The NEW and IMPROVED Question Thread (with Index and Page Links)

[Murphy Siding]

Did all E units have steam boilers? If a railroad had A-B-A e-units MU'd together, were all 3 steam boilers used at the same time?

[Anonymous]

I found some more info on Fire Training Trains. [:)]


http://www.traingod.railfan.net/fire.html


This is not the Dupont Training Train but another such train.

[SALfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by chad thomas

Mike, One of my best steam pictures I ever took was of the 3985 in Gerlach,Nv. opening the "cylinder cocks" wide open after sitting for a water refill. The steam sprayed out over 100' feet on either side of her. I remember thinking to myself..Man that could really [censored] someone up good if they were standing near that. Although out there they really let it loose where the only thing in danger is sagebrush (the state tree I think [(-D]). Unfortunately it is a print so I can't post it.

In the 1960's World War II movie "The Train", which starred Burt Lancaster, there was a scene where a French engineer did exactly that to a squad of German soldiers. Can't remember what happened to the engineer in the movie, but if done in real life he probably would have been shot.

[CShaveRR]

Quite often those old maps will show projections of rail lines, a "promotion" of their intention by either the city or the railroads themselves.

I have a book here, Chicago: Growth of a Metropolis, by Harold M. Mayer and Richard C. Wade, which states:

"In 1850 only one railroad, the Galena and Chicago Union, entered the city. Two years later four more lines were in operation, two connecting with the East, one with the South, and another with the West."

The one connecting with the south is a no-brainer--IC. The other one connecting with the west could be either the Rock Island or the predecessor of the Alton (Or, it might be the Aurora Branch railroad which, for the time being, used G&CU tracks east of Turner Junction). The two from the east are the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern and the Michigan Central. The caption on an 1851 MC timetable (which shows the line going as far west as Michigan City, with steamer connections between New Buffalo and Chicago) suggests that the MC arrived in Chicago the following year.

The book also tells about the battle at Grand Crossing, where the IC had to lay its tracks across the route of the LS&MS under cover of darkness after overpowering their guards. Since the MC and IC had parallel routes into Chicago at this point ("point" meaning location, not necessarily time), it seems likely that LS&MS was the first in from the east, in either 1851 or 1852.

I think we'll have to have the experts on the specific railroads named (NYC, RI, IC, Alton, CB&Q) come up with the precise dates when their predecessors hit the city.

[Murphy Siding]

On the "Today in railroad history" thread, something came up that you Chicago railfans should be able to answer. I posted something that said 1854 was when Chicago was connected to eastern cities by rail. Nanaimo73 found a map dating from 1850 that appears to show several lines into Chicago. When did Chicago link up with the east coast by rail, and what railroad was it. Thanks

[CShaveRR]

If I remember correctly, the controls for the old Locotrol were completely independent of the controls in the lead cab--it was impossible to just tell the slaves to do what the Master was doing. So the engineer was always--very literally--attempting to operate two sets of power.

[chad thomas]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH

What is the difference between Distributed Power as operated currently by UP, BNSF and other roads and mid-train slaves as operated in the 1960's and 1970's by Southern, ATSF and others?

I'll take a crack at this.

The old remote controll was not that reliable, or flexable as todays distributed power. The electronics and controll equiptment in the day of locotrol and locotrol-2 were cumbersome and not very reliable especially in mountain territory where the signal would be lost and the remote units would loose contact. This was especialy a problem where tunnels were involved. Plus in those days you had masters and slaves and each had it's own equiptment for it's use. The remote units typicaly had a longer short hood due to the extra controll gear and were nicknamed snoots (SP 83xx, UP 33xx,ect.). So for a locotrol remote you had to have a master unit for the head end consist and a remote for the helper consist. Not very flexable.

DPU is a setup that is more integraded with the cab electronics and the software of the locomotive. A DPU unit can be a master or a slave depending on the need. You can also have multiple helper consists with DPU which you could not do with locotrol (at least not independant controll). The communications and signal frequency / modulation schemes are also much improved these days and signal loss between DPU is much less of a problem. So reliability and flexability is much improved with the modern DPU.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

What is the difference between Distributed Power as operated currently by UP, BNSF and other roads and mid-train slaves as operated in the 1960's and 1970's by Southern, ATSF and others?

[CShaveRR]

OK--the photo is of DUPX 912, a three-unit set. The one I described is the 911, which only has the tank car and caboose. Just found out that DuPont also has a "913" set, that is probably identical to the one pictured there.

