I may be opening a BIG can of worms here, but I have to wonder how many of the wrecks involving Class J’s were due to simple human error. I mean, riding a hot-rod like a J it must have been VERY tempting to push it a bit faster than the situation called for, and then wind up in an “OH $#!)” situation when those who were running them realised a little too late they were doing something they shouldn’t be doing.
Of course, there’s always the possibility of someone other than the head-end crew making the mistake that lead to disaster, can’t discount that either.
Actually, I have been thinking about that when studying these wrecks. As I have heard, the operating rules are “written in blood” and I tend to think of pushing the speed limit on a certain division or less than consideration for the rules for some reason. With these wrecks, quite a few enginemen lost their lives, and this “yielding to temptation” would have resulted in fatal error, not including what it would have meant for the fireman, train crew and passengers. lois
However, the relatively few wrecks compared to the operating time of the J’s in regular service (from 1941 to 1959) shows that most of the time, the crews obeyed the rules and there was careful handling and respect for the J’s speed and power that prevented derailments. Regarding collisions, there seem to be not any more than would occur with any other locomotive, though I presently only have information for incidents involving 611 on the Scioto Division. I presently do not have any information of any collisions during 611’s excursion career. As to derailments, she did have a problem in Norfolk after her first excursion in 1982, but that was due to the curves being made too tight at Lambert’s Point on the approach tracks and turntable lead after the end of steam. There was the wreck in the Great Dismal Swamp in 1986, but the locomotive was not affected. This resulted in the retirement (and a few badly damaged cars scrapped) of Southern heavyweights which had separated and turned over. Finally, there was the collision in Lynchburg in 1994, but the locomotive was not connected to the train and so was not involved. lois
Oh good Lord no, I had NO intention of saying all N&W enginemen were hot-rodding Class J’s, far from it. I’m sure a vast majority were mature men who took their responsibilities seriously.
The trouble is, it only takes one to cause a disaster. Look at that Metro-North engineer in New York who put his train on the ground at Spuyten Duyvil because he fell asleep or was zoned out, no-one seems to know for certain.
You know, I’ve sat in 611’s cab and looked down that long black snoot, and I can’t imagine the nerve it took to drive that BIG piece of machinery 50, 60, 70 miles an hour or more. I don’t think I’d run it any faster than a walk, given the chance. I am oh so chicken…
The 1994 Lynchburg collision! Lady Firestorm swears to this day it was deliberate sabotage to cause the cancellation of the steam program. She hasn’t forgotten and she won’t forgive!
As regarding the N&W enginemen, it is understood that you did not mean all of them hot-rodded the J’s. As to the Lynchburg collision, my husband (who worked as a part of the program and ran 611 and 1218) had a opinion of the matter as well. But I will not go into those opinions in detail, regarding who might read them and the present attitude of NS toward steam. lois
However, collisions have no real effect on the operating abilities of the J’s. The only exception may be when 613 rear-ended a freight train, but I believe the freight was having issues, and without radio contact with the crews in those days, was unable to stop 613 in time. The photo I have seen of this accident shows one example of the power of the J at speed, with the front end of 613 up in the air and the caboose thrown up over the rear of the freight. It is a miracle the rear end crew survived. lois
Hi Lois! Yes, it’s enough to make you stop and think of how many lives have been saved and accidents prevented simply by the use of radio on the railroads.
Reminds me of when I read in one of my vintage railbooks about the Erie adopting radio not long after the end of World War Two. A veteran trainman was asked what he though about it and all he said was “I don’t know how we ever got along without it!”
Of course a lot of collisions seemed to happen back then. I understand it had something to with some grade crossings not being marked, but it really had to do with people not taking the time to look out for a train. For example, the incident when 611 hit a bread truck in Crum, WV, the truck had stopped for another train, but then drove out into the path of 611. I suspect the truck was destroyed, can’t say much for the bread. Of course her woes wasn’t over then, a few days later, she hit a tractor-trailer in Ohio and put a dent in her nose, as well as tearing up her front steps. The trailer was heavily damaged. Same cause: vehicle stops to let another train pass, then drives out in front of her. I would have thought people then would have heard the J was a powerful and fast locomotive and knew to stay out of the way. Apparently not. lois
But 611’s speed capabilities are not well documented, as there is no confirmed record of how fast she ran. The July 1959 trip from Petersburg to Norfolk (where she had been estimated to have run at 100 mph) the estimated speed is in doubt. There is a pacing video of this trip on Pocahontas Glory Vol. 5, and I wish I could have been able to read the car’s speedometer. However, such high speeds were attainable by the modern design of the J, which included the use of roller bearings on the running gear as well as the tender wheel bearings. The use of roller bearing rods are notable as the rods were handled differently than the usual carbon steel rods used on N&W steam. With extensive mechanical lubrication as well as the advanced steam servicing facilities, this allowed the J’s to have quick turnaround between assignments as well as allowing them to attain such high speeds in operation. lois
Lois,
Given that the Santa Fe’s “Blue Goose” # 3460 was delivered in Jan.,1938, do you think that its overall profile in any way influenced the design of the N&W’s Class J?
