A very high percentage of logging engines are saddle tankers.
What exactly are saddle tanks for? Obviously they replace the tender. Are they exclusively for fuel?
What are the advantages and limitations?
Chip
The saddle tanks run fuel oil.
JIM
Chip,
The ‘saddle tank’ contains boiler water. Usually a small fuel bunker is located behind the cab area. The advantage of this arrangement is a very compact engine. You see them in industrial settings, used as shop switchers, and in logging operations. The key here is that this configuration has limited range due to the small water/fuel capacity, but in terminal type service, that is not a big issue.
Jim
[#ditto] what he said. Also when used in logging opperation and with the tiny 0-4-0s, the weight of fuel and water is now on the drivers creating extra tractive effort. I saw one of the last saddle tank industrial switches in left in operation in Elmira, NY in the 1970’s. There was a big article in local papers down there when it was finally taken out of service. Steamtown has a tiny saddle tank engine sitting right ahead of the BIg Boy. Thats the short and long of it! [:D]
Everyone above is correct. Water was stored in tanks on the sides of the locomotive. There was a small area for fuel storage behind the cab. The extra weight on the drivers meant you had a compact engine with lots of power. Although I went to the Black Hills Central Railroad in Black Hills South Dakota (www.1800train.com) and they have a saddle tanker it is a 2-6-2T and the water was put in at the top of the boiler, as seen in the picture below…
I couldn’t pass this one up!
Most of the pictures of saddle tankers I’ve seen associated with logging operations have been 2-6-2 and 2-8-2’s with the occational 0-6-0 and 2-6-6-2.
Chip, the Baldwin 2-8-2T is the loco I visited and rode on in late June. I posted the link and I believe you commented on the video. The tank curves over the boiler like a hotdog bun inverted…if you ‘see’ what I mean. Ths saddle tanks locos, of which ther eis a 2-6-2T on static display here in Courtenay, has a tank on either side of the boiler. In either case, the water gets extra heat from being warmed by the bolier which adds to it tractive capacity. Additionally, the water reservoires are directly over the drivers, so these locos could manage up to 9 deg of grade under load…believe it or not. I know this because I read a placque on the backhead of the Alberni Pacific 2-8-2T that drew the engineer’s attention to scribe lines on the water glass. It said to not let the water level fall below the top line when climbing 9 deg grades, and to not let it rise above the bottom scribe mark when descending the same grades.
True, I was referring to the little industrial switchers used in factory sidings to move one or two cars. A large collection of photos of industrial switchers is found here: http://www.northeast.railfan.net/steam22.html BTW, there were also 0-6-6-0s used in logging operations. The first Mallet (Old Maude) was an 0-6-6-0.
One thing no ones mentionsed, Space savings…
A Tank engine takes up less space than a tender engine, this can be vital in cramped yards or tight industrial facilites. Also they were often running on very tight curves, so the engine itself would often be limited in size upon ordering, companies would then try to get the biggest engine in the smallest packages, the best examples of these to me are the two 2-6-6-2T narrow gauge Articulated locos built form the Uintah RR and the 2-8-2T Minaret class engines built for the Pacific Northwest logging companies. While the Uintah locos (very similar to the pic you show Spacemouse) were large, they operated on 7.5% grades and 60 degree curves. Heavy pulling, heavy traction, smallest package for operating on tight curves, see where I’m going? While the Minarets were more aimed at maximum pullling power whil operating in the limited trackage of many logging lines, a tender takes up the space of a revinue car, so get rid of the tender. Many logging RR’s did use tenders, but that was mostly due to the need for motive power, any motive power, so they would often take what they could get if they couldnt afford to order new. Also these tank engines were not preferred at the camp end of trackage, due to the lousy trackage, extreme curves and grades, logging companies would use geared locos to hual the trunks from the camp end down to the mill, the tank engines would then be used to haul finish product from the mill end down the the interchange to be transfered to standard gauge or switched onto the mainline.
Spacemouse, another outfit that still operates a saddle-tank
engine is the Mount Rainier Scenic Railroad. www.mrsr.com
They own and operate the Hammond Lumber Co. #17. This is
a 1929 Alco 2-8-2T. She’s a great loco-good, crisp stack talk and
a multi-chime whistle that is beautiful to hear. If you’re ever in
Washington give them a visit.
Thanks. You answered another question I had about how lumber companies dealt with getting the logs from the mountain to the mills. It didn’t make sense that they would tie up the main with a slow moving geared loco. But on the other hand, I couldn’t picture them leaving a huge string of logs on a siding either. Having the saddle tanker go to the camp makes sense, but I didn’
She’s a Minaret![:p] i want one for my layout[:p]
Spacemouse, glad I could help!.
This is the Alberni Pacific Baldwin I spoke of. I have side shots and closer front quarter shots if you’d like me to post them, Chip.
I always like good photos. 1929 is a little late for my layout though.