Trains.com

A Sneaker

2985 views
44 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: US
  • 13,488 posts
A Sneaker
Posted by Mookie on Thursday, August 19, 2004 12:39 PM
Kind of like a quickie -

I asked this before, but then lost it in all the postings we have had lately.

Can someone tell me the forumla for how many feet for how long for a 1% grade? I was told one time, but can't find my notes on it.

Thank you.

Mz Moo

She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, August 19, 2004 12:59 PM
The previous topic where this was discussed is

"Horse shoe curve"
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, August 19, 2004 1:04 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill

1 foot rise in 100 foot run = 1%
2 foot rise in 100 foot run = 2%
3.4533 foot rise in 100 foot run = 3.4533%

That's all there is to it.

4% is pretty steep if you're walking up -- you'll feel it very quickly if you're not in shape.
Take it from a guy that has done his share of surveying, You got that 4% right even if you are in pretty good shape
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: US
  • 13,488 posts
Posted by Mookie on Thursday, August 19, 2004 1:08 PM
Thank you - I knew someone would come through for me!

Mook

She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: US
  • 13,488 posts
Posted by Mookie on Thursday, August 19, 2004 1:11 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by dgwicks

The previous topic where this was discussed is

"Horse shoe curve"
I went back to the topic and printed it off. Lots of info there!

Thanx

She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Thursday, August 19, 2004 3:40 PM
....Now just think about Saluda and it's 4.7%......How did they ever get that much weight up that grade.....!! Yes, I know they did for years, but doesn't it make one think about railroad equipment grinding up that much grade.

Quentin

  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: St.Catharines, Ontario
  • 3,770 posts
Posted by Junctionfan on Thursday, August 19, 2004 7:53 PM
Anything over 4% and you might as well use the clog system like they use in Switzerland.
Andrew
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, August 19, 2004 8:14 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

Anything over 4% and you might as well use the clog system like they use in Switzerland.


Uhhh, I think you mean "cog", not clog. Oh, and we do have a few cog railways in the U.S. The Mt. Washington Railway in N.H. comes to mind...

LC
  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: St.Catharines, Ontario
  • 3,770 posts
Posted by Junctionfan on Thursday, August 19, 2004 9:04 PM
oops my mistake I meant cog.
Andrew
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: US
  • 13,488 posts
Posted by Mookie on Friday, August 20, 2004 6:15 AM
OK - silly me - I will ask - why wouldn't you use a cog system on the Saluda? Not efficient enough? Too heavy? Takes too long to move trains? I don't know - that's why I am here. Just seems like a really scary way to get from point to point to do it the "normal" way.

Mook

She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Friday, August 20, 2004 7:06 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie

OK - silly me - I will ask - why wouldn't you use a cog system on the Saluda? Not efficient enough? Too heavy? Takes too long to move trains? I don't know - that's why I am here. Just seems like a really scary way to get from point to point to do it the "normal" way.

Mook

Maintenence issues notwithstanding - you would have to have a dedicated set of locos just for Saluda. It's not that they couldn't be used anywhere else on the system, but they'd be needed on the grade, so couldn't leave. Given enough traffic, that could be worthwhile. You'd also have to have enough spare cog-equipped locos to cover downtime for the primary set, and they would also be captive to the area near Saluda so they would be available if needed.

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: US
  • 13,488 posts
Posted by Mookie on Friday, August 20, 2004 9:07 AM
Well, Duh - I sure didn't think outside the box on that one did I!

Mookie

She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, August 20, 2004 11:32 AM
Dear Mookie,
There are a few other reasons for not using a cog railway. Firstly, all trains would have to switch locomotives, which costs money (the ultimate no-no for railroads). Also, cog railways cost more to build, and when Saluda was built, labor was cheap, so railways just ran many, short trains. The same thing happened pretty much on Cumbres (4%) and Raton (3.5%) passes.

