Hey, enjoy the trip and good hunting!
Firelock, thanks for that. I am going to the U.K. next month and in central London there's a lot of used bookstores. By the way, in the London Science Museum is the Supermarine S6-B floatplane, the precursor to the Spitfire. Also, Alcock and Brown's Vickers Vimy.
54light, in case you're interested I got my information on the Sopwith Triplane from a book published in 1995 by Motorbooks International called "Wind In The Wires" by Mike Vines, originally published in Britain by Airlife Publishing.
It's an aviation picture book of vintage operational aircraft starting with the Bleriot XI and ending with the Spitfire. Collections highlighted are the Old Rheinbeck Aerodrome, the Shuttleworth Collection, the French air museum at La Ferte Alais, and others. What's in there will amaze you.
The books's out of print now but it's one to keep an eye out for if you cruise used bookshops. Grab it if you see it, you won't be sorry.
Good Lord, it just dawned on me, I've had that book 20 years already! WHERE does the time go?
Dr D,
As usual, you are "spot on" with your commentary.
Common sense isn't as common as it used to be, are you listening Elkhart?
M636C I don't believe that anyone could now cast a Niagara nor a T1 frame anywhere in the world. They were all made in a single plant that doesn't do it any more. I understand that the S1 frame was the longest one piece casting ever made anywhere (remember that an S1 was as big as a Big Boy but rigid with half the number of driving wheels).
I seem to recall a minor news item about the latest USN carriers using a large casting (~400 tons) for the rudder control assembly. This looked to be a much simpler casting than for a steam locomotive frame. My recollection was that BLH was involved with the manufacture of propellers for an earlier generation of carriers.
- Erik
How was a Niagara "More sophisticated" than a QJ?
Roller bearings throughout? Much better "build quality" (see Wardale's Red Devil and Other Tales of the Age of Steam)? Stable at high speeds vs very bad ride at 50 km/hr?
Other than that, the QJ represented the pinnacle of (Russian) design with a large superheater and arguably better thermal efficiency than the Niagara, especially taking into account the poor quality of the coal they were using in China.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
CSSHEGEWISCH I would hardly call it "being stuck with a welded frame". As pointed out by M636C in the above post and by EMC with its first switchers, a welded frame is just as strong as a cast frame.
I would hardly call it "being stuck with a welded frame". As pointed out by M636C in the above post and by EMC with its first switchers, a welded frame is just as strong as a cast frame.
Weren't the first EMD switchers built on cast frames? That's the "C" in SC;correct?
Of course EMD ultimately found the welded frame to be just as good structurally and superior from a manufacturing process point-of-view..
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
Dr D Seems the British Toranado 4-6-2 reproduction started with the easy to manufacture parts "as a whim" and then got serious about the project having to commit to boiler courses - frame and cylinder castings. A couple of more observations here. The British steam locomotive was no where near as massive as the American steam locomotive. It was a relatively simple and effective engine! The Brits used flat steel plates for their locomotive frames with bolted or rivited cross construction. Where as late American practice as I noted was large steal castings then machined as one construction. The British reproduction new boiler courses were rolled in Eastern Europe - Poland being the only place they could find that could still handle rolling steel sections of that size. I have often thought it would be easier to go to China with an American blueprint and have the existing Chinese machine shops foundries etc. cast and assemble most of a reproduction American locomotive and then scrounge the parts from spares needed to finish it. The Chinese, however, have never even considered making as sophisitcated a steam locomoitive as a NYC Niagara or Pennsy TI - this is way beyond any of the technology China or the British ever attempted. Dr. D
Seems the British Toranado 4-6-2 reproduction started with the easy to manufacture parts "as a whim" and then got serious about the project having to commit to boiler courses - frame and cylinder castings.
A couple of more observations here. The British steam locomotive was no where near as massive as the American steam locomotive. It was a relatively simple and effective engine! The Brits used flat steel plates for their locomotive frames with bolted or rivited cross construction. Where as late American practice as I noted was large steal castings then machined as one construction.
The British reproduction new boiler courses were rolled in Eastern Europe - Poland being the only place they could find that could still handle rolling steel sections of that size.
I have often thought it would be easier to go to China with an American blueprint and have the existing Chinese machine shops foundries etc. cast and assemble most of a reproduction American locomotive and then scrounge the parts from spares needed to finish it.
The Chinese, however, have never even considered making as sophisitcated a steam locomoitive as a NYC Niagara or Pennsy TI - this is way beyond any of the technology China or the British ever attempted.
Dr. D
Fascinating stuff, Firelock! I recall reading in one of my old man's aviation magazines that a man built a new Boeing F4-B4, a biplane carrier borne fighter from about 1934. Boeing gave it a serial number in continuation with the series that was long out of production. I love when people do this sort of thing.
In Britain, the Tornado locomotive has a serial number in continuity with the A1 Pacific series that was out of production as well. Great stuff! I've been to the Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome and the aircraft there are considered authentic.
Per Dr. D's comment...
