henry6 To rephrase my point: can the final average speed be broken down enough to find out how fast the train had to be going on the segment in question to support the average speed as publicized?
To rephrase my point: can the final average speed be broken down enough to find out how fast the train had to be going on the segment in question to support the average speed as publicized?
Given the admittedly brief duration of the run (90 seconds), plus the possiblity of slow orders and other restrictions even within that crew district, I'd opine that even during the time that just that engineer was running, the total time elapsed would probably not be apparent.
Even considering acceleration and deceleration, the entire burst of speed probably didn't exceed 8-10 miles.
Larry 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...
Sunnyland I glanced at the article and haven't read it in depth yet. But I did see a graph with the different engines that were used listed and average speed. In some places, maybe one engine did go faster than in another place. I was on UP City of St. Louis west of Green River, WY with my parents and a guy in the dome car was clocking mileposts and we were doing 100 mph. It was straight track and they were making up time. This is when the waiters were dropping dishes in the diner earlier, which meant something unusual was happening. Our trip didn't average 100 mph, but on that stretch we did. No speed limits in those days, except ones UP put in place on their own, I guess. It was a diesel of course, but I know I've heard of a famous steamer running over 100 mph in the early 1900's. It's an interesting article, in fact the whole issue has a lot of goodies. My parents and I saw the General when she was visiting different cities in 1962.
I glanced at the article and haven't read it in depth yet. But I did see a graph with the different engines that were used listed and average speed. In some places, maybe one engine did go faster than in another place.
I was on UP City of St. Louis west of Green River, WY with my parents and a guy in the dome car was clocking mileposts and we were doing 100 mph. It was straight track and they were making up time. This is when the waiters were dropping dishes in the diner earlier, which meant something unusual was happening. Our trip didn't average 100 mph, but on that stretch we did. No speed limits in those days, except ones UP put in place on their own, I guess. It was a diesel of course, but I know I've heard of a famous steamer running over 100 mph in the early 1900's.
It's an interesting article, in fact the whole issue has a lot of goodies. My parents and I saw the General when she was visiting different cities in 1962.
If nothing better than Automatic Block or Manual Block (CTC was no better) was in service, passenger trains were limited to 79 mph and freights were limited to 59 mph. If there was no signal protection, passenger trains were limited to 59 mph and freights were limited to 49 mph.
Johnny
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
I am going with Hankey and Bill Withuhn and their view that the 106mph is suspect. Withuhn appearantly has sufficient knowledge of thermodynamics to be able to run calculations. (quote) "Years ago, he ran calculations to determine the power output..."
The specs for Baldwin built Santa Fe 4-4-2 No. 507, basically identical to No. 510, can be seen here- http://www.catskillarchive.com/rrextra/blatpg23.Html I don't know if there are any professional mechanical engineers with good knowledge of thermodynamics now on the forum, but I'd expect that the specs on the engine would provide the necessary data to run maximum speed calculations.
This Wikipedia entry on the special includes the running times for each crew district. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Special Note the Shopton, IA to Chillicothe, IL segment which includes Cameron to Surrey-104.7 miles was run in 1hr 41min for an average speed of 62.3 MPH. Not clear, but I assume the segment times include engine change.
Today the Amtrak Southwest Chief is scheduled to make the run from Fort Madison to Galesburg, for the most part ex-Santa Fe-58 miles in 59 minutes or just under 60MPH. Amtrak is limited to a top speed of 79 MPH on that run, but has much lower limits over the ex-Santa Fe to ex-Burlington interchange tracks at Cameron and from Cameron to the Galesburg station. The time also includes the station stop at Galesburg.
My thought: If the Scott Special was not subject to any speed limit on tangent track and the engineers were allowed to take curves as fast as their experience said they could do, what held them down to an average speed now almost matched by an operation with a top speed limit of 79MPH. If the Santa Fe No. 501 could run at a steady 90MPH, why would the average speed be not better than the 62.3 as reported.
I am not going to argue that accurate clocking of the run between Cameron and Surrey would not have been possible, but there doesn't seem to be any record of who clocked the time. The sidebar notes that it was not included in the dispatches of the on-board reporter. Aside from the Booklet put out by the Santa Fe (availble as a pdf as part of the preview of the magazine), newspapers reporting on the special made no note of the speed. So what was the origin? Hankey makes good points in suggesting it was just corporate spin.
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
Bucyrus I get the impression that some people believe that because earlier locomotives were relatively smaller, pulled less, and were less modern, it had to also follow that they were slower. From what I have read, the opposite is closer to the truth because the smaller locomotives were easier to balance.
Bucyrus: good point --- would like to add that those engines also had very large driving wheels which enabled slower piston travel.
