 |
Re: Outside frame steam engines.... Why?
Author: HUTCH 7.62
Date: 02-16-2018 - 08:21
Kevin Madore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> synonymouse Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Sorry, forgot about the gila monster. But the
> > modern WP&Y locomotives were inside frame
> clearly
> > by management choice. Perhaps they did not
> care
> > too much about the outside frame K-28 470's the
> > Rio Grande gave up to them during the war.
> IIRC
> > the Rio Grande did not want them back either
> and
> > they were shipped to Seattle to scrap. And of
> > course there were the inside frame WPB design
> > locomotives which were originally supposed to
> be
> > meter gauge for Iran that ended up in Alaska at
> > the same time. Did not one of those go to No.
> > Carolina?
>
> I think it is important to note that there was a
> significant gap in time between the acquisitions
> of the outside frame, 60-class engines and the
> arrival of the MacArthurs and 70-class engines, so
> there could indeed have been a change in power
> strategy. I don't have any way to know this,
> because all of the folks I talked to up in Skagway
> joined the railroad long after that happened. I
> know that the present-day crews definitely prefer
> the 73 to the 69, but the reasons they cite have
> nothing to do with the frames. The 69 is no
> longer superheated, so it needs water support at
> Glacier. The 73 can make it all the way to Fraser
> on one tank. The 69 also has poor ergonomics.
> She has a deckless cab, so the Engineer and
> Fireman sit astride the boiler and cannot see each
> other, which is pretty important on an oil-fired
> engine. Also, the Fireman cannot see his fire,
> other than a glow reflecting off the oil tank.
> The Fireman on 69 can often been seen craning his
> neck to look at his stack, because there's no
> other easy way to tell if he has the fuel-air
> mixture adjusted correctly. I am pretty certain
> that the railroad would like another 70-class
> back, but as of right now, there are none
> available.
>
> I believe that the other engine class you
> mentioned were the Class S118 MacArthurs, an
> inside-frame, 2-8-2 design, that I believe came
> from the military. Yes, the Tweetsie Railroad in
> NC does still have one. There is another active
> MacArthur at the Dollywood amusement park in TN.
> The folks at White Pass indicated that the
> railroad was not particularly impressed with the
> performance of those on the hill and in fact there
> is one in Skagway that the railroad has no
> interest in restoring.
>
> WPY 195
>
> /Kevin Madore
Thats a big looking steam engine.
-------------------------------------------------------
> synonymouse Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Sorry, forgot about the gila monster. But the
> > modern WP&Y locomotives were inside frame
> clearly
> > by management choice. Perhaps they did not
> care
> > too much about the outside frame K-28 470's the
> > Rio Grande gave up to them during the war.
> IIRC
> > the Rio Grande did not want them back either
> and
> > they were shipped to Seattle to scrap. And of
> > course there were the inside frame WPB design
> > locomotives which were originally supposed to
> be
> > meter gauge for Iran that ended up in Alaska at
> > the same time. Did not one of those go to No.
> > Carolina?
>
> I think it is important to note that there was a
> significant gap in time between the acquisitions
> of the outside frame, 60-class engines and the
> arrival of the MacArthurs and 70-class engines, so
> there could indeed have been a change in power
> strategy. I don't have any way to know this,
> because all of the folks I talked to up in Skagway
> joined the railroad long after that happened. I
> know that the present-day crews definitely prefer
> the 73 to the 69, but the reasons they cite have
> nothing to do with the frames. The 69 is no
> longer superheated, so it needs water support at
> Glacier. The 73 can make it all the way to Fraser
> on one tank. The 69 also has poor ergonomics.
> She has a deckless cab, so the Engineer and
> Fireman sit astride the boiler and cannot see each
> other, which is pretty important on an oil-fired
> engine. Also, the Fireman cannot see his fire,
> other than a glow reflecting off the oil tank.
> The Fireman on 69 can often been seen craning his
> neck to look at his stack, because there's no
> other easy way to tell if he has the fuel-air
> mixture adjusted correctly. I am pretty certain
> that the railroad would like another 70-class
> back, but as of right now, there are none
> available.
>
> I believe that the other engine class you
> mentioned were the Class S118 MacArthurs, an
> inside-frame, 2-8-2 design, that I believe came
> from the military. Yes, the Tweetsie Railroad in
> NC does still have one. There is another active
> MacArthur at the Dollywood amusement park in TN.
> The folks at White Pass indicated that the
> railroad was not particularly impressed with the
> performance of those on the hill and in fact there
> is one in Skagway that the railroad has no
> interest in restoring.
>
> WPY 195
>
> /Kevin Madore
Thats a big looking steam engine.