I hope I have helped,
Daniel
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: US
  • 13,488 posts
Posted by Mookie on Friday, August 20, 2004 11:54 AM
Well, see - that is why the forum is so interesting - kind of like one collective brain!

I will think of the questions and rely on all of you to supply the reasoning!

Mook

She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Friday, August 20, 2004 12:11 PM
....I suppose Shay engines would have been able to meet that grade requirement pretty good [years ago], but believe they were used in logging operations much of the time. Not sure adhesion was the real problem there. Just pure weight...pulling it up such a steep grade...engines can just pull so much tonnage up a certain grade......and holding that tonnage back and in control decending the same grade. I suppose the bottom line in recent years was it got to be too costly to operate up and down that grade. And of course the always present danger of tragedy.

Quentin

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Friday, August 20, 2004 3:21 PM
Mark....Are you saying the little "geared locomotives" had no advantage on steep grades using their built in "gear ratio" as long as they could achieve adhesion over a high drivered unit that had less mechanical advantage in it's design.....Leaving the rough track out of the equation.

Quentin

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Louisville,Ky.
  • 5,077 posts
Posted by locomutt on Friday, August 20, 2004 6:04 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by tree68

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie

OK - silly me - I will ask - why wouldn't you use a cog system on the Saluda? Not efficient enough? Too heavy? Takes too long to move trains? I don't know - that's why I am here. Just seems like a really scary way to get from point to point to do it the "normal" way.

Mook

Maintenence issues notwithstanding - you would have to have a dedicated set of locos just for Saluda. It's not that they couldn't be used anywhere else on the system, but they'd be needed on the grade, so couldn't leave. Given enough traffic, that could be worthwhile. You'd also have to have enough spare cog-equipped locos to cover downtime for the primary set, and they would also be captive to the area near Saluda so they would be available if needed.


I've got to agree with Larry on this one. The old Pennesylviana had the branch running into Madison,In.(I think it came from North Veron,In.) but anyway,it was an 8-9% grade,they used specially geared SD-7's or -9's.

Being Crazy,keeps you from going "INSANE" !! "The light at the end of the tunnel,has been turned off due to budget cuts" NOT AFRAID A Vet., and PROUD OF IT!!

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Friday, August 20, 2004 8:34 PM
Mark....Totally agree. I was simply wondering in conversation if the Shay with it's "lower gearing" set up...small wheels included can't climb a steeper grade than an engine with the configuration of high drivers and hence, "higher geared ratio".....Assuming there would be enough adhesion to accompli***hat.

Quentin

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Friday, August 20, 2004 8:52 PM
Locomutt....I've read about the "steep" grade at Madison, In. for years but have never seen it....Is it still in use...?
Some specs. I've read on it....Grade is 5.89% and a special rack and pinion gear setup was built and successfully used for about 20 years in the middle of the 1800's.
It was converted back to an adhesion railroad branch then and I believe thereafter.

Quentin

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, August 20, 2004 10:51 PM
Originally posted by Lima Loco



Its COMING DOWN 4% that gets tricky!!! with thousands of tons.. Sweat flows and lots of pucker. Cab heater gets foot prints on it.
[/quote
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, August 20, 2004 11:47 PM
re- Madison Hill...

Last time I was there - tracks were still in place, but was not operated. I don't believe there are any active customers on the down-slope end, but the line is owned by the City of Madison, who is understandably reluctant to pull the tracks up. There is also a large power plant (coal burning, delivered by river barge - boo!) just downstream from the foot of the hill that occasionally has receieved oversize shipments of boilers, turbines, and such that raises a fuss anytime abandonment is brought up.
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Saturday, August 21, 2004 8:24 AM
...Mark, I totally agree with all stated in your last post. Ratios and mechanical advantage and adhesion, the whole bit....I have looked over Shays and read about their operation, etc...but never heard one run. That must have been quite a sound...with the 3-cylinders doing their thing in concert.
I would like to have been standing at trackside in Saluda if one ever would have powered up the "hill" even all by itself....That sound must have sounded like a large sewing machine as it wound up to it's "6 mph" at "full speed".....! Wonder what was the primary reason they settled on 3-cylinders.

