.
Railroader_Sailor_SSN-760Shay geared locomotives were often fitted with 3 cylinders as well. The 3 cylinder design did not fare well in North America, mainly owing to the higher maintenance required by an extra cylinder, and the increased difficulty of reaching the middle cylinder.
The 3 cylinder design did not fare well in North America, mainly owing to the higher maintenance required by an extra cylinder, and the increased difficulty of reaching the middle cylinder.
Just to point out the obvious -- the 3 cylinder Shay and Willamette were succesful because that middle cylinder was easy to access.
Phil
Timber Head Eastern Railroad "THE Railroad Through the Sierras"
Railroader_Sailor_SSN-760 Union Pacific 4-12-2, the longest non-articulated locomotive in the western hemisphere.
Something over 99% of all North American steam locomotives were 2-cylinder. I guess there were a lot more 4-cyl engines than 3-cyl, even not counting articulateds? (And maybe we can't count Shays.)
Edit: turns out that engine-and-tender length of a PRR 4-6-2 with the large tender exceeds that of the 4-12-2. Lots of other engines do too, of course. As for engine-only length, all the PRR duplexes beat the 4-12-2, along with the larger 4-8-4s and 2-10-4s.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.