Re: RGS #42
| February 04, 2020 02:13AM |
|
Jeff Taylor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Herb, others. 315 is the only C-18 that has a
> 160psi boiler pressure, all others ran 145psi.
> This makes a large difference in tractive effort.
>
> As I have said in the past, I think the C-19s are
> under rated in the time tables. I also believe the
> reason is a result of short main rods. When you
> work a C-19(or a C-16)close to tonnage they start
> rocking pretty bad. This can effect adhesion, crew
> comfort, and puts strain on the the frame and
> running gear. If de-rated this is minimized.
>
> Some day I would love to have contest between 315
> and 346 to prove my theory.
A contest between those two would certainly be fun!
I had heard the longer main rod argument before, more on account of ride comfort rather than pulling power. Interestingly, several of the 70 Class (C-19's) were equipped with long third-driver connected main rods after they were converted back from standard gauge engines (5 of the 70 Class were converted to SG 2-8-0s in 1888 and converted back in c1899). "New" 401 and 402 (the original 402 and 411, respectively), had long main rods connecting to the third driver when rebuilt. and have shown up in photos. Ferrell's book on the early days of the D&RG has a nice side shot of the 401 at Chama by Jukes showing this conversion.
By the time the RGS bought the 402 and made her No. 40 in 1916 she had the short mains again so the experiment apparently failed.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/04/2020 02:17AM by Herb Kelsey.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Herb, others. 315 is the only C-18 that has a
> 160psi boiler pressure, all others ran 145psi.
> This makes a large difference in tractive effort.
>
> As I have said in the past, I think the C-19s are
> under rated in the time tables. I also believe the
> reason is a result of short main rods. When you
> work a C-19(or a C-16)close to tonnage they start
> rocking pretty bad. This can effect adhesion, crew
> comfort, and puts strain on the the frame and
> running gear. If de-rated this is minimized.
>
> Some day I would love to have contest between 315
> and 346 to prove my theory.
A contest between those two would certainly be fun!
I had heard the longer main rod argument before, more on account of ride comfort rather than pulling power. Interestingly, several of the 70 Class (C-19's) were equipped with long third-driver connected main rods after they were converted back from standard gauge engines (5 of the 70 Class were converted to SG 2-8-0s in 1888 and converted back in c1899). "New" 401 and 402 (the original 402 and 411, respectively), had long main rods connecting to the third driver when rebuilt. and have shown up in photos. Ferrell's book on the early days of the D&RG has a nice side shot of the 401 at Chama by Jukes showing this conversion.
By the time the RGS bought the 402 and made her No. 40 in 1916 she had the short mains again so the experiment apparently failed.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/04/2020 02:17AM by Herb Kelsey.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
488 stops for water at Los Pinos tank on closing day Oct. 1979. Photo courtesy Don Richter
The NGDF was started by Don Richter and is currently operated in his memory by Nathan Holmes and others. Others who have contributed to the upkeep of this board are (in no particular order): Charles McCandless, Everett Lueck, Ted Wilton, Cole Adams, James Bane, John Moellmer, Jon Bentz, Linn Moedinger, lloyd lehrer, Rod Jensen, John Craft, Steven Forney, Herb Kelsey, Bill Ramaley, Russ Sperry (El Russo Loco), Josh McNeal, John West, Jim Armstrong, Bob Bergstrom, Greg Scholl, Blake Forbes Doug van Veelen and Mark Fuller.