The J was designed directly for what was needed in N&W passenger service, the only problem was that it came so late, and was affected by the decline in ridership of passenger trains. Then came the cutbacks in passenger service, using the Powhatan Arrow as an example, originally carrying seven cars but cut back to five and later even less than that. It is this that resulted in the J seeming like too much for the trains, but I have to wonder if the N&W truly understood the J’s full potential. lois
The Niagra was not more than what was required. As the Central lost passenger business, they combined trains. So their trains remained pretty long. The PRR did the same, and their equivalent was the T-1. A Hudson might be able to take 14 or 16 cars Harmon - Buffalo, but a Niagra 22 or 24. Did you ever see a single E-unit on a Harmon - Buffalo passenger train? Three were normal, and a Niagra could do the work of three!
A 16 car train would leave GCT behind a T or P motor. At Harmon, the Niagra would back down on the train with six or eight mail and express cars that had come up the West Side. The Century, of course, was an exception. A Hudson could have handled the passenger train, but the added cars required the Niagra (or a Mowhawk at possibly a bit less speed).
Regarding the J’s, their performance was put to use on some of the through Southern trains that could be pretty long, again with a lot of mail and express.
And even then, I’m sure the J’s were not asked to pull the 25-plus car excursion trains that 611 handled in the 80s and 90s. I’m sure Bob Claytor had a clear picture of her abilities, or he would not have allowed her to run such large trains. And I’m certain these large excursion trains taxed her abilities on a few occasions, though mostly she tended to handle them quite easily. However, on Saluda Grade, with three diesels that were mostly for dynamic braking though they could be used for assistance if necessary, according to the book “Steam’s Camelot” it was feared with the HP of 611 and the diesels, the effort required to pull the train up the steep grade might result in drawbars and couplers being pulled out of passenger cars. So, it was decided to pull most of the train up the grade behind the diesels and leave the last four or five cars for 611 to handle. In the book, the diesel units were SD40-2’s with 9,000 combined HP, or estimated 3,000 HP per unit. 611 was rated at an estimated 5,100 HP, possibly up to 5,400 HP as stated previously. This meant a total of 14,100-14,400 HP tugging on 20 passenger cars, the majority of which were 85-foot streamlined coaches. This was on a grade ranging from 4.5 to as much as 5.1 %. With these figures, it is easy to understand the concern about the drawbars and couplers on the passenger cars. Now what these figures mean and what could have happened I will leave for Overmod, Juniatha and other like minded persons to tackle. lois
There almost certainly were some long troop trains duringWWII coupled behined both N&W J’s and Niagras.
During that time, the troop trains were first run behind the unstreamlined J1’s, which may explain why six were built. These, like the A’s and Y6’s constructed during that time, were built fairly quickly, with two of the J1’s finished on the same day! They were streamlined as soon as possible, due to the bearing problems experienced with the heavy rods necessary as the usual Timken rod material was not available. Why they used these heavy rods instead of the normal carbon steel rods for the J1’s I do not directly know, though I suspect they wanted the engines to have roller bearing rods. Once the Timken materials and other materials for streamlining became available, the N&W sent the J1’s to Roanoke Shops to be streamlined. This was in 1944, and the J1’s were built in 1943, leaving only a year for the existence of the J1’s. Afterward, they were added to the J class. The J1’s appear to have been built for troop train service, a task they shared with the A’s. A special note: 1218, being built in 1943, probably spent its share of time on troop trains. lois
A few things to consider about this post:
The J, like any other steam engine produces its maximum power at a specific speed. For the J, that was probably around 40 mph or so. They weren’t making 40 mph up that grade. At the single digit speeds the J was capable of with 5 cars, it was lucky to be making 900 - 1000 hp. Also, if I recall correctly, (could be wrong) during those trips the 611 was set at 275
I have never heard anything about any changes to the 611’s boiler pressure during these trips. I will have to ask around for details, but I do know Bob Saxtan and Scott Lindsay, who worked the Saluda trips, are now busy with the design work for the rebuilding of 611’s engine truck. As far as I know, 611 always used Pocahontas coal provided by NS, what particular grade I do not know. Again, the parties that know this information are busy with the restoration preparations and so are not available at this time. lois
Can they even get Pocahontas coal today? Most of the mines in that region were being shut down back in the early 1980’s. Even up in the larger Pittsburgh Field in Northern WV - SW PA, with similar coal, they are running out. Many of the mines are shut down, and the mines that are left open are using longwall mining. They are removing a tremendous amount of coal per year, most of it going to China, and the last I heard is they will be mined out in less than 20 years at this rate. The rest of the coal isn’t worth mining - too high in sulfur and impurities. It is going to be increasingly hard and expensive to find good steam coal to run these engines in the near future.