I think what we have accomplished here is to confirm what Mortimer J Adler said about a "historical fact" being a very difficult thing to nail down. All of the people involved are long dead, the company is merged away into BNSF years ago, all the equipment used was scarped years ago. Other than the tracks, all there is left of this incident are the accounts of it. We cannot successfully refute any of it, since none of us were there. We can only speculate.
George
I finally got around to reading the story last night. Coupling all that has been said here and what was said in the article I come up with what has not been said, and could point to the soluition or at least some kind of answer. We know the exact time LA to Chi. and the elapsed time. I gather that there are numerous point to point speeds recorded with the one, the 106.1 mph one, in question. I am sure there must be an Einstien or other mathimatical wizard out there who could or have access to computer program that could, take all the known times and speeds and figure what other speeds, or if this particular segment speed, had to be achieved to total the LA to Chi avreage and exact. I can type, not well, but I can type, I cannot do major math after I take my shoes and socks off, so maybe one of you out there could "add" a little help.
I get the impression that some people believe that because earlier locomotives were relatively smaller, pulled less, and were less modern, it had to also follow that they were slower. From what I have read, the opposite is closer to the truth because the smaller locomotives were easier to balance. So, I have no problem believing that, for the best 1905 passenger locomotives, 100 mph with two or three cars was a piece of cake. So, was 106 possible? How about 120? I don't know, but those speeds do not strike me as being far fetched.
1905 was not the beginning of railroading. It was well developed and had acquired quite the swagger by that period. It was a wild and bold era where risk-taking was fashionable, and delivering the big promise was part of that fashion. If one does not understand the railroad culture of that era, it might sound like too much to believe.
My take is the 106.1 mph claim is a "back of the envelope" type calculation made by someone riding the train. It may not be scientifically 100% accurate, but pretty darn close. At least over what Mr. Hankey claims the engine could do based on published data.
When it comes to the laws of physics or thermodynamics, I'm like Bugs Bunny. I never studied law. That being said, I do know that you can have identical machines built by the same company, same factory, same people, but work slightly differently. I know I've read in Trains, and elsewhere, of steam engines of the same class that fired differently. As an engineer I've had identical (on paper) trains that handled differently. Some roll with ease, some don't. One you can't maintain 50 mph in notch 8 while the next one you have to throttle down to avoid going over 50 mph at the same location.
It could well be that on the day and at the place the 100 mph plus speed was claimed everything, and I mean everything down to weather conditions were just right. That day they could do it, the day before or day after maybe not so well.
Something caught my attention in the sidebar. I know someone brought up that maybe there was an extra hand tossing coal into the fire that day. Certainly plausible if they thought ahead of time to "see what she could do" at a specific location thought to be ideal for that. Some of the published data on the engine, like grate area, heating surface, drive wheel diameter, etc is not subject to change. Of course there could be minute changes from manufacturing or repairs done, but that data is probably very close. But what about boiler pressure? That 220 psi is surely for the class of engine. While there is an absolute operating pressure, it's going to be higher than working pressure. I don't claim to know what it is, but what if the boiler could be carried safely at 230 psi? Maybe it wouldn't get them to 106 mph, but it might get them close to it, at least over the 90 mph Hankey claims is the best it could do. Those of you with the law degrees will have to argue that one.
I enjoyed the April issue. I do think it is stretching some of the articles to include them in "Railroading's 7 Greatest Myths and Legends" though. Track 61, Al Capone going to the pokey by train, or the RMS Titanic's (a subject that has filled many volumes with myth and legend itself) connection to railroading (I knew about the two executives, but didn't know of the architect) have never been on my radar for a list of railroad legends or myths. Excellent articles, but there are other subjects more worthy for such a list. Possibly some of those were not used because they have been featured before in the pages of Trains.
Jeff
Newtonian physics includes gravity so why worry if the boiler or any other kind of HP precludes the 106 mph. we had locomotives that it was said couldn't overspeed if they were run off of a cliff.
I set many an SP Coast Div clocks at 9:00 AM but never compared the elapsed time between points on our reporting, OS reports I mean, as evidence.
Consider that an ancient device: a mechanical stop-watch carried between the definig locations if accurateley manipulated......
The "stops" for the watch also generated problems....say between mile posts. After the Mojave-Colton By-Pass was completeded, everyone knew the mileposts signs were set by a crew driving the M of W paths, trails roads along side the new main.
I went home on Santa Fe's Grand Canyon Limited and some where on an Illinois winter afternoon in a few miles saw 32 to 35 second miles based on my ability to gage the passage of the mile posts and their accurate location.
