A couple of logging operations questions

Garden Railroading
1

In a typical logging operation where a narrow gauge locomotive (shay, etc.) was used, where was the locomotive positioned? Was it at the tail end if the rolling stock was being pushed up hill? Was it at the front if they were heading downhill? Should the locomotive be on the “downhill” side so that the risk of uncoupling and a runaway logging car was minimized?

Were these types of locomotives equally proficient running forward or backward?

Just wondering if there were some rules of the road to follow.

Joe

2

Joe:

Let me answer your “middle” question first. Mechanically speaking, a steam engine has no preference on which way it is pointed. Steam power efficiency is totally independent of direction of travel.

In my limited experience, all the old logging trains I have seen used a “link and pin” coupling system as opposed to a knuckle type coupling. This dramatically reduced to chance of cars becoming uncoupled. Parts would have to break first. Now, weather the engine was “uphill” or “downhill” depended mostly on the arrangement of equipment for loading and unloading the cars. How far did the track extend beyond the loading boom? In the five I visited one had to run “uphill” of the consist as there was plenty of room in the loading area and limited space on the off loading pier. That was a timber trestle bridge with only one end, logs were rolled of into a pond. The other four were exactly the opposite, space was limited up in the loading area, but the track continued on beyond the logging pond for connections with distant locations.

The question I will ask you is: How much track do you plan on laying beyond the loading boom and will your line reach out to the world of commerce or is it a simple short point to point operation? You answer my question to yourself and you will have the answer to your question.

3

Great feedback! Thanks. I haven’t configured my logging operations yet, so your info will really help.

Joe

4

On lines where the grades were steep, the locomotive would always be on the downhill side, this was to prevent breaking couplers and creating runaway log cars.

Geared locos run the same forward or backwards

5

Hi Joe,

An EXCELLENT book for you to look for is Kalmbach’s “The Modeler’s Guide to Logging Railroads”

Printed in 2008, 77 pages, Many Great photos, and a Lot of information, MSRP $18.95 item# 12423. Written by Matt Coleman.

If running disconnects, they were almost NEVER pushed, and with skeleton cars, pushing was limited as much as practical, especially after air brakes and knuckle couplers were adopted. According to this book, “The Larger California Narrow Gauge logging lines were all air-brake users relatively early” pg 41.

On lines with steep grades, which were common to logging lines, the locomotives would be oriented FACING uphill, to keep the firebox crownsheet covered with water.

Steam Locomotives in mechanicaly, run equally well forward or reverse. Many logging Rod locomotives had trailing wheels under the cab/firebox more for better tracking in reverse, than for weight carry reasons, as many logging lines had no provision for turning at one or either end of the line, it was common for locomotives to run as many miles in reverse, as they did forwards.

On the West Coast in particular, later in the logging era, it was common to have a “Main Line” built to better standards on lines with longer runs, that would use rod locomotives for the long haul, and use temporary “Branchlines” to reach cutting areas. These branchlines were typically laid quickly, with minimal roadbed preperation, and sharp curves and steep grades. these braches were typically used for one or two cutting seasons, and when the viable timber was removed, pulled up and relaid in new areas to reach new timber. Geared locomotives were commonly used on these branches. While Heislers were known to be “A Bit Faster” than the Shays, and some Climax locomotives had a two speed gearbox, none of the geared locomotives were what would be considered Fast machines by any stretch of the imagination.

Doug