That "Massachusetts Call/Volunteer Firefighters Association" stuff isn't actually owned by CSX, nor is it restricted to their lines, as we've had those cars in our yard as well. Reporting marks are MCVX. Cars I've seen include several tank cars of different types, a former Conrail insulated box car, and a caboose that may have Illinois Central origins.

[tree68]

CSX has a similar "train," including the boxcar/classroom. there is lettering somewhere on it for a Massachussetts firefighters association.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by UPTRAIN

Yeah, that tank training train. I've seen UP's car. http://uptrain.rrpicturearchives.net/rsPicture.aspx?id=5946

I found this photo elsewhere. [;)]

The caboose I saw was like this one, not a bay window. So there are probally more than one training train. [:)]

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=81877

[UPTRAIN]

Yeah, that tank training train. I've seen UP's car. http://uptrain.rrpicturearchives.net/rsPicture.aspx?id=5946

[CShaveRR]

Short answer: mobile classroom.

When I saw these cars, there was only the tank car and the caboose--no box car.

Tank car has a door in one end, and five manways or valves along the top, each one of a different variety. It carries number 911A (That's 911 as in the emergency number).

Caboose is 911B. It's a bay-window car, built in 7/75. Lots of cabooses immediately pre-EOT had the side windows plated over rather than replacing the panes with the FRA-required safety glass. Inside? Don't know, but I suspect it could be set up as a classroom. Or maybe that's the function of the box car now. But you get the general idea. These cars are for instruction of local emergency-response personnel.

Lots of other companies (BP, Chevron, Rohm and Haas, even UP) have tank cars set up similarly to this one for demonstration/instruction purposes. Many of them are even numbered 911.

[Anonymous]

I have a sighting and a question. [:0] [8D]

The other day I was waiting for a train to pass and noticed several railcars painted for Dupont. It seems like one was a tank car and one was a boxcar. (I think there was at least one more car but not sure.) There were two odd things about them. One was, I noticed a sign on them that said something about responsibility which at the time struck me as odd. Then the last car paint in the Dupont scheme turned out to be a caboose. [:0] [:p] [:)] All the windows had been covered and it looked like the rear door was padlocked. That leads me to believe that it was unoccupied. Now my question is this--what would be in a caboose that a boxcar wouldn't carry? Of course, people comes to mind first. But like I said, I believe at least one door was padlocked and all the windows were blanked. I would think that would not make for a very pleasant ride or a safe one either.

At the time I was pretty busy and didn't have much time to think about it. Now I wish I would have called Zach and had him be on the look out for it. Then he could have gotten some photos and shared them with us. I didn't notice the caboose until it was too late to try and capture a photo of it. [:(!] [:(] [B)] [8] [V]

Has anybody ever seen this caboose or one like it? ? ? [?] [?] [?]

Anyone know what it might contain ? ? ? [?] [?] [?]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes

G B

I have not seen the others as yet. They could have come through before I saw this one or after. Perhaps they have not come byt all, I just don't know.

Thank you again. You can see all the 6 locos on RailPictures by searching "Israel". Some of them have very interesting histories, serving the Egyptian Railways before coming to Israel as spoils of war.

[Anonymous]

G B

I have not seen the others as yet. They could have come through before I saw this one or after. Perhaps they have not come byt all, I just don't know.

[Anonymous]

stop

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by UPTRAIN

Jim spied this in North Little Rock UP Yard today, he wanted to know what it was. After some research by me, I know for sure it is an Israel Railways unit, I'm thinking G12, maybe a G16. Jim said it was 4 axle, but they sometimes switch trucks out en route. It's heading from Houston, Texas to Mount Vernon, IL, National Railway Equipment Company. It is loaded on flatcar OTTX 97030. Maybe somebody can confirm what model it is.

Thank you!! This is great news. As an Israeli railfan I was looking for this loco for four months now, since it was shipped to the U.S.A. with five G12 engines.
Photos from Ashdod port, just before departure from Israel were published (by a friend railfan) in Railpictures.net.
See it here: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=117295
being lifted to the ship.

Have you spotted the G12's by any chance?

[Anonymous]

the g8 is loco no. 251 from israel.
we got $20000 for it.
we took it from Sinai on 12.06.1967.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by UPTRAIN

Jim spied this in North Little Rock UP Yard today, he wanted to know what it was. After some research by me, I know for sure it is an Israel Railways unit, I'm thinking G12, maybe a G16. Jim said it was 4 axle, but they sometimes switch trucks out en route. It's heading from Houston, Texas to Mount Vernon, IL, National Railway Equipment Company. It is loaded on flatcar OTTX 97030. Maybe somebody can confirm what model it is.

