Electroliner 1935Did the N&W J's have overfire air injectors for smoke reduction.
To my knowledge, the Js never had guns; I don't think they were even tested. As passenger power there was probably minimal 'idle time' or part-load operation immediately after hard firing that would produce excessive smoke. I will have to defer to Big Jim or feltonhill (Dave Stephenson) to see what is in the NWHS collection regarding overfire systems.
Note that in order to fit these, there are normally fairly large ports through both water legs in which the actual nozzles (either steam or air) are centered. The visible large 'hats' are mufflers, to damp down what can be an incredible detuned banshee wail when the jets are on. Basically what these do is to entrain a fairly large mass of secondary air and (so went the theory) propel it across the firebed to ensure late combustion of any propagated soot. (In practice you'd see chaotic disruption of any smooth flow of combustion gas generated from primary air, but hey! there would be relatively little visible smoke ... I don't know about quenched levitated fuel particles, though.
I'm given to understand that the 2-6-6-2 at Frostburg is being restored with her overfire system in place, so there's at least the promise of some real-world observations of how the things work in practice.
Did the N&W J's have overfire air injectors for smoke reduction. I seem to remember that they had something like that to meet some strict smoke requirements in their Clare yards in Mariemont OH.
Reference: https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-sz-001&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=sz&p=steam+locomotive+over+firing+injectors#id=0&vid=1063b359febb0439712493e0a6374f94&action=click
blue streak 1Look at the smoke from 610 and compare it to N&W 611. It makes one wonder how much fuel was being saved by 611 compared to 610. Of course it may be that firemen on 610 had a difficult time eliminating smoke ?
MUCH more likely that the firemen on 610 had a relatively easy time smokin' it up for the foamlets, as was almost SOP for photo runbys in that era.
One of the great advantages of Woodard's initial Super-Power design (of which the T&P engines are a simple enlargement) was the adoption of larger grate area with lots of free primary air to make ample combustion gas without approaching the grate limit or wasting carbon. I think only later was the importance of radiant heat uptake in steam generation fully appreciated... but the consequences for running smoke reduction were there from the beginning.
Look at the soke from 610 and compare it to N&W 611.It makes one wonder how much fuel was being saved by 611 compared to 610. Of course it may be that firemen on 610 had a difficult time eliminating smoke ?
Quality of coal of course is a factor and was 610 using coal quality it is designed for maximum efficient operation ?,
For De luxe #610 did yeoman duty in Mr. Claytor's Steam Excursions in their first iteration of Southern Rwy's 1960's-70's Steam Excursion Tours:
Here are #4501 and #610 on an excursion between Birmingham and Chattanooga in the '70's
tomstamey's replies to the last two posts appear to be missing. Please fix this as he is a premier poster in this thread.
BaltACD What was the reason a 2nd Sand Dome was added to so many engines? The class I-1d engines came with a 2nd sand dome and a larger main sand dome. The extra domes added to engines to increase sand capacity which helped increase tonnage allowed.
What was the reason a 2nd Sand Dome was added to so many engines? The class I-1d engines came with a 2nd sand dome and a larger main sand dome. The extra domes added to engines to increase sand capacity which helped increase tonnage allowed.
Anonymous De Luxe Just imagine a Timken roller bearing and booster equipped 610 storming at 80 mph with a 20 car excursion train through the Texas plains! This Texan would surely proove to all those Northerns in the excursion biz that it is equal to them (if not superior)! Except boosters can't be used at high speed like that. They were only designed for use under about 15 mph or so, to give the train a little extra boost to get it started, or keep it from stalling on a grade. Boosters aren't really needed in excursion service anyways, probably why it was removed in the 70's, since it would have been a bigger maintenance headache than a help. The I-2's were equipped with high speed boosters and could be used up to 30 MPH. 610's booster was kidnapped by the fella that had CB&O 4-8-4 and GT 4-6-2. He wanted to use it on one of those. Suspect it wound up in a junk yard.
De Luxe Just imagine a Timken roller bearing and booster equipped 610 storming at 80 mph with a 20 car excursion train through the Texas plains! This Texan would surely proove to all those Northerns in the excursion biz that it is equal to them (if not superior)!
