Do they both operate on the same side of the cab?
British engine drivers operate from the left side of the cab while American engineers operate from the right side.
Never paid much attention - with the CNW adhering to the British left hand running - were their locomotives - both steam and diesel (at least in the 30’s, 40’s and early 50’s set up with the engineer on the left hand side of the cab?
It is my understand the C&NW left-hand running originated when a second track was laid to the south of the original track–so that people waiting to board did not have to cross the tracks to board. Thus there is no connection with the British practice.
Take it from an old C&NW person–Johnny’s explanation of C&NW’s left-handedness is correct. And I can vouch for the fact that some of the diesel locomotives built in the 1950s and even the late 1940s were built with cabs on the right side.
So CNW built stations ONLY on the North Side of their E-W lines?
Yes, particularly in lines used by commuters to/from Chicago. Having the station facing south - with the platform on the south side of the building - gave the waiting passengers some sun / light / heat during the cold Midwest winters. Better than having to wait in the shadows.
When the second track was added, it was decided to be safer to run the trains going towards Chicago on the track nearest the station. People were anxious to get on, in a hurry, and if they had had to cross the other main to get on the train, they might have not been paying attention and been more vulnerable to a train coming from Chicago. In the afternoon, people weren’t in a hurry, and were more likely to be mindful of other trains and look both ways before crossing the tracks.
p.s. although several railroads (C&NW, DM&IR) ran left-handed, all had the engineer on the right side like other railroad did. BTW, CNW’s subsidiary company the Omaha (Chicago Minneapolis St.Paul & Omaha Ry) ran on the right side on their lines, so a “CNW” train from the Twin Cities to Omaha ran ri
Drivers (proper engineers design locomotives, not drive them) typically sit or stand on the left side of the footplate. A few railroads did design locomotives with the driver’s position on the right side of the footplate. However, with the groupings in the 1920s, it was determined that the proper position for the driver was on the left side, as most railways in the United Kingdom arranged their locomotives so that the driver was on that side. Due to economics, some of the right hand drive locomotives were not converted to left hand drive. This required the crew to be extra attentive to their duties, as all signals were placed to be observed from the left side of the footplate. There were several accidents and many near misses on account of drivers mistaking another signal for their own or missing signals due to the fact that they were on a right hand drive locomotive.
It should also be noted that the preferred term for the place where the driver and fireman stand is footplate, not cab. The reason is that many steam locomotives were built without any form of enclosure to protect the driver and fireman in inclement weather. Cabs started to appear on UK locomotives in the late 19th century but were not common until the 20th century.
As for running direction, lines were designated UP and DOWN. UP lines headed to London and DOWN lines headed from London.
As to directions, if you go from London to Oxford, you go up to Oxford. However, we have to be very careful in discussing elevations lest we get into the matter of why a lower berth was higher than an upper berth.
You may go up from London to Oxford, but you do so on a down train running on the down line, and return to London on the up line.
I would usually go from Paddington.
Peter
I had heard that the CNW was designed by British engineers, and this is the reason for the left hand running. Is there any truth to this notion?
The version I heard … which for some reason I associate with Freeman Hubbard if anyone wants to delve into fact-checking … was that the Vanderbilt clan that was involved with financing it in the double-tracking years was enamored of some aspect of British practice. Probably in the same kind of way Leonor Loree could be with locomotive practice. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything indicating that British engineering was involved, but if you have a source by all means provide it; I for one would find this interesting.
Did you get this off GPS Z-axis data? Because it sure doesn’t represent how the British handle their ‘up’ and ‘down’ railroad conventions. It is NOT that London is physically lower, and it is NOT that most of England and all of Scotland are “up north” of London on a typical Mercator projection map.
I learned it as ‘you go up to London because it’s more important’. The actual sense behind the convention might, of course, be different from this. But remember that UP is toward London and DOWN away from it. (At least that’s the way I now understand it.)
Another thing is, besides left hand drive on locomotives and right hand drive on cars that drive on the left hand side of the road, people in Britain tend to walk on the left, say through the passageways on the London Tube and so forth whereas we in North America tend to walk on the right. But, don’t they also have LHD locomotives in France?
No, I was considering the expression used of students at Oxford–they go up to Oxford, just as anyone, no matter the transportaion, goes up to London.
I don’t remember where I heard it. I don’t have a source.
That was the story I had heard - its origin I have no idea.
Nope.
The story probably started because many 19th century US railroads, like many US businesses at the time, had investors in Britain. But the investors didn’t decide how the railroads were built. Keep in mind Canadian Pacific and Canadian National, who one would think would be heavily influenced by the British, both use right-hand running.
I think it depends on context - Oxford the school vs. Oxford the city. If you were in Paddington station - London and someone asked where you were going, you would say you were going ‘down to Oxford on the Great Western’. If someone asked you where you planning on going to university, you might say you were going ‘up to Oxford’.
[quote user=“wjstix”]
Yes, the context determines the meaning, just as it does if you said that the upper berth is lower than the lower because it is higher.
Deggesty
Overmod
Deggesty
As to directions, if you go from London to Oxford, you go up to Oxford.Did you get this off GPS Z-axis data? Because it sure doesn’t represent how the British handle their ‘up’ and ‘down’ railroad conventions. It is NOT that London is physically lower, and it is NOT that most of England and all of Scotland are “up north” of London on a typical Mercator projection map.
I learned it as ‘you go up to London because it’s more important’. The actual sense behind the convention might, of course, be different from this. But remember that UP is toward London and DOWN away from it. (At least that’s the way I now understand it.)
No, I was considering the expression used of students at Oxford–they go up to Oxford, just as anyone, no matter the transportaion, goes up to London.
I think it depends on context - Oxford the school vs. Oxford the city. If you were in Paddington station - London and someone asked where you