It's been a maxim for years with those who restore antique aircraft, particularly the World War One vintage 'craft, that as long as SOME of the airplane is original, maybe a fuselage rib, maybe the engine, maybe only the builders plate, it makes no difference how much of the plane's been replaced as long as it's built the same way as the original was.
There IS one exception I can think of...
When the Shuttleworth Collections Sopwith Triplane was built during the years 1973 to 1990 believe it or not Sir Tommy Sopwith was still alive (!) and enthusiastically involved in the project. He declared it an ORIGINAL Sopwith Triplane, Number 153 to be exact. Number 152 left the production line in 1917!
A late production model, to be sure, but still an original!
Wizlish 54light15 Also, wasn't 999 used to set a bicycle speed record in the 1890s where the rider was in an enclosure at the rear of the coach, riding on polished wood between the rails? If I remember correctly, that record was on the LIRR (where the NYC didn't run). I know there was at least one detailed description of the rolling stock used; I will see if I can find it, but anyone is welcome to comment in the meantime. EDIT: Google "Mile-a-Minute Murphy".
54light15 Also, wasn't 999 used to set a bicycle speed record in the 1890s where the rider was in an enclosure at the rear of the coach, riding on polished wood between the rails?
If I remember correctly, that record was on the LIRR (where the NYC didn't run). I know there was at least one detailed description of the rolling stock used; I will see if I can find it, but anyone is welcome to comment in the meantime.
EDIT: Google "Mile-a-Minute Murphy".
It is quite interesting. It seems to have written by an Englishman, since it speaks of the engine driver, who opened the regulator.
Mr. Murphy was certainly tenacious, keeping on even with dust and dirt being thrown up into his face.
Johnny
LensCapOn 54light15 There is a famous person who came up with this idea. His son was named Popeye. Where is a link to verify THAT story? Google and Bing have failed me...
54light15 There is a famous person who came up with this idea. His son was named Popeye.
There is a famous person who came up with this idea. His son was named Popeye.
Where is a link to verify THAT story?
Google and Bing have failed me...
A link, you say? Here is the link!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popeye_the_Sailor_filmography_%28Fleischer_Studios%29
54light15 The head is the bow of the ship, notice a framework on most sailing ships of that era. You clung to the framework, undid those 13 buttons and... In the days of Spanish galleons and the like, to have a wave wash onto the hull at the stern from directly aft was called being pooped. Notice that a galleon has a raised stern area, that is called the poop deck that by being raised, helps to prevent the ship from being forced downward by the pressure of the water. There is a famous person who came up with this idea. His son was named Popeye.
The head is the bow of the ship, notice a framework on most sailing ships of that era. You clung to the framework, undid those 13 buttons and...
In the days of Spanish galleons and the like, to have a wave wash onto the hull at the stern from directly aft was called being pooped. Notice that a galleon has a raised stern area, that is called the poop deck that by being raised, helps to prevent the ship from being forced downward by the pressure of the water. There is a famous person who came up with this idea. His son was named Popeye.
"La Poupe" is French for "The Stern" (from the earlier Latin word Puppis), and was anglicized as "poop"...in this case referring to the decking over the aft-most cabin(s) of a sailing vessel as you describe.
Interestingly, in French usage Poupe can also refer to the "stern"(posterior) of a person so perhaps that's where the bodily function related definition of the word was derived from...
54light15 Firelock, I had not thought about sanitation. Just going to the "head" wouldn't be the thing in the 21st century.
Firelock, I had not thought about sanitation. Just going to the "head" wouldn't be the thing in the 21st century.
Not that I know much about sailing....
Firelock, I had not thought about sanitation. Just going to the "head" wouldn't be the thing in the 21st century. About the Coast Guard, I recall in the US Navy in the 70s a Coast Guard guy came up to me on the base at Norfolk to ask about my car, an old Nash. He said how the Coast Guard had a sort of a rivalry with the Navy. I didn't have the heart to tell him that we didn't think about the Coast Guard at all.
In Britain, you can get a brand new body for an MGB and an E-type Jaguar and others I am sure. If you have a rusty body, you can move the chassis plate from one to the other and legally it's the same car. People do it here too, a guy on Ebay was selling a fragment of a body of a 69 Camaro SS 396. It had been junked after a wreck in 1970. He made it plain that it was only for the chassis plate, the car was beyond restoring and there was nothing left of it but the plate. But, you can put that plate on a non-SS body and presto! You have an original Chevy Camaro SS 396! He got thousands for it as I recall. A metal rectangle with numbers stamped on it but there you go.
This question about "how much is original" is a legal issue, and one that has been appraoched and discussed in court for years. Starting with Loyds of London the insurance company. Legally no matter how many times the "SS Jane" is rebuilt is is still legally the "SS Jane."
The "SS Jane" can be entirely rebuilt out of itself and it is the legal and titled property of the owner. Take this situation for example - a totally rotton Chris Craft speedboat was found from the 1920s - grey wood suitable only for patterns. This was hauled to a boat builder in Marine City MI. The boat was used for patterns for two new constructions which were then "reproductions of 1924 Chris Craft."
