How many of you have tried to us a steam engine as a helper on a modern era layout, much like what the 844 did in 1996 when it caught up to a frieght with a failed diesel helper?
Can’t really say I model the modern world - as of 2012 the prototype of my combustion sub is under catenary.
The usual assigned helper for trains needing same on the 2.5% upgrade from Harukawa is a 2-6-2T, C12 class. It may help steam or diesel, depending on what power the train was assigned at Takami. DMU never need help - with two engines per car, they always have plenty of power. It’s not an accidental thing (like 844) but, rather, a normal part of operations in the Central Japan Alps.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Since that event happened 16 years ago and probably not for more than 36 years or more before that I would say it was a rare occurence and one that if UP had a choice they would not have even done the one time. Definitely not a procedure on any modern US railroad.
I must admit I have not run mixed steam and diesel on my layout, but I have seen it in real life in the 1990’s!
Norfolk Southern, (old N&W for me), was known to be thrifty. Their old president actively supported their steam preservation program in the 70s-90’s. They restored the massive “A” articulated in 1987 and ran numerous fan trips out of Petersburg and Richmond. I went on a fan trip once powered by the newly restored mighty “A” to Norfolk. (weekend excursion).
The #1218 “A” was a 2-6-6-4 that weighed almost one million pounds with tender and produced over 6300 horsepower. At the time of its restoration, it was the hardest pulling, 114,000 lb tractive effort, and most powerful operating steam locomotive on the planet.
Next Monday, my work took me from Richmond to Prince George county, (just beyond Petersburg, VA). At a large grade crossing, I came to a stop about the second car back. I could not see very far down the track, but the gates were down and I heard a familiar wail of a steam whistle mixed with air horns and smoke was drifting above the tree line in the distance. Finally to my amazement and stunned disbelief of other drivers, giant, high velocity, vertical blasts of pitch black smoke were moving through and high above the pine trees.
Into the clearing appeared the “A” trailing its spare, giant water calf and 2 diesels with their kerosene smokey stacks also roaring into the sky. The group thundered over the crossing physically shaking the ground under the car as the million pounds of iron and steel flew by. This forced a couple of shocked drivers to go into a slow reverse, in fear, I suppose. They had probably never been that close to giant operating steam in their lives!
What a sight! The Norfolk Southern needed the “A” somewhere else (probably its ancestoral home, Roanoke) for another weekend fan run and, as it was in good sh
Well, I don’t don’t do it on a “modern” era layout. But I model the early 50’s and run mixed steam/diesel helpers/double headers just like the B&O and WM did in that era.
The B&O put diesels to work as helpers first, since ABBA sets of F3’s, FT’s and Alco FA’s did not need to be turned like the steam did. Most the trains they “helped” were still steam powered - EM-1’s, EL’s, etc. And the passenger trains which were dieselized early, often got 2-8-2’s as helpers on the worst grades.
The WM ran Alco RS units with their 2-8-0’s all the time. Sometimes with as many as seven or eight locos on one train. Three or four in front, three or four in back, no special positioning of diesel vs steam. Groups of two or three diesels might be MU’d, maybe not.
Sheldon
I was told by a BN engineer that in the mid 1960s there were instances where the CB&Q was so short of appropriate power that they steamed up the 4960 excursion 2-8-2, normally stored in the roundhouse in Galesburg IL, and used it to power the local that went from Galesburg to Peoria and back. Presumably they made arrangements to water the engine in Peoria, or perhaps the aux water tank that was coupled to the tender was sufficient.
Whether that was true or a mere story I do not know, but lending some credence to it is the fact that at least once they were so short of power that they fired up an old Doodlebug stored in that same roundhouse and used it for the Peoria turn – VERY limited tractive effort for that, given the hills on that run due to the Spoon River valley and getting out of the Illinois River valley leaving Peoria. I believe that was documented in photos.
The Wisconsin & Southern has used over the years former C&NW 4-6-0 1385 and ex Soo Line 2-8-2 1003 (stored on line) for local service – in situations where the engines were under steam and on the line for other reasons – but I suspect that was due more to the enthusiasms of its owner than any dire need to use the tractive effort at hand. Then again at that time their roster was patchwork and the steamers might have been the most reliable tractive effort on the property that day.
Into the 1980s Northwestern Steel & Wire used steam exclusively at its massive steel mill in Sterling Illinois – which was served by the C&NW and the BN. The day I was there four 0-8-0s were under steam, and one could see modern diesels and their crews patiently waiting for a steamer to bring out the interchange cars for the day. To those guys it was old hat to see working steam, into the 1980s. That use of steam ended a matter of DAYS after the death of the elderly owner of the mill.
Dave Nelson
Dave, your reference to use of the Doodlebug caught my attention.
Club members have been questioning my Grizzly Northern Doodlebug hauling a string of 6 to 8 assorted freight cars in a work train consist, at speeds of 20 scale mph, albeit on the club’s flatlands. What tractive effort did typical bugs have and what max speeds with trailing loads?
Don’t know for sure but this website
http://www.mtmuseum.org/jsr/roster/cbq9735.php
talks about a CB&Q doodlebug hauling short freights and even pushng snow plows, and remotored with a 400hp engine. With that HP I think 4 to 8 freight cars might be about right, with 8 probably pushing the max. Does someone know the citation to the article by Jim Boyd about this use of the Q doodlebug?
Dave Nelson
Obviously being able to haul as many as 8 mixed freight cars the Grizzly Northern’s doodlebug must have a 400hp engine. It’s the GNR’s only diesel electric. 
I wouldn’t think hauling 6-8 cars at a slow speed would be a problem for a ‘doodlebug’. The RDC couldn’t, they only had enough power to pull themselves.
The M-St.L used to use a doodlebug pulling a heavyweight coach as a passenger train on one line for a long time. They updated it to an RDC and a streamlined Budd coach, even though GM warned them the RDC couldn’t pull the car. GM was right and the RDC failed (burned out traction motors or something?) so the M-St.L went back to using the doodlebug, only now pulling the stainless steel Budd car.