In the fifties N&W bought some CO steam engines from C&O. When N&W took possesion they increased the hauling capacity of the former C&O tenders.
Question : What was the role that C&O used these tenders in that they did not need a lesser capacity ?
Thanks
YGW
I know N&W bought some nearly new 0-8-0s from the C&O and didn’t change the tenders since they was switchers.
Changing tenders wouldn’t alter the hauling capacity - i.e., how much the engine could pull - but using a larger tender would increase how far the engine could go without needing to stop for water and fuel.
I hope someone with more knowledge on C&O / N&W will give the definitive answer, but I assume the C&O used the engine in an area where there were ample water stops, so they didn’t to go as far as they did on the N&W.
Could also be the C&O engines were in an area with limited length turntables compared to the N&W. IIRC when the Soo Line bought their big 4-8-4s they decided it was more economical to buy them with shorter tenders than you’d normally expect. It was easier/cheaper to have make an extra water stop than to rebuild several turntables to fit the 4-8-4s with a big tender.
Brakie
Hey ! They kept the tender but they did alter the tender to increase the water and coal it could haul. When I read that I wondered " why did N&W increase the size and C&O didnt. Was it longer running days as switchers more intense work day and they didnt have time to stop for refueling, were they used on short runs where they may have needed a bit more fuel and water …?
The c&o took 2 orders of their C-16 0-8-0 class. The 1st order was filled by Lima in 1942, designated C-16a, #240-254. The second order was filled by Baldwin in 1948, designated C-16b, #255-284.
The N&W bought C-16b 255-284 and they were classed S-1. The N&W retained the same road numbers. FYI, the Virginian landed up with the 1st C-16a batch and also some of these ended up in Korea.
The N&W did not change the tenders of #255-284. What they did was copy the C-16b and classed the newly built locomotives S-1a, #240-244. These had the larger tenders that were welded, not riveted, together. So you must be referring to an N&W S-1a.
As far as your question. The C&O used their C-16s for switching duties, so no need for large capacity tenders.
I’m speculating, but I agree the N&W may have used their S-1a for longer runs. Transfer runs?
Best way to know for sure is to contact the N&W historical society.
Joel
Joel
Thank you very much for the info on the C&O that was veryenlightening. I will check the book I am reading and see what it has to say about which tender it was if it mentions it all.
YGW
No problem. Glad to help.
Joel
The only change made to these switchers by N&W was the addition of a second cross compound air compressor.
YGW,
The N&W did purchase 30 C&O C-16a 0-8-0s. They were a hit with the railrad and so they copied them and produced 45 more near identical engines in the Roanoke Shops. The C&O engines, N&W class S-1, were modified as they came due for shop work which included new Pyle headlights, over-fire jets, a 2nd cross-compound airpump, class lights (some engines), boiler check valves replaced with a single top valve and boiler pressure raised to 220 from 200 psi. The tenders were also rebuilt with a raised water area and extended coal bunkers from 8,000G/12T to 9,100G/15T.
The N&W built group was class S-1a. They differed in some minor items like cabs and tenders from the S-1 engines. The tenders were all welded bodies and used the frames and trucks from older USRA 12,000G/10T tenders. They were about 6’ longer than the C&O tenders.
All of these engines were very reliable and their availability, economy and tractive effort over the engines they replaced was very impressive. They basically replaced more than one engine each due to these factors. They were used as switchers in yards and passenger terminals for all but the most rigorous assignments like hump yards and such. They also were used on locals and transfer runs. The larger tenders allowed them to spend more time at work and less time at the water plugs and coal wharfs. These efficient engines help hold off the diesel a little longer than would have the engines they replaced.
The Virginian engines from the C&O gave the railroad the same service and advantages but they apparently did not receive any of the modifications the N&W engines were given.
Hope this helps you out.
Roger Huber
Deer Creek Locomotive Works