I talked to the boat builder who smiled and said, "They didn't want what was left of the original so I kept it and rebuilt it. They paid me $xx,xxxx to do two boats but I acquired the original 1924 and redid it - I GOT THE ORIGINAL - THEY GOT THE REPRODUCTIONS!"
This was all a legal and if not somewhat of a moral quagmire that has been settled by "due process of law" over the years. The two new speedboats above were titled as new construction the original speedboat rebuilt was titled as a 1924 boat. Even though all three were sporting new wood! Go figure!
The "USS Constitution" or for that matter the recently rebuilt "Charles Morgan" the last whaling ship from before the civil war 1847 - which was recently rebuilt and is sailing out of Mystic Conn - sailing the ocean. These are the legal ships of their name no matter the age or stage of rebuilding.
"Charles W Morgan" last of the old whalers was used in the 1960's movie MOBY DICK on her last summer voyage out to the Grand Banks encountered whales which came around and played around the same hull that slaughtered their great great great grand parents over 100 years ago! Check last months Wooden Boat Magazine.
NYC 999 however new is still the NYC 999 - needs the polished frame, gold pinstriping and a set of larger drive wheels. Also what happened to the original number boards? The ones on the locomotive now are not the ones that were on her when she was stored outside on display at The Museum of Science and Industry. Are the orginals locked up for safekeeping, misplaced? The replacements are tacky.
Words to watch in this type of discussion - "original" - "reproduction" - "repair" - "replacement."
Doc
It's my understanding USS Constitution is about 60% original. The same applies to Admiral Nelson's flagship HMS Victory.
As far as sailing "Old Ironsides", here's a story I heard from a Coast Guard officer years ago.
During the Bicentennial when the US Navy heard about OpSail, the parade of "Tall Ships" planned for New York harbor, someone got the idea "Hey! Why don't we sail 'Old Ironsides' during OpSail?" Everyone was ecstatic about the idea until they realised in 1976 there was no-one in the Navy who was sail qualified.
Enter the Coast Guard. "Hey guys, WE'RE sail qualified! We've got the "Eagle", remember? We'll sail her for you!"
"No thanks", said the Navy. They weren't going to let a Coast Guard crew handle their ship!
Realistically though, "Constitution" is still an 18th Century ship with no modern sanitary facilities. Sailing her up and down the east coast with the main deck loaded with a cargo of Porta-Johns would be undignified, to say the least.
54light15Also, wasn't 999 used to set a bicycle speed record in the 1890s where the rider was in an enclosure at the rear of the coach, riding on polished wood between the rails?
The old "grandfather's axe" thing again. Speaking of boats, I've heard that the U.S.S. Constitution has only 10% of it's original timber. I wish they'd sail that thing around, they did in the 1930s' I think all up and down the east coast.
Also, wasn't 999 used to set a bicycle speed record in the 1890s where the rider was in an enclosure at the rear of the coach, riding on polished wood between the rails?
This question regarding whether a restored steam engine is the actual article or whether this even really matters is known as the question of "Theseus' Boat" or the "Ship of Theseus" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus
Who was Theseus? He was this legendary person of Athens back when the Minoan tyrant was demanding "tributes" -- a real-life version of those Jennifer Lawrence movies. And Theseus was the Jennifer Lawrence heroic person in these events that supposedly took place 4000 years ago. A lot of the account has the cast of mythology about it, but the account is that Theseus kicked Minoan backside and brought back the young people who were to be sacrificed to the Minoan gods back to Athens.
This was regarded as a kind of founding experience of Athens, and Athenian Greeks had that boat on public display for so long that all the boards in it had to be replaced at least once, that some Greek philosopher dudes who worried about such things wondered if it was really Theseus' boat anymore.
I guess "modern" philosphers having time on their hands worry about this question. And like ancient Greeks and modern academics, it appears to steam locomotive enthusiasts lose sleep over whether Engine 999 at the Museum of Science and Industry is "the same thing" as the locomotive that broke the century mark but locomotive enthusiasts in England snark was an unproven claim.
CSSHEGEWISCH NYC&HR 999 still exists and is on display at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago.
NYC&HR 999 still exists and is on display at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago.
That rebuilt engine has nothing to do with the Old 999.
By the time they were done rebuilding it, only the number was left. A RP20BD has more in common with the Dash-7 it was built on the then the existing 999 has with the engine William Buchanan built.
Which is why a new version sounds like fun. (And would be less than a T-1 to build)
Just did a search and see things have changed since leaving Chicago.
"in 1962, the Museum of Science and Industry acquired the 999 and displayed it outside. Following a complete restoration from June to October 1993, the 999 was brought inside to its present location in November 1993."
Question is, is the rebuilt one a steamer or just a looker?
NYC&HR 999 still exists and is on display at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago. However, the 86" drivers are long gone. The locomotive was rebuilt twice by NYC in the early 1920's to make it a more usable locomotive.
T-!? Meh!
Now talk about doing NYC&HR #999 and I might be willing to kick in some $$$
Wonder if CSX would grant some track time on the old route to let her rip.
Aber naturlich, meine Freund!
Es lebe dampf! Es lebe Deutschland!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.