Earl,
Interesting that you took exception to the magazine article. Difficult to argue those points given that persons background. I can put myself in your place very easily.
But it has gotten to the point where a few years back, I sent a letter to and later (last year at CRRM 50th) had a somewhat indepth discussion with that same individual. Very interesting. And while I understood where he was heading, when asked directly about train handling, it was maintained that the WB was the only form of brake used.
Now I have a great deal of respect for that individual, he has a indepth engineering knowledge base to draw from, but there was not an answer to the question about factor of adhesion. After all, if one locomotive can't haul a train up hill, how could it hold one going down hill?
I couldn't hold a 12000 ton coal train on 1% grade with 5 SD-40s.
I have much difficulty believing that is possible for a single steam locomotive on head end of a tonnage freight, NG or SG, for the WB to hold a train in motion, at allowable speed on 3% or 4% decending grade. Sorry.
I do believe that using the WB in conjunction with the train air would allow for not having to go into them as deep as when not using the WB. And further more, if properly used, it could reduce the heated brake shoe & wheel conditions to a point where there could be little or no smoke from the oil baking off the wheel plates. Some of the article pictures on the east side of Solder Summit seemingly indicate that. But then, what was the train makeup? Mostly MTYs with only a few loads? That would brake differently from a full tonnage train.
Generally, one should remember that tonnages in those days were no where near the amount run today. Many trains filled to (somewhat standard) tonnage & car lengths to be able to run trains efficiently. Meaning that enginemen had their spots to be able to successfully handle trains whether on the head end or on rear end helpers (pushers). Even with a pole line an counting cars, one could "get lost". (There is more to this paragraph obviously that could be said.)
Anyway, not that I want to belittle that one individual as he certainly believes in what he preaches and has a right to his opinion. But this kid would not want to try taking a tonnage train down a 3% or 4% hill with just the WB of one engine, even an articulated. If is doable, someone please show me. Oh yes, and live to tell about it.
Seriously, if we're all missing something, OK. But I would like some first hand real experience before trying that bit of braking.
Still a skeptic after all these years,
Chris
As a side note, there were large trains doubled together and run E.B. off Cumbres. And what about out of Gunn to Sargent, and then doubled to M.Pass. Did they double everything together at the top of M.Pass to run into SAL? Was trying to remember some of the Jimmy B.s dispatchers sheet remarks on that. I would bet there were retainers used, and if the WB was available, maybe that too! However, I don't believe this was a normal practice on the SG, at least in most cases. For the NG however, it served a purpose.
ca