According to an article published in Trains magazine in 1994 about the Pocahontas Division of NS, coal was alive and well and NS kept busy in that region. There may not be as many mines as there were years ago, but as I personally observed during a visit to WV in 2011, there has been no real effect on coal operations. As regards to coal running out, I have personally seen places where seams of coal lie in the rocks along roads. The coal is there; it just needs to be discovered. Believe me, they would not consider running 611 if there was a lack of coal to fire her on. lois
1994 was 20 years ago. I grew up in the coal fields, and a lot has changed in the past 20 years, most of it not for the good. Between decreasing supply of high quality coal, increasing environmental laws and costs, coal mining in the east is a declining industry. Consol just shut down or unloaded a lot of their mines. They are focusing on natural gas now.
There is nothing to discover in the coal fields. They know exactly where all the coal is. The issue is all the best and easy to get to coal has been mined out. What is left, for the most part is either too expensive to get to, or low quality (high in sulfur and impurities).
There will always be some coal around in the east. The question for the future will be how much it will cost per ton, and is it good enough quality to burn in steam locomotives that were designed for a certain type of coal. Burning poor quality coal in a locomotive will decrease performance, increase maintenance costs, and more than likely cause the EPA to take notice. All it would take is one “executive” order from the EPA calling for steam to meet higher pollution standards, and you will see every restored locomotive off the tracks.
In the quantities required for fantrips, yes.
A little more involved: the coal ought to be washed and sized to about 2", which involves some extra work not easily handled in ‘truckload lots’ delivered to the tender by loader. But the required equipment would not be difficult to construct, and could be made portable.
It’s also possible – in this particular kind of application – to use the range of ‘clean coal’ fuel fabrication techniques to make a few tender-loads’ worth of fuel. That might include SRC to remove the sulfur and ashing constituents, or cofiring with dolomite or torrefied-wood additives.
Fuel cost (as a percentage of overall trip costs) is probably no more for a 611 excursion than the 5% or so that it was for 8055 in Europe (where coal is more expensive to source). So the absolute economic ‘advantage’ of mine-run coal delivered in a heap where it can be trackhoe’d up into the tender may be far less, indeed outweighed, by the operating advantages of good fuel properly provided… just as it was in 1950.
Thank you for your explanation, Overmod. That helped explain what I saw in Bluefield and Williamson in 2011, as well what I have been seeing on the satellite images on Google Maps. Coal is not dead. It will be there when it is time to go get it, when we fill the 611’s tender for the first time. The coalfield area of southern West Virginia, southwest Virginia and eastern Kentucky is a rugged area and will survive. Long live Appalachia. lois
Returning to the original subject of 611 on Saluda, I have asked one of the original NS steam crew members about the steam pressure of 611 on Saluda. Reviewing the videos I have seen, it appears that 611 was going around 10-15 mph on Saluda Grade, though she was working hard the entire way. There are parts where she would have gone slower, like at Melrose at the beginning of the grade where one has about 4% grade right in their face. And that moment on the first trip up in 1992, where she slipped so badly and stalled, she was very slow before and after. First before when she was beginning to “lose it” then afterward, when she could just crawl on the steepest part of the grade but later could pick up a bit before she stopped in the town of Saluda. On the second trip, she maintained her speed but had a few slips, including at the spot where she had stalled in 1992. On the remaining trips, she maintained speed past the stalling location with no hesitation or slipping. There seems to be a question of momentum though the main issue is with how well the crew had learned to handle Saluda. As to steam pressure, the safety valves did go off on a few occasions on the videos. And knowing what pressures the safety valves were always set on, it appears to me that 611 was run at regular working pressure (300 psi) unless some changes were made to the settings of the safety valves. lois
One important clue. There was concern that there would be separation of couplers and drawbars with 611 and three SD40-2’s going up grade with 20 passenger cars. This was with 611 rated at 5,100 HP and all three diesels rated at 9,000 HP. The HP of 611 is of course at full working pressure at 300 psi, calculated at reaching its max at 40 mph. I think there would not have been much concern if 611 was working at less pressure or at lower speed, my estimating the speed of 10-15 mph on the grade. I turn this over to Overmod for further analysis. lois
A selection of videos of 611 on Saluda for analysis: http://youtu.be/A0np1GJy3fc http://youtu.be/NUPlynJq7tg http://youtu.be/LUogT5wA-EM http://youtu.be/rZwNcw7X6VK (Part 1 of 3) http://youtu.be/IBwO48Zf_sA lois
Have we succeeded in locating a hp-speed curve for 611 including the steam-chest pressures available (at 300psi nominal) for each speed at the demanded load? I don’t have good data to do anything other than the averaged formula (e.g. Davis equation with assumptions) that has already been done.