/
henry6 Timing is everything. What TRAINS was trying to do with this issue is deal with the great legends and stories from railroading through the times, back to a time when railroading was glitz, glamour, and romance of the rails ruled. Can you believe these stories? Well, do you want to? Railroading....and life...was not a binery or digital world of absolute bits and bytes but what a colorful and imaginary concoction of words and mind images created by words and deeds. It was as much fun as it was serious, but never dour. It was, well, a different time. As for the stories being true or not...read them again in Trains, search through history books and old magazines for the same stories as told in a different era...then decide for yourself what you want to believe and enjoy.
Timing is everything. What TRAINS was trying to do with this issue is deal with the great legends and stories from railroading through the times, back to a time when railroading was glitz, glamour, and romance of the rails ruled. Can you believe these stories? Well, do you want to? Railroading....and life...was not a binery or digital world of absolute bits and bytes but what a colorful and imaginary concoction of words and mind images created by words and deeds. It was as much fun as it was serious, but never dour. It was, well, a different time. As for the stories being true or not...read them again in Trains, search through history books and old magazines for the same stories as told in a different era...then decide for yourself what you want to believe and enjoy.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Well done sir!
Stand by boys, ol' Firelock's gonna throw some gasoline on the fire! In 1900 the Plant System (later acquired by the Atlantic Coast Line) was bidding against the Seaboard for a mail contract. Eight cars of mail were divided between the two roads at Savannah, the first to get their four cars to Jacksonville Florida would get the contract. Plant Systems #111, a 4-6-0, took over the Plant train at Fleming, Ga., and from Jesup to Jacksonville by way of Waycross, 115.9 miles, did the run in 90 minutes or at 77.3 mph. Between Screven and Satilla the time was 2 minutes and 30 seconds or 120 mph.
Plant System never claimed a speed record though. The mail contract was good enough.
I think "Death Valley" Scotty's generating a lot more controversy than he deserves. Cool character though!
BucyrusI do not see any reason to suspend this discussion until such time that Mr. Hankey can prove his debunking.
jpwoodruff .My suggestion would be to suspend this discussion until that data areavailable.
.My suggestion would be to suspend this discussion until that data areavailable.
And what fun would that be?....
jpwoodruff The abilities of the locomotive arethe only thing that will limit the speed, and that needs to bemeasured.My suggestion would be to suspend this discussion until that data areavailable.
The abilities of the locomotive arethe only thing that will limit the speed, and that needs to bemeasured.My suggestion would be to suspend this discussion until that data areavailable.
I do not see any reason to suspend this discussion until such time that Mr. Hankey can prove his debunking. By definition of debunk, he has already claimed to have proven it. This discussion is not to prove the AT&SF claim true. It is only to prove that Mr. Hankey has not proven it to be false. If anything should be suspended (or retracted), I think it should be Mr. Hankey’s assertion that he has debunked the AT&SF claim. There is no evidence that he has.
I'd like to stand with that proposition. Mr Hankey relies (ref above in this thread) on conversation with BillWithun, who is preparing a book for publication. That book has thedata BW needed to analyse two earlier claims (1893 & 1905). I thinkHankey and Withun extrapolate to the Scott train.As far as physics, if the engine will produce enough heat energy thenthe train will accelerate until the drag forces balance that energy.So Newton won't limit the speed. The abilities of the locomotive arethe only thing that will limit the speed, and that needs to bemeasured.My suggestion would be to suspend this discussion until that data areavailable.
timz,
So, if I understand you, Mr. Hankey has not refuted, disproved, or debunked the AT&SF 106.1 mph speed claim by the analytical use of science, mathematics, mechanical engineering, or thermodynamics.
BucyrusMr. Hankey claimed that the speed record was impossible because it would be a “pretty basic violation of Newtonian physics.” Surely we have some math wizards here who can confirm or deny Mr. Hankey’s claim.
BucyrusIf it is a “pretty basic violation,” as Mr. Hankey says, it ought to be pretty easy to run the numbers. Why do you say there is no way we can put the matter to rest?
In his discussion, do you see any numbers to "run", easily or hardly?
(Neither does anyone else.)
timz Bucyrus: ...we can move on to Hankey’s thermodynamic argument. As I recall there was no thermodynamics in his discussion. Bucyrus: After working our way through the Newtonian physics, we'll be able to put this matter to rest once and for all. He mentioned the term, but don't think any actual physics appeared in his discussion either. Even if it did, no way we can put any matter to rest, for all or for part.
Bucyrus:
...we can move on to Hankey’s thermodynamic argument.
Bucyrus: After working our way through the Newtonian physics, we'll be able to put this matter to rest once and for all.
