hey there, I’m muddling through some ideas for equipment to use on the HO layout and I was wondering if there are any garratt types out there that, with minor modifications, could look like something that was made for use in the United States. I already know there has never been one in the country, with the possible exception of something for a faire of some type. I honestly find it a little odd that such an innovative design was overlooked by north american railroads. For the idea I have it could either end up being something that was based on one from another country or an import. From what I’ve seen so far, the australian locos come the closest to looking like something that might be found in the US but I’ve seen very little in the way of photos of the different types out there. The main thing is that I would expect it to be a large variant of the type that might be comparable to the standard articulates used by american railroads in the 30s-50s.
I have one of these:
I have the excuse to use it on my layout, that it is being used on trial on my shortline [:D]
I will say however that these “monsters” require a substantial curve radius (27,5").
I am still in the process of making a nice sound file in it (LokSound).
Presumably the classic disadvantage of a Garratt – that as fuel and water is used up, weight on drivers and thus pulling power is reduced, is the primary explanation. Experience with duplex and triplex steam in the USA probably soured some on the concept.
One sometimes reads that US operating conditions were too tough for Garratts but certainly the operating conditions that the Australian Beyer Garratts endured were not unlike what one would expect in parts of the USA.
Frankly a significant number of inventions relating to British and European steam technology were not used here, perhaps partly out of national pride, so that might be a factor as well.
The first ever Garratt, an 0-4-0 + 0-4-0, is no more experimental or unusual looking than some of the truly oddball locomotives that were tried out in the USA from the 1870s up to around 1910.
Dave Nelson
From what I have seen in railfan videos, the operating conditions in South Africa can be quite rugged as well. Garretts there were used to haul coal trains as well as general freight.
That being said, if you are modeling a freelanced RR, most anything palusible goes. Make up a story about how the Garrett was imported or specially built and go for it!
I think that the Garratt design could have succeeded in the United States. Alco actually had a license from Beyer-Peacock to build them, but nobody ever bought one.
For a, “Made in America” look, I would start with some proven American technology:
- Engines from a couple of USRA locos, 4-6-2, 2-8-2 or 4-8-2. The trailing trucks could be booster-equipped for enough starting TE to get the train that could be pulled at speed up to 10mph.
- a BIG boiler - say, that of a Y6b, but with a deeper firebox.
- Arrange the accessories in typical American fashion - Elesco or Worthington feedwater heater, compressors on the smokebox front, air tanks and cooling coils below the frame…
- Cylindrical water tank forward of the smokebox, Vanderbilt tender (BIG bunker, little tank) behind the cab.
- Fill out the water capacity with a canteen - a six-axle water tender that could be coupled to either end.
Or, for the super-locomotive that I and another forumite kicked around, how about a 4-8-6+6-8-4 high pressure triple expansion compound, Withuhn-design engines (4 cylinder, dynamically balanced) and a beefed up water tube boiler. We never did make drawings.
Since my imagineered coal hauler is set in Japan, my Garratt, when I build it, will have the boiler from a JNR 9600-class 2-8-0, engines from two 0-6-0 teakettles, typically Japanese equipment and accessories, and a 4% grade mountain goat trail to climb the 13.6km from Tomikawa to the big colliery at the end of the line. Due to the short distance, I doubt that water capacity will be a problem.
Just a few ideas, FWIW.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with rolling stock that neba hoppen)
I haven’t decided on a wheel arrangement yet but I already know that I intend to run atleast one bigboy on the layout and I wonder why a garratt would require a larger curve radius than the minimum 22 that the big boys can take (though I do intend to go wider whenever possible).
Another thing I’m thinking about doing is making the loco in question an oil burner as apposed to the usual coal ones I see so much.
In regards to a compound locomotive, with the amount of trouble american railroads have had with compound articulates, it would seem to me that the manufactures would avoid that type on any would be garratts produced as well.
One question I have is, why would it be likely to have firebox mounted compressors? granted the cab forwards used them (and I even thought about making mine look like something baldwin might’ve built) but I honistly never found the advantage to having them located on the front of the smoke box as apposed to along the side of the boiler like most locos.
Graffen: I’m curious why the water tender on yours is so much smaller than the coal one at the other end, I’ve always been of the impression that both are usualy about the same size
http://www.interhobmodels.com/id18.html
Before getting 1, ask how much drawbar pull ot has. If you can’t get a coherent answer, don’t buy it.
I have 1 imported by PFM in 1975. There is little room in the tank and tender to add weight. The engine will pull 5 Athearn passenger cars up a 4% grade.
I seriously doubt that such a large engine would only be able to pull five cars like that when my old kato dash 9 can pull 20 NMRA weighted cars up a %1.5 grade unassisted
Has been done, my friend . . . . . . . . . alhough, without the index, I can’t tell you where to find it. I only know that in either the late '60s or early '70s–I believe I was stationed in Germany at the time which would put it in the early ‘70s–MR did a feature on a Garrett complete with drawings. Following they published photos of models primarily from Great Britian but, wahlah, sure as shootin’ someone came up with a freelanced model of one with a North American design.
I can’t remember anything about the wheel code and my mags are inaccessible at this time but perhaps someone who was modeling in that era might be able to put you in touch with the particular issues involved.
While some HO Big Boys are engineered to take a 22 inch radius curve, they look seriosly ugly doing so. Note that the Garratt shown is a commercial product A home-built can be engineered to turn tighter. Critical clearance point will be the center of the suspended frame, on the inside of the curve.
There have been oil burning Garratts - but no oil burning Big Boys. Railroads usually try to stick with a single fuel.