Quentin

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Saturday, August 21, 2004 8:51 AM
...Does anyone know if the Shay like [not sure of the brand], engine that was at the Whitewater Valley Railroad, Connersville, In....years ago, is still there. Did they ever operate it on that 18 miles or so of tourist track down to Metamora...?

Quentin

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Saturday, August 21, 2004 9:00 PM
....Yes, that's all interesting stuff. There was so much going on in shafts, bearings, universal joints [of some kind], and then the gear boxes at each axle...Wow...how was it all maintained to continue to operate reliable....It looks to me like the gear boxes were out in the open susceptible to the elements, dirt, etc...Must have required a bunch of greasing.
One Item: On auto engine rotating many times to drive axle....Some not as much as one might think....Especially with overdrive transmissions now....and middle of the spectrum rear end ratios....My truck in top gear the final drive ratio is 2:39 to 1 so that turns the engine pretty slow going down the road. Of course just a bit over 2 revs. per axle rotation.

Quentin

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, August 23, 2004 2:19 PM
Yes adhesion is what determines how many cars can be pulled by a locomotive. A high addhesion locomotive can pull more cars. Doubleheading or trippleheading gets more over the hill in one cut. The problem at Saluda really came from runaways. The cars can start pushing the locomotive down the hill and unless the brakes are whistled for in time the engine cannot stop the train. At Saluda there have been cases of a train trying to go up the hill and having a reverse runaway. The engine is drug back down the hill. Again if brakes are not called for soon enough it is goodby!
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, August 23, 2004 2:23 PM
Back to the Shay locomotives. Being from West Virginia I have visited and rode behind the Shays at the Cass Scenic Railroad. Also rode on the Yosemite Sugar Pine Railroad behind their Shay. They do have a whole lot of noise with very little forward motion. There are about 17.35 million points to lubricate on a Shay. I have one of the Bachman Shays in G gauge. I think it has about the same number of places to lubricate each Christmas (when it comes out of storage) as the real ones do.
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Monday, August 23, 2004 2:31 PM
WT....You mention of adhesion being the limiting factor how much a locomotive can pull up a grade....I've been to Horseshoe Curve and watching a long TOFC just about stall as he was exiting the western side of the Cuve and he wasn't slipping...just about stalling the 2 or 3 engines that were on the front. Fortunately he was able to continue to craw on up and made it....I heard him talking on the radio and he actually was talking about the thought they were almost in a stall and wasn't sure if he could make it...But there was no slippage at the time....Just the weight pulling down the engines to almost nothing, etc....

Quentin

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Monday, August 23, 2004 2:37 PM
PS....To continue a bit of above post of mine....I'm thinking possibly the engines were equipped with computer anti slip electronics and ability to cut power as needed to traction motor, etc...but the case I cited was about 10 years ago...Don't know what was available to handle that situation then.

Quentin

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, August 23, 2004 5:56 PM
Wow, I can't believe I missed this forum from the start. School's got me bogged down...

Back to Saluda, there are several things to consider. The grade is only 3 miles long (which is 3 miles too many at that kind of grade) with the steepest at the top. It's hardly worthwhile to install a cog system for only 3 miles of track and would be overly complicated. When the trains went up, they were divided into 16 car sections at Melrose and hauled up to Saluda at 20 mph, not too bad of a speed, but takes a long time to do that for a 50 - 100 car long train. Coming down was a different story... but dynamic brakes and an 8 mph speed limit have kept Saluda run-away free for years.
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Monday, August 23, 2004 7:51 PM
....I'm assuming they kept the train in one piece to decend the grade....
Pulling up the hill at 20 mph is impressive....Didn't think it would be that fast.
On the cog system....In my way of thinking, that would have been over kill in cost and maintenance, and special equipment needed plus adhesion evidently wasn't the problem....The problem now....for railfans...is no trains...! Too bad.

Quentin

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy