Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Re: The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

May 01, 2003 03:02PM
Well, on the 463...I hope it runs again, a broken main rod is very bad, can easily, by todays standards put a good running engine out of service for good.
I know that would probably be the case for the 100 year old krauss engine at the Zoo here in Omaha. Although the gear is not walscherts, it is called Helmholts, Helmholts is made so that it is easy to machine or, if needed, make new side rods for the locomotive. Although helmholts is the same motion of walscherts, it still is unique. The only difference with helmholts is that when the gear is at the bottom of the link, the crank pin is leaning towards the back of the engine instead of toward the cylinders, can that be called indirect gear?
The 463 is one of if not my favorite engine on the C&TS today. I also like the 497 very much. If I run there, well, when I run there, if the 497 and the 463 aren't running I am going to work very hard to get them back to operating condition.
The 463 is so neat in one way because it has to work harder to get up the grade so then it barks louder!! I am very big into noise, im all about noise!! The Krauss 0-6-2t barks pretty good for its size. Its 30" gauge and is also very powerful!! It walks 8 cars up a 6% grade!! Of course that after building up some momentum. I ran the thing the other day, about 5 times!! I found that if I slowed it down enough and then hit the throttle right before the S curve and knock the gear down a notch or two that the exhaust is very loud!!
Sorry for getting off the subject of the 463 and the mudhens. If anyone has any questions about the Krauss Austrian Narrow Gauge 0-6-2t named Riva, go ahead and ask, im rarely asked questions about steam, im always doing the asking!
Kevin Bush
Subject Author Posted

The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

Matt Hutson April 30, 2003 03:45PM

And The Two Remaining Are Out Of Service *NM*

MudDuck April 30, 2003 04:13PM

Yes, That's a Bummer, BUT....

Herb Kelsey April 30, 2003 04:30PM

Re: Yes, That's a Bummer, BUT....

Marty Knox April 30, 2003 05:16PM

Re: Yes, That's a Bummer, BUT....

Herb Kelsey April 30, 2003 10:45PM

Re: Yes, That's a Bummer, BUT....

Herb Kelsey April 30, 2003 10:45PM

Superheater? Re: Yes, That's a Bummer, BUT....

Tom Stewart May 02, 2003 03:22PM

Re: Superheater? Re: Yes, That's a Bummer, BUT....

Marty Knox May 02, 2003 06:26PM

Re: Superheater? Re: Yes, That's a Bummer, BUT....

Jorge Gigante May 04, 2003 10:03AM

Re: The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

Kevin Bush May 01, 2003 03:02PM

New Main Rods--Opportunity in disguise *LINK*

Erik Ledbetter May 02, 2003 06:15AM

Re: New Main Rods--Opportunity in disguise

Kevin Bush May 02, 2003 03:47PM

Re: New Main Rods--Opportunity in disguise

Gavin Hamilton May 03, 2003 01:10PM

Re: not the main rod

John Craft May 02, 2003 08:04AM

Re: not the main rod

Kevin Bush May 02, 2003 03:40PM

Re: not the main rod

Gavin Hamilton May 03, 2003 01:08PM

Re: not the main rod

Trevor Hartford May 06, 2003 03:22PM

Re: not the main rod

Kevin Bush May 06, 2003 05:09PM

Re: The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

Jim Adams May 06, 2003 06:59PM

Re: The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

Kevin Bush May 06, 2003 07:36PM

Re: The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

Jim Adams May 06, 2003 09:42PM

Re: The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

Kevin Bush May 07, 2003 06:12AM

Re: The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

Jim Adams May 07, 2003 08:36AM

Re: The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

Kevin Bush May 08, 2003 07:16AM

Re: The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

Jim Adams May 08, 2003 08:34AM

Re: The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

Glenn Butcher May 09, 2003 12:29AM

Re: The Mudhens - 100 years ago today

Kevin Bush May 09, 2003 05:45AM



Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.