I live in a microcosm of Colorado railroading history, Everywhere I go, I encounter the old grades and structures of the once proud working railroads that served and developed this part of the country.
Right here in Rockvale, we had 28 coal mines within just a few square miles, served by the Sante Fe and the CCI. In the alte 1800's the first oil trains were pulling out of Flornce of a regular basis. Midway between Canon City and Florence in the Phantom Canyon grade of the Florence and Cripple Creek RR, 22 miles with a ruling grade of 4% and a maximum grade of 6% at the Wilbur Loop. Florence and Canon City were served by both the Denver and Rio Grande and the Sante Fe railroads, each striving to take over the commerce and the lucrative route through the Royal Gorge to the mines beyond.
So here is the question that nags at me every time I drive around my area of Colorado.
The F&CC RR had to double head every consist of five cars(maximum) just to reach Cripple Creek, so why didn't the narrow gauge railroads, with their steep grades, turn to the geared locomotives that were available - the Heislers, Shays and Climaxes - that served the timber industries and others so well.
It wasn't speed, because the light rail and tight curves of the NG railroads limited speeds to around 20 - 25 mph, so...? :?:
"so why didn't the narrow gauge railroads, turn to the geared locomotives that were available - the Heislers, Shays and Climaxes - that served the timber industries and others so well."
I read this over several times, and a few
choice words came to mind.........then,
28 coal mines 
1. "Double head locomotives and they burn more
coal". . . and generate more profit for the mine owners, and less for the
railroad. (
This could be invalid if the mine owner's were also the railroad owners.)
2. Then there is, the Mark Twain quote, "
Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and, for the same reason".
3. And finally, If one locomotive could haul the train, instead of using two, that would put two people, (
an engineer, and a fireman ), out of work, and, more likely, having to be on welfare, at the government's
expense. :wait: :wait: :wait:
I'm not sure I can follow your reasoning. The F&CC RR needed to keep expenses down, so why double-head when single geared loco could do the job with greater facility? No unions back then, so no pressure to maintain jobs.
The coal mines were an interesting set up. They supplied everyone's needs from Cripple Creek and the mine steam engines to the home and business heating locally, but by far the biggest customer of all was CCI - Colorado Coal and Iron, later to become Colorado Fuel and Iron - and the insatiable steal mills and furnaces nearby in Pueblo, so much so the CCI ran it's own railroad.
Next down from that were the gold mining operations, stamping mills and refineries - the refineries were initially located in Florence at the terminus of the F&CC RR, and of course, the railroads themselves. Due to a severe shortage of decent trees in this part of the country, coal was the fuel of choice and Cripple Creek alone was home to eight railroads, all of whom had voracious appetites for fuel.
In fact, according to my reference histories, the expansion of the railroads throughout Colorado went from areas with coal mines to similar areas to facilitate obtaining fuel, and the entire Florence-Rockvale-Canon City area was a major hub from the very beginning, and while the mines were certainly interested in maximizing their sales, the railroads were not interested in maximizing their costs any more that they had to to remain operational.
But, as I said earlier, my area is merely a microcosm of the entire Narrow Gauge Circle servicing all of the mines and towns of Colorado, many of which were at the top of step, twisting climbs high up into the mountains. The Argentine RR, for example, ran the route through the Alpine Tunnel, and stiff climb to 11,400 feet just to pass under the Continental Divide and trains were routinely double-headed when they needn't have been. And so it was with the majority of the high mountain mining communities, all of which could benefited enormously from the more servicable geared locomotives.
The mines near Leadville were also over 11,000 feet, making that climb a stiff and costly one for the Baldwins and Consolidations of the day, and again, geared would have been the right answer to an easy problem: significantly greater hauling power up steep grades without the need for double-heading.
So the question remains: why weren't they used when by all standards of efficiency, profit and servicability they should have been?
MountainMan, I think that the answer may be found in the words Altitude and Capital Cost.
Firstly Altitude, from my reading of World War Two aircraft books, I know that 10,000 feet is generally considered the height at which aircrew in non-pressurized aircraft had to be fully using the oxygen supply to prevent anoxia [the lack of oxygen to the brain] thus impairing cognitive thinking. This height is also relevant to Internal Combustion Engines [i.e. propeller aircraft] as the performance of the engine and thus the aircraft falls off significantly using normal aspiration and the solution is to use single and then double stage superchargers to attempt to maintain performance levels.
Now a steam locomotive is an open combustion engine so the fire is drawing in oxygen from the surrounding air which is thinner than the air at sea level, so the fire does not perform as well along with the poor fireman tending the fire.
We also encounter a problem with the generation of steam at altitude called an Adiabatic or Isothermic reaction [not sure which at the moment writing this in a rush] whereby the lowering of air pressure also lowers the temperature at which water boils, which causes problems because the boiling water is not receiving enough heat to create the steam pressures we normally require for an operating steam locomotive. This phenomenon has been shown where we can boil some water at altitude yet not be able to cook potatoes, so the problem would be far greater for a steam locomotive[s] struggling on a steep grade with a heavy train. As we all know a successful fire requires all three sides of the equilateral triangle to work properly.