Just imagine a Timken roller bearing and booster equipped 610 storming at 80 mph with a 20 car excursion train through the Texas plains! This Texan would surely proove to all those Northerns in the excursion biz that it is equal to them (if not superior)!
Except boosters can't be used at high speed like that. They were only designed for use under about 15 mph or so, to give the train a little extra boost to get it started, or keep it from stalling on a grade. Boosters aren't really needed in excursion service anyways, probably why it was removed in the 70's, since it would have been a bigger maintenance headache than a help.
The I-2's were equipped with high speed boosters and could be used up to 30 MPH. 610's booster was kidnapped by the fella that had CB&O 4-8-4 and GT 4-6-2. He wanted to use it on one of those. Suspect it wound up in a junk yard.
There were higher speed boosters available. The rebuilt I-2 engines had them and they would run up 25-30 MPH before having to be cut out. The originals were limited to 15 mph.
Dick Jenson took the booster with him to Illinois. The doghouses were installed in the late 1930's starting in 1937 because of an ICC mandate the head brakeman had to have a seat enclosed from the weather. There was not room in the cab for a 3rd seat so T&P put doghouses on freight engines.
The longest run of passenger trains on the T&P was Texarkana to El Paso basically 4 of them (2 each direction) but in earlier days there were 3. New Orleans trains ran to Ft Worth. In the early 1960's they were combined in Marshall with Texarkana-Ft Worth trains.
Tom Stamey
Modifying the Lima truck is an effort in futility. It's shortcoming is that you could not back it through sharp switches as it would run forward through. The one cast frame and commonwealth trailing truck added to 9 engines cured that.
Two other reasons the booster was taken off: Money not available to rebuild it and we were running short on time to get the engine running for the Freedom Train.
Reason for 2nd sand dome being added is that runs west of Ft Worth needed the extra sand capacity due to two 9 and 13 mile long grades of 1.3% and another grade of 7 miles at the west end of Lancaster yard going up to Aledo.
657 is at Ft Worth engine terminal. The 2-10-2 is not waiting for a run. Its eccentric rod and headlight have been removed and given to another engine. This engine is retired.
De Luxe PHOTOS FROM THE 30s: 637 652 657 An unknown one speeding through Texas.
PHOTOS FROM THE 30s:
637
652
657
An unknown one speeding through Texas.
What was the reason a 2nd Sand Dome was added to so many engines?
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
S. ConnorExcept boosters can't be used at high speed like that. They were only designed for use under about 15 mph or so, to give the train a little extra boost to get it started, or keep it from stalling on a grade.
Later boosters were good for higher speed, but weren't too 'useful' at speed due to rising steam consumption. (The higher speed meant they didn't have to be thrown out of gear as early.) On the other hand, they could be invaluable in starting a consist, especially one with congealed plain bearings - think of them as an additional coupled axle's worth of TE at starting. And the device could be very useful in reducing the time needed to accelerate a train (in the lower speed ranges) with a 2-cylinder steam locomotive -- that is one of the reasons NYC used them on the J1 Hudsons.
The Lewty booster was, if I recall correctly, specifically designed to be useful at higher speeds; it certainly can if transmission speed gearing is used.
Boosters aren't really needed in excursion service anyways, probably why it was removed in the 70's, since it would have been a bigger maintenance headache than a help.
Not needed with a 2-10-4 this size on a 20-car excursion in relatively flat country, no. If you don't need the operating advantages, it will certainly be cheaper to leave it off...
kgbw49 Okay, the heck with the T1 Trust - everything's bigger in Texas and we need to do an I2 Trust - rebuild the 610 with the one-piece cast frame and cylinders, Delta trailing truck and Boxpok drivers. No slipping on those drivers! And for excursion service no need to take it up to 80 mph - 50-60 mph will be just fine. Name it the "Sam Houston" and designate it as Texas' official steam locomotive. Run occasional excursions on weekends on Trinity Railway Express and connections. Yes it is a big, big unit. But it's Texas!