Notice I specified a Withuhn-design compound. That was a 1970s take on what might have been in 1950-odd, not 1900 Vauclain or Cole compound. Note, too, that Norfolk & Western, the one railroad that really tried, seemed to have gotten the articulated compound right.
Another little-known fact. The last C&O steam order was for compound 2-6-6-2s.
I presume you meant to type smokebox-mounted compressors.
Yes I did mean smoke box mounted.
And the common fuel type isn’t an issue with me, the majority of steam motive power on my layout is going to be SP, all of which burns oil. Coal burners are going to be the exception to the standard as I am planning on relatively few engines from UP and eastern railroads that were coal fired. I am going to put a coal tipple in for those that use it but I’d say about 1 in 5 steam locos won’t burn oil.
I don’t know whether or not I’m right, but I always thought that the Garrett was an extremely successful South African/Austrailian design to run on LIGHTER rail, hence the separation of the two articulated mechanisms, and not the two sets of drivers under the same boiler as say, a Big Boy or a Yellowstone…
It’s certainly a handsome loco, at least IMO, and I know that an HO scale model was --or possibly still is–imported by a company up here in Auburn, CA, about 35 miles up from where I live. I was seriously thinking about getting one when they first came out, just for the ‘unique’ look of the loco. I remember seeing a video of South African Garrett’s in action, and it’s a fascinating loco to watch.
But I do wonder about the Tractive Effort over the drivers, once the water and the coal bunkers start to run out. Or does that heavy centered boiler and firebox in the middle assist in keeping the TE fairly constant?
Just wondering. It’s sure a nifty looking locomotive.
Tom [:)]
May of 1966 Model Railroader, page 32. Text by David P Morgan! Photos and a fold out J Harold Giessel drawing of the New South Wales Beyer Garratt 4-8-4 + 4-8-4.
And for some time after that from time to time Garratt models would be featured in Trackside Photos.
Dave Nelson
I’ve taken a look at several photos of Australian garratts that look to be hauling loads comparable with the AC-7 and AC-8 cab forwards during 1941, the engine in question pulling the comparable train being a South Australian Railways class 400 I found on a site somewhere.
One of the reasons I thought a scratch built one might make a good baldwin is the diffrence in boiler width between the cab forwards and the big boys/challengers, it seems to me that based on that baldwin was producing the largest diameter boilers in the US while alco seems better at longer yet thinner, atleast from my observation.
If you go through with this there ExP_Razor be sure to get some photos; I, for one, would be extremely intererested in how your endeavor turns out!
Some more uselss trivia. During the oil crisis in the 80s, New Zeland couldn’t put oil into it’s “Modrern Looking Country” Diesels. So they refired their old Garratts. (even over other choices) Several made it to the rails and pulled. Even after the crisis ended some stuck around.
Also, one design, which became version 3 for the ACE3000 modern steam engines was as a Garratt, inteneded to take engines off Helper service. Chessie was so disinterested in a Garratt and a Helper that they dropped ACE on it’s butt then and there. If ACE had continued as a steam puller than it might’ve gotten further. But the Garratt was a practical engien where it ran
“During the oil crisis in the 80s, New Zeland couldn’t put oil into it’s “Modrern Looking Country” Diesels. So they refired their old Garratts. (even over other choices) Several made it to the rails and pulled. Even after the crisis ended some stuck around.”
Where did you get this this from? New Zealand did have three Garratts built in 1929. They were not successful and were quickly rebuilt in to 4-6-2 locomotives. Perhaps you are thinking of Zimbabwe!
There are several Garratts remaining in Australia at a place in New South Wales called Dorrigo along with dozens of other locomotives. Incidentally the NZ Garratts were fitted with two Westinghouse compressors mounted on the smokebox left.
Bill
[quote user=“ExP_Razor”]
I seriously doubt that such a large engine would only be able to pull five cars like that when my old kato dash 9 can pull 20 NMRA weighted cars up a %1.5 grade unassisted./quote]
The pulling power of model locos can vary a lot. One of the trains we run at Boothbay on display days runs fine with one Atlas RS-11, but the Intermountain U-18B will not run the same train unless we double head them.
The railroad in central Peru, SA. run by the Cerro Mining Corp based out of NYC in the 50’s and up to the mid-60’s used at least two Garratts. This was at 12K feet above MSL. Grades typically reached 2.5%, sometimes steeper, into the 3% range. The Garratts handled good sized consists (no idea what tonnage…too long ago now) all by their lonesome.
I recall standing on a foot bridge over the tracks at the end of the yard throat at Casapalca. A Garratt was leaving the yard and just getting under way. Lemme tell ya, it was an exciting experience to be 10’ above that amazingly wide stack as it lifted the train. [:P]
-Crandell
Having looked at several more pictures, a modification of an engine the same class as the east african railway no 5918 also looks like a good candidate for what I have in mind, they already seem to use westing house breaks (I don’t see any sign of the large vacume break tubes I see on so many other garratts, instead having break lines similar to those used in the US), it appears to be an oil burner, and the general appearance looks like something that might’ve been used here had an american railroad decided to have a standard gauge counterpart built.
Other cosmetic changes would be added, I would try to find solid trailing/pilot wheels, turn the lengthened stack into a double stack similar to what’s used on the later cab forwards, and I’d also try to change the shape of the cab windows. Also, both tenders look like they could be made into a variation of SP’s whale back tenders.
http://users.powernet.co.uk/hamilton/5918.html
One question I have about the larger garratts, I am wondering what the twin pipes are that I see on most of them sticking out ontop of the water tender on the front of the loco, both my latest reference and the Australian AD60 have them.