[img.nr]http://www.pbrail.org/Jimpix/eurounit.JPG[/img.nr]

[chad thomas]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rgroeling

Thanks, Chad, thats a great sight, added to my favorites![^]

Did you poke around the site? There are some great things in there like great explainations of signaling,air brakes,drawbar forces,fuel consumption,ect... and the photo essays are great. One of my favorites is the story of the time he got to run SP&S 700 in Montana check that one out:

http://krugtales.50megs.com/rrpictale/steam700/steam700a.htm

[Anonymous]

Thanks, Chad, thats a great sight, added to my favorites![^]

[chad thomas]

Hey Chris, Check out this site:

http://krugtales.50megs.com/rrpictale/SDP40F/SDP40Fa.htm

[Anonymous]

Okay, maybe some of the forum memebrs that are/ were railroad employees can answer this.

Well, I am 14 years old, and as a big time foamer, my favorite locomotives are F45s. My question is, is there anyone here that has ridden in/operated an F45? What are they like?

Thanks [:)]

[CShaveRR]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox
Have flange lubricators been used on tangent track to impove fuel consumption?

Probably not intentionally. The way to go would be with something that provided a more consistent lubrication over longer stretches, such as locomotive-mounted systems. I saw a locomotive recently (CSX, maybe, or UP--didn't pay attention) that was equipped with brackets for applying lubricant in stick form to the wheels, but it was empty.

I haven't heard that much about wheel/rail lubrication lately. I think benefits were proven, but there may have been a downside that outweighed the advantages.

[bobwilcox]

QUOTE: Originally posted by mudchicken

Flange Lubricator (proper term)

Wheel plunger mechanically lets out the grease along the blades.

Usage determines maintenance/ refill schedule for the 5 gallons of grease in the pot. (Most grease now comes in a plastic sack that gets dropped in the holding pot - 30+% of the flange lubricant now used is not petroleum based)

Lubricators are quite common. Placed wherever rail wear/tonnage is a problem.

Even though train crews hate 'em, you GOTTA have them. There is a science to properly applying the grease beads in the proper amount.

Got "goop gage"? [:D]

Have flange lubricators been used on tangent track to impove fuel consumption?

[Anonymous]

What's the Difference between ABS and CTC?

[chad thomas]

Mike, One of my best steam pictures I ever took was of the 3985 in Gerlach,Nv. opening the "cylinder cocks" wide open after sitting for a water refill. The steam sprayed out over 100' feet on either side of her. I remember thinking to myself..Man that could really [censored] someone up good if they were standing near that. Although out there they really let it loose where the only thing in danger is sagebrush (the state tree I think [(-D]). Unfortunately it is a print so I can't post it.

[techguy57]

Thanks Chad![:D] That makes sense to me. If anyone cares to expand on that or knows where I might find a good diagram please let me know.

These questions were posed to me by my grandfather who grew up in Lewis, IN on the Milwaukee Road Terre Haute to Bedford line. My great grandfather was a blacksmith who I beleive worked for the NYC in Terre Haute. Several of my great-uncles worked for the railroads in Terre Haute as well, many of them as their first jobs or their first jobs back after WWII. Of course I can't get enough of their stories about the railroads. They have also been a great source of information on my for-fun research of the ammunition train accident that happened in Lewis in the 1950's.

As for the steam from the side valves, that makes sense too. My grandfather had said that he and his brothers had often walked the rails and the trains would often release steam out of the sides as they went by (of course I don't advocate this ever, but this was during the 1930's and 40's, a different time). I guessed that it was a operational procedure that also was a bit amusing for the crews[}:)][:D] Sounds like there is some truth to that.

Thanks again.

Mike

[chad thomas]

I'm no steam expert either but I think I can answer.

Steam from the driving cylinders is exhausted into the smokebox to help draft air through from the cumbustion chamber. With each cylinders exhaust valve opening there is a coresponding "CHUF". As this blast of steam shoots out the stack it draws air (smoke) from the combustion chamber with it, in essence stoking the fire with vacume from the smokebox.

Steam is released from the cylinders after they have sat for any period of time because water will condense in the cylinder. If they tried to move with water in the cylinder things would break as water does not compress.