I think that this last point is the most likely explanation for the double heading question.
There is also the possibility of a geared locomotive having a greater capital cost than a standard narrow guage loco, which would be relevant to a start up railroad, but I dont think that issue is as important as an out of breath loco.
Mark
Gear locomotives wasn't made for fast running they was made for slow speeds over rough hastily laid temporary track that was built by the lumber company for hauling logs. Top speed was 10-15 mph downgrade and on level track or less going upgrade.
The reason the CCI double headed was due to the grade versus tonnage and pulling force of the CCI engines.
Uintah railway did
But they had track that was sharp and steep enough that over Baxter Pass, using a rod engine was almost impossible. I think the other NG lines in Colorado weren't steep enough to require geared locos, and since geared locos are slower and probably were more expensive, I would guess a railroad would probably not use geared locos unless they had to. I think RGS had one shay, that was also used on one of the Silverton lines.
Of course, my HOn3 fictional railroad has a shay
Mr Fixit Wrote:MountainMan, I think that the answer may be found in the words Altitude and Capital Cost.
Firstly Altitude, from my reading of World War Two aircraft books, I know that 10,000 feet is generally considered the height at which aircrew in non-pressurized aircraft had to be fully using the oxygen supply to prevent anoxia [the lack of oxygen to the brain] thus impairing cognitive thinking. This height is also relevant to Internal Combustion Engines [i.e. propeller aircraft] as the performance of the engine and thus the aircraft falls off significantly using normal aspiration and the solution is to use single and then double stage superchargers to attempt to maintain performance levels.
Now a steam locomotive is an open combustion engine so the fire is drawing in oxygen from the surrounding air which is thinner than the air at sea level, so the fire does not perform as well along with the poor fireman tending the fire.
We also encounter a problem with the generation of steam at altitude called an Adiabatic or Isothermic reaction [not sure which at the moment writing this in a rush] whereby the lowering of air pressure also lowers the temperature at which water boils, which causes problems because the boiling water is not receiving enough heat to create the steam pressures we normally require for an operating steam locomotive. This phenomenon has been shown where we can boil some water at altitude yet not be able to cook potatoes, so the problem would be far greater for a steam locomotive[s] struggling on a steep grade with a heavy train. As we all know a successful fire requires all three sides of the equilateral triangle to work properly.
I think that this last point is the most likely explanation for the double heading question.
There is also the possibility of a geared locomotive having a greater capital cost than a standard narrow guage loco, which would be relevant to a start up railroad, but I dont think that issue is as important as an out of breath loco.
Mark
Actually, 15,000 feet is the altitude at which people start needing oxygen. I've been to the top of Pikes Peak numerous times - 14,000 plus - and never had problems or needed oxygen, and people hike all the way to the top routinely.
Your point about the thermal dynamics involved is a good one, but merely points out the advantages of a geared locomotive, and is easily solved by keeping the steam under pressure, which loco boilers do quite well. The Alpine Tunnel locos did just fine at 11,400 feet working altitude, and the Climax Mine locos did just fine at Leadville, over 11,000 feet as well. BTW - the population of Leadville itself lives at over 11,000 feet. 8-)
Your point about the acquisition cost and maintenance issues might be reasonable, although a large number of shoestring, low budget lumber companies procured and used multiple geared locos.
The question remains unanswered.
MM,Recall 6-10% grades wasn't out of the question for lumber companies..Two geared locomotives may have been needed for extra braking on a steep grade.
nachoman Wrote:Uintah railway did But they had track that was sharp and steep enough that over Baxter Pass, using a rod engine was almost impossible. I think the other NG lines in Colorado weren't steep enough to require geared locos, and since geared locos are slower and probably were more expensive, I would guess a railroad would probably not use geared locos unless they had to. I think RGS had one shay, that was also used on one of the Silverton lines.
Of course, my HOn3 fictional railroad has a shay
Uintah actually used articulated Mallets.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=uintah+railroad+locomotives&qs=SC&sk=OS1SC1&FORM=QBILPG&pq=unitah%20railroad&sc=8-15&sp=3&qs=SC&sk=OS1SC1&adlt=strict">http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=uin ... dlt=strict</a><!-- m -->
As for grade, I'm not sure what "steep actually means, but a ruling grade of 4% and a maximum grade of 6% probably qualifies, especially if moving a few cars requires double heading.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=florence+and+cripple+creek+railroad+double+heading&view=detailv2&adlt=strict&id=EBEA5628777334DD90616E8062BCACF2BD455F86&selectedIndex=19&ccid=LaZ%2fKje9&simid=608049902705905539&thid=OIP.M2da67f2a37bd215eab8d22069b926ea4o0&ajaxhist=0">http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=flo ... ajaxhist=0</a><!-- m -->