Mr. Hankey claimed that the speed record was impossible because it would be a “pretty basic violation of Newtonian physics.” Surely we have some math wizards here who can confirm or deny Mr. Hankey’s claim. If it is a “pretty basic violation,” as Mr. Hankey says, it ought to be pretty easy to run the numbers. Why do you say there is no way we can put the matter to rest?
refutation
henry6 BaltACD: I think it is all based on the theory 'If you shout a lie loud enough and long enough some people begin to think it's the truth'. Seems to work in politics from time to time. henry6: tmz must look these things up for himself...we all have given him sources and noted variations of era, railroad, etc. Why do people here ask questions or pose problems and then refute the answers when they think we're wrong? Which is based on theory? The actual printed, taught, enforeced rules and rule books or peopl's refutation of the given answers they requested?
BaltACD: I think it is all based on the theory 'If you shout a lie loud enough and long enough some people begin to think it's the truth'. Seems to work in politics from time to time. henry6: tmz must look these things up for himself...we all have given him sources and noted variations of era, railroad, etc. Why do people here ask questions or pose problems and then refute the answers when they think we're wrong?
I think it is all based on the theory 'If you shout a lie loud enough and long enough some people begin to think it's the truth'. Seems to work in politics from time to time.
henry6: tmz must look these things up for himself...we all have given him sources and noted variations of era, railroad, etc. Why do people here ask questions or pose problems and then refute the answers when they think we're wrong?
tmz must look these things up for himself...we all have given him sources and noted variations of era, railroad, etc. Why do people here ask questions or pose problems and then refute the answers when they think we're wrong?
Which is based on theory? The actual printed, taught, enforeced rules and rule books or peopl's refutation of the given answers they requested?
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BucyrusWell, once we get this timing issue nailed down...
Bucyrus...we can move on to Hankey’s thermodynamic argument.
BucyrusAfter working our way through the Newtonian physics, we'll be able to put this matter to rest once and for all.
Bucyrus timz: henry6: All clocks and watches were set to the second at noon EST everyday. They weren't, of course. Which of the six stipulations in Henry's statement are you refuting?
timz: henry6: All clocks and watches were set to the second at noon EST everyday. They weren't, of course.
henry6: All clocks and watches were set to the second at noon EST everyday.
Which of the six stipulations in Henry's statement are you refuting?
We've all seen pics of those SFe mercury-pendulum standard clocks with the signs "This Clock Is _ Seconds Slow/Fast". Obvious question: how far off were they allowed to be? Don't see any rule about that in my SFe books (which only go back to 1953).
CSSHEGEWISCH My college major was History, not one of the Sciences, and after completing Hankey's article, I observed that the Scott Special was publicized in a time where stretching the truth or inventing facts was tolerated much more than it is now. It may well have been expected by the public. Also keep in mind that the term "muckraker" was originally intended as a pejorative. Many of the "facts" of the Scott Special may not have been created out of thin air but the truth was probably stretched pretty badly in the process. As mentioned above, they can't be proved but they can't be disproved, either. Any speed claims from that run need to be taken with a grain of salt. At any rate, the Scott Special was an outstanding performance by the Santa Fe from both labor and management, and can be appreciated as such even if some of the claims can be discounted.
My college major was History, not one of the Sciences, and after completing Hankey's article, I observed that the Scott Special was publicized in a time where stretching the truth or inventing facts was tolerated much more than it is now. It may well have been expected by the public. Also keep in mind that the term "muckraker" was originally intended as a pejorative. Many of the "facts" of the Scott Special may not have been created out of thin air but the truth was probably stretched pretty badly in the process. As mentioned above, they can't be proved but they can't be disproved, either. Any speed claims from that run need to be taken with a grain of salt. At any rate, the Scott Special was an outstanding performance by the Santa Fe from both labor and management, and can be appreciated as such even if some of the claims can be discounted.
So true, Paul. Scotty may have paid Sante Fe to run the train but the PR department har more to do with the run than the operating department in cewrtain respects. There actually was no mass advertsing medium or media at the time, no coast to coast radio, tv, internet, no USA Today and few magazines which could be timely in circulation and with a large enough literate audience. Even the likes of Playboy would have failed for lack of photograpic reproduction. So, in order to get attention, a major stunt had to be invented which would be deemed newsworthy enough for the rags to pass onto their readers, and these were pretty much parochial. After the news release, was the reporters embellishment often fed by his own search for noteriety and money or by the PR agents pushing him.
BaltACD I think it is all based on the theory 'If you shout a lie loud enough and long enough some people begin to think it's the truth'. Seems to work in politics from time to time. henry6: tmz must look these things up for himself...we all have given him sources and noted variations of era, railroad, etc. Why do people here ask questions or pose problems and then refute the answers when they think we're wrong?
I think we will be sidetracked to discussion of the Gregorian calendar and the demise of the Wagner sleeping car first.
henry6 tmz must look these things up for himself...we all have given him sources and noted variations of era, railroad, etc. Why do people here ask questions or pose problems and then refute the answers when they think we're wrong?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.