My assumption is that the diesels would be worked just to the point where 611 was at maximal effort, to give the best steam show. If that were being done today, a significant part of the diesel power would be applied via DPU to the rear (separating SD40s would probably have implied an extra crew at the time, particularly if the Southern pilot wasn’t riding 611). That would put the ‘node’ somewhere in the train, probably not moving more than a few cars whether 611 was slipping or not.
The principal difficulty, of course, is that 611 can’t put anywhere near the significant hp she could develop at, say 15 mph to the rail without slipping, particularly at her very low effective FA. So whatever concern there would be would involve rapid changes of TE for the consist as a whole, perhaps the result of a slight slack run-in at the slip (the diesels being delayed in loading down) followed by a relatively quick acceleration (with the diesels loading and 611 recovering adhesion). This was surely back in the days when the consist was not all-tightlock coupled, and it would be the non-tightlock cars that I’d expect to show the worst effects…
A few factors: 1. There are a few documents regarding 611 in excursion service in the N&WHS archives, as stated on the nwhs.org web site. I don’t know if this would cover the information that is being sought, but it is worth a look. As well, there is a document on the tabulation of tractive effort in J’s. 2. The diesels had taken most of the train up the grade, so 611 was left to handle the grade alone with 4-5 cars, all 85-foot streamlined cars though on at least one occasion she had her tool car (a former N&W heavyweight mail storage car, the same car now used as a tool car by Southern 630) and may have once had rebuilt heavyweight Pullman “Kitchi Gammi Club”. I’m certain all her cars had tightlock couplers, as the last cars without these couplers, the Southern heavyweight cars, were removed from the excursion train after the May 1986 wreck. lois
With rereading the post about steam locomotives being like big friendly dogs, I couldn’t help thinking about that illustration in “Alice in Wonderland” with Alice and the giant puppy. (The illustration can probably be found online easily, don’t know about the copyright issues.) As regards 611 on Saluda, here’s a quick rundown of the four trips: October 25, 1992. Plan changed late to split up train before going up grade, diesels handling first 15 cars and 611 handling last five cars, on this trip all 85-foot streamlined cars. 611 had difficulty on last curve of grade due to flange lubricator and slipped badly and stalled. A restart was made after sand was checked, and 611 conquered the grade. Return run at night, with train intact, diesels used for dynamic braking to keep speed down on steep downgrade. May 30, 1993. Downhill run made first, with stop in town of Saluda to check water. Uphill run made on return trip, with train split up as before. 611 handled last four cars in train, slipped a few times but never lost momentum, notably slipping at the curve that was the location of the stall in 1992. October 23, 1994. Train handled as in previous trips, 611 ran upgrade without slipping on last curve. She held momentum throughout the trip. November 13, 1994. Trip handled as before, 611 ran well to complete her conquest of Saluda. And this will definitely be the final trip, as due to the closure of the line and two washouts (one of them severe) it would be very difficult to get the line back into condition so that 611 could run on it again. lois
I recently got an answer to my question from former NS steam crww member Dwight Browning. He says that as far as he knows, 611 ran at 300 psi on Saluda but the water glass was raised so that more water would be carried in the boiler. He said that with the water glass at its normal position, and regarding the bottom of the glass with the location of the crown sheet, the crew would not be encouraged to carry enough water over the crown sheet for the engine to operate safely on the grade. My bedtime now, more details later… lois
Easier solution in 2014. Use one heavy weight ES44AC with high adhesion - high TE software to drag the entire train , 611 included over the grade. Simple.