Were the two engines of the George H. Emerson coupled by an internal crank system similar to the French steam experiments? Or were they independent like the Pennsy T-1? The T-1 was noted for being very slippery, especially when starting on wet rail. The French solved that by connecting the two engines. Hank
Fitz - it's been a LONG time, but as I recall, the water tube firebox, rather than having a crown sheet and staybolts had an arrangement of tubes that looked like a backbone and ribs. There was a large (maybe 1 ft. diameter) horizontal tube at the apex, with U shaped curved vertical tubes connected to it. It was more efficient at generating steam than a conventional firebox, but the combination of heat and vibration caused maintenance nightmares. As engineers of many disciplines have discovered, the railroad is a difficult and unforgiving environment.
Gregg, thanks. It sounds like a worse maintenance nightmare than the staybolts. How was it structurally attached? Everyone on this thread interested in articulateds might want to go take a look at the New York Central forum. I borrowed a picture from a man named David Stephenson who has put together what he thinks the NY Central would have built to pull a 100 car freight, had steam continued to develop. It's beautiful. Topic is "What might have been."
How about a few more. The 4-12-2 is for Watash since he likes them new looking. The 4-8-4 I put in because of the unusual smoke clear device along the top of the boiler. The 2-8-8-2 is here just to prove that UP had them. [ 01 July 2001: Message edited by: bnsf4354 ]
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alan: Regarding water-tube boilers, weren't they widely used in ships?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes, they were, and still are used on most fossil-fueled steam powered ships. Current technology allows for more than 50,000 shaft horsepower to be generated by one ship's boiler. Also most fossil-fueled steam electric power plants use water-tube boilers. Some of these boilers can generate super-heated steam in excess of 1200 PSI at more than 1200 degrees, which translates to nearly 1,000,000 horsepower Water-tube boilers are very critical and somewhat delicate, but both ships and power plants are normally stable environments. As Gregg said earlier, if these boilers were on locomotives, they would become a maintenance nightmare in a few minutes due to vibration and shock. Hank
bnsf, is that 4-8-4 a UP engine? No. 818 would fit in their number scheme. Back on page 3 of this forum I posted one of 814 or 815 with a similar skyline fairing on top. Maybe they were experimenting with stuff, before they decided to go with the elephant ears?
The articulated looks like a "Bull Moose" 2-8-8-0 to me, rather than a 2-8-8-2, and the FEF has s shield number plate, so it's got to be a UP, Interesting pictures. If you think about it, the B&O KK-1 was really the precursor of the 2-6-6-4's used by N&W, SAL, and P&WV (the SAL's ended up on B&O), the Allegheny of C&O, and the Challengers, as it was the first relatively large drivered six axle simple articulated.
Ok guys, Heres one that i'd love to model in HO! It would be a real attension getter!!!!!! A B&O 2-6-8-0. Home made by the B&O at Mt. Clare!!! Just different I guess, but still interesting how it worked being it had 2 different types of tration engines beds on it with different wheel arrangements.....
Yes the 4-8-4 is a UP engine. They experimented with some different arrangements before they settled on the elephant ear approach. Fitz: it does appear to be the same arrangement as your photo now that I look at it more clearly. The articulated is a 2-8-8-2 that UP used on sherman hill for a while, but they were too slow and were replace by the challengers and big boys. They were moved to slow freight and coal draggging from what I have read. I read somewhere that UP sold as many as it could, but saved a few for emergency motive power for the HILL! [ 02 July 2001: Message edited by: bnsf4354 ]
Here we go guys!!!!! 3 B&O EM-1's all coupled together and at work... Count 'em 3 of the biggest B&O's steamers all on the front and exerting their 115,000 pounds of tractive effort together that measures up to 345,000 pounds of tractive effort!!!!! WOW!!!!
OK all, a bunch of photos to enjoy over the holiday. There are a few of the ATSF articulated boiler engines, a articulated camel-back, an EM1 in BW and one in color?,and a WM challenger. [ 03 July 2001: Message edited by: bnsf4354 ]
Here are a couple of drawings showing the water-tube boiler arrangement on Sir Nigel Gresley's experimental locomotive for the London and North Eastern railway. It was nicknamed the "Hush-Hush" due to it's very quiet running. The drawings are cross sections.
Here are a few more---mainly NP 4-6-6-4s, 2-8-8-2s, and NP 2-8-8-2s. [ 06 July 2001: Message edited by: bnsf4354 ]
BNSF, I love that picture of the Articulated Camelback!!!!!!! That give those engines personality I think! And to boot.. It's Articulated! I love it. Anymore of those articulated Camelbacks???? I know of a few B&O Camelbacks.. I'll post!
heres one of the B&O Camelbacks.. A, 0-6-0 switcher....... And another B&O Camelback.... A 2-8-0...... [ 07 July 2001: Message edited by: 7600EM_1 ]
Have we come to the end of the line on this post? Seems like most people have quit posting things. If so, I won't continue to dig up stuff to post here. Maybe we should consider a non-articulated steam thread---what do you think?