Okay, the heck with the T1 Trust - everything's bigger in Texas and we need to do an I2 Trust - rebuild the 610 with the one-piece cast frame and cylinders, Delta trailing truck and Boxpok drivers. No slipping on those drivers! And for excursion service no need to take it up to 80 mph - 50-60 mph will be just fine. Name it the "Sam Houston" and designate it as Texas' official steam locomotive. Run occasional excursions on weekends on Trinity Railway Express and connections. Yes it is a big, big unit. But it's Texas!
Haha nice idea! If I had cash like Mr Trump I´d surely donate the needed amount to make 610 run again! But if you only wanna run it at 50-60 mph then there is really no need to rebuild it into an I-2. All 70 engines were upgraded for passenger service during 1937-1940 with rebalanced drivers and disc center drivers in order to not only run at a maximum speed of 70 mph but also to run very well and smooth at this speed (what they indeed did). But I forgot to mention: those nine I-2´s that were rebuilt for 80 mph operation featured Timken roller bearings on all locomotive and tender axles. I guess that would definetly be an advantage for excursion service!!! I wonder what happened to the booster of 610! When she was reactivated in the 70´s, she ran without her booster (as well as without a doghouse). Means "only" 84600 lbs of tractive effort instead of the original 97900 lbs with booster. Would be cool if the booster would be installed again (the doghouse is unimportant as these engines originally came without it anyway and ran without it until the mid-40s). Just imagine a Timken roller bearing and booster equipped 610 storming at 80 mph with a 20 car excursion train through the Texas plains! This Texan would surely proove to all those Northerns in the excursion biz that it is equal to them (if not superior)!
kgbw49 Great stuff, De Luxe! Those original wood pilots almost look "Polar-Express-sized". On the shot of 657, it must be moving along pretty well because the movement of the running gear is a bit blurred, connoting some speed there. And the last one going over the overpass - that is one photo done in the manner of O.Winston Line - really nice! I zoomed in as far as I could to 500% and it looks to be possibly 646 or 648, but not certain. Really great stuff! T&P definitely had photogenic classes of power.
Great stuff, De Luxe!
Those original wood pilots almost look "Polar-Express-sized".
On the shot of 657, it must be moving along pretty well because the movement of the running gear is a bit blurred, connoting some speed there.
And the last one going over the overpass - that is one photo done in the manner of O.Winston Line - really nice!
I zoomed in as far as I could to 500% and it looks to be possibly 646 or 648, but not certain.
Really great stuff!
T&P definitely had photogenic classes of power.
Yes I agree, T&P power was truly photogenic! I actually love those large "Polar-Express-sized" pilots. Always liked that "cowcatcher-style". I generally love big pilots, but not all of them: those massive oversized steel pilots used on CB&Q, MILW and the NP A4 Northerns are totally ugly. Actually I was surprised that the T&P 2-10-4´s came with wooden pilots originally. I didn´t think wooden pilots still were in use in the 20´s.
With the AFT in 1976 (color) Part 5:
kgbw49Okay, the heck with the T1 Trust - everything's bigger in Texas and we need to do an I2 Trust - rebuild the 610 with the one-piece cast frame and cylinders, Delta trailing truck and Boxpok drivers.
Why replace superior Baldwin disc with Boxpok? The only one needed is the main. All the work to make it run smoothly has been done already.
You won't get your cast frame made until the T1 Trust works out the suppliers and methods to fabricate it cost-effectively. (Or you could pay the Chinese to work their way up the learning curve for you, as the guys with the Hudson project reportedly found out...)
Likewise, who needs a whole new Delta truck (presumably with full rearward chassis extension and drawbar as part of the new cast frame) when a far better approach is to put proper lateral-motion control devices on the 'four corners' of the articulated trailing truck ... and perhaps put M942-compliant roller bearings in there. Looks better, too... there's likely going to be some compromise between where the axles of the Delta truck have to be for weight-bearing reasons, and where they (and the pivot) should go for proper Bissel curve following. (Note the hardened-roller kludge for lateral motion on the first trailing-truck axle in some of the 'improved' large Berks!) Why do all that work when articulation is better? (Well, better once you know what to do with it, at least better than Mr. Woodard did at the time...)
With the AFT in 1976 (color) Part 4:
With the AFT in 1976 (color) Part 3:
With the AFT in 1976 (b&w) Part 2:
With the AFT in 1976 (b&w) Part 1:
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.