I don’t think so. From what I have read of the design of the J, the man responsible for the design (Frank C.Noel) seemed to work alone, without any outside influences, except N&W management who approved or rejected his work. But it is possible that he may have seen pictures of other streamlined steam locomotives and he may have indirectly been given ideas. lois
Amazing what information is there in front of you if you only open a book!
After posing this question late last night, this morning, I went back through my books (N&W Giant of Steam “Revised Edition”, * to be specific) to find that actually Mark W. Faville made the first drawing submitted to the design team. This drawing needed some touching up which was done by Frank C. Noel. The drawing favors the SP’s GS class of 4-8-4’s which predate the ATSF 3460 by about a year. This design was rejected as being not fancy enough.
Mr. Noel became more interested in the project and his subsequent drawings evolved into what we now know as one of the most beautiful streamlined passenger locomotives ever built.
So, we now have two other locomotives that have similar design traits that could very well have influenced the design of the J’s form (which includes the locomotive & tender styling) over function.
It is too bad that no one sat down and discussed the thought process of the J’s design with Mr. Noel and put it down in writing. Here again, I wish my father, who hammered out the J’s sheetmetal, was still around to ask what he knew about the evolution of the J’s design and if any problems popped up while the streamlining was being formed.
Mark W. Faville was not credited with the first sketch of the J in the original “N&W Giant of Steam” book. This was brought to light in the revised edition of the book.
It strikes me that the inspiration for the J’s steamlining comes from the New York Centrals Hudsons, as designed by Henry Dreyfuss, just rendered a bit more conservatively.
No matter, it’s a work of genius. Lady Firestorm, lover of all things Art Deco always refers to 611 as “My engine!”, hence her fury at Norfolk-Southern back in 1994 when the steam program was cancelled.
As a matter of fact when the programs cancelleation was reported in the local paper she let out an audible gasp I could hear from two rooms away. I thought somebody died!
And Big Jim you’re right, it is a shame no-one thought to write down the thoughts and processes that lead to the Class J’s streamlining. But back during the Revolution no-one thought to write down the processes and discussions that lead to the design of the American flag, to the consternation of flag historians from that day to this. Sometimes people just don’t think of these things.
It probably went beyond the inspiration of the NYC Hudson, in the mid and late 1930’s streamlining passenger trains and locomotives became the visual future of passenger trains. Many streamlined passenger trains were brought to the forefront during that time in the US, including eastern roads PRR and B&O, the N&W had to keep pace. In the book Steam Passenger Locomotives by Brian Hollingworth, he noted that in 1940 the N&W felt it should have a locomotive better than the standard USRA design, of which the N&W passenger trains relied on. He further explained they wanted a design to help minimize the cost of maintenance and time required for servicing.
Eventually when other railroads were converting to the clean look of diesels, the N&W continued with their steam program showing a clean and fresh look could still be acheived. They did, in a fine looker and “well oiled” piece of machinery.
I particularly enjoy reading Lois’s excitment and enthusiasm over the 611, I know she won’t be disappointed when the project is complete…remember Lois, take a deep breath and enjoy the moment. It’s gunna be great!
You are right in part. I should have also included that Mr. Noel did a drawing very much like the NYC Hudson, only stretched out to 4-8-4 form. This design was deemed “too fancy”.
BTW, tell Lady Firestorm that I have my reasons to agree with her theory, but, I will not discuss them here.
Yeah Mr. Jim, Lois said the same thing. Must be some HEAVY theorys out there.
I’d love to get yourself, Lois, and Lady Firestorm together in a closed room with some refreshments on hand and let you all let it rip. It’d be fun to say the least.
By the way, a couple of years after 1994 I rode the C&O 614 excursions on New Jersey Transit and wore my “611- The Thoroughbred” sweatshirt. When people found out I’d ridden behind 611 I lost track of how many of them asked me “What happened?” All I could say was “pick the story you like and stick with it, it’ll be hard for anyone to say you’re wrong.”
I’ve got my own theory, but like you I won’t discuss it here.
Since there is such a good discussion here, I won’t interrupt it. I have done very little research on the design of the J’s, and yes, I wish there was more recorded on the subject. But there is something I do know. The N&W designers were at the top of their field, and they truly, as I have heard, the “scientists of steam”. They designed some of the finest steam locomotives, and with these locomotives built by the skilled workers at Roanoke Shops and operated by skilled personnel, you have the finest locomotives designed, built and operated by the finest personnel. A plus all the way around, I might say. lois
You’re absolutely right Lois, N&W’s people were the best, and built the best.
A tribute even came from one of the people at Lima Locomotive Works, no slouches themselves. “Norfolk and Western? There’s nothing we can teach them about how to build steam locomotives!”
Perhaps an even higher tribute from Lima was the reported gloating and glee when the Allegheny “bested” the class A’s test numbers – with the Allegheny including far more fancy tecnnology, and incorporating the lessons learned during almost the entire Golden Age of evolution of large steam power after 1934…