When a steam switch engine with a separate tender (such as an 0-6-0) is working in a classification yard would it be working with its front or its tender towards the yard? It seems it might be more comfortable and have better visivility for the engineer if it worked head first into the yard.
Thanks, ahead of time, for the help
It would would be pointed so the engineer could see the crews working on the lead.
Ok…In a “forward” yard-that’s where all the switchstands is on the engineer’s side(right side) the switcher would be “boiler lead”.A reverse yard where the switchstands is on the left side(fireman’s side) the switcher will be operated tender first so the engineer could see the switchmen.
A lot of yard switchers had backrest for the engineer-in theory this was suppose to eliminate a pulled back muscle from being twisted around.The engineer sit sideways and leaned out the window.
That is why PRR engines for the most part had slope back tenders so the engineer could see. I suspect to the rear would have been preferred on the PRR.
A friend of mine grew up in Flint MI and use to watch the Pere Marquette switch Fisher Body Plant #1. He said the switcher would run backwards with the train all the way from Mcgrew yard, switch the plant then head back frontwards. I know this wasn’t a class yard but it means that on the PM at least they would run the engines both ways. I don’t think the crew would like it very much though because the coal dust from the tender would be blowing all over them.
I asked this question on a PRR board and got a surprising answer. While either end could and would be used the preffered method was to turn the engine so the most switchstands were on the engineer side of the engine making it easiest on the crew during an 8-10 hour day. Since the fireman would be busy firing the engine the engineer would then know when to move without his input.
Some enginemen liked to sit on the windowsill armrest when shifting. This made it easier to see past the tender when backing or past cars being shoved ahead of the engine. Of course they had to be careful of close clearances when doing so.
Sometimes the fireman would get out of the cab to pass signals. On some jobs it wasn’t that hard for one man to run and fire the engine and, at least from my observation, a lot of engineers took great pride in “still being able to fire”.
On some jobs it wasn’t that hard for one man to run and fire the engine and, at least from my observation, a lot of engineers took great pride in “still being able to fire”.
Back in the day I suspect the BLF&E would have a word or two about that since there are job descriptions involved…
A engineer would balk at firing since he wasn’t a fireman and because of the Union rules-unless he was a qualified fireman so he could work both extra boards.
However,most engineers seen the fireman’s job as hard work for less pay-that why they became engineers.
Remember,even back in the day there was no starry eyed romance in railroading-its all about payday.
Back in the day, some, but certainly not all, enginemen would split running and firing with the fireman. Around here, on the PRR and the B&O, I don’t recall ever hearing any thing about it from the BLE, the BLF&E, or the carriers. This continued into the diesel era, although it was a little easier to fire a diesel.
Once in a while, if there were no firemen available an engine would go out with two enginemen, one of whom was called as a fireman. Have seen them (off the record) swap firing and running each trying to run the other out of steam. Generally, afterwards each would claim he had “won” and the other had cheated[;)]
The fireman would need to be a qualified engineer and close friends with the engineer since both could get into hot water with the Union and the railroad.
A engineer could “protect” the job of fireman-if he was still on the active fireman extra board if not then the “next out” extra board fireman would be called.
That was a touchy matter that could set off a round of grievances and somebody would get paid for that infraction for staying home.
Remember back in the day the operating unions was strong and not to be trifled with.
Most rule books I’ve seen allowed for the fireman to run the engine under the engineman’s supervision. That was how firemen got the experience to be able to handle a train. (No simulators in those days)
Back then, at least on the roads I’m familiar with, the Brotherhoods controlled the number of men on the extra lists and if no one was available for a job there was no grievance for using a qualified member of another craft to fill the vacancy. Only men that were available for work could claim a runaround.
Regardless of who was pulling the throttle and who was keeping up steam, as noted in several posts above the usual practice in yards (and local freights, work trains, etc.) was to have the engine facing whichever way was best for passing hand signals.
Most rule books I’ve seen allowed for the fireman to run the engine under the engineman’s supervision. That was how firemen got the experience to be able to handle a train. (No simulators in those days)
Absolutely as a student engineer the fireman could operate the engine while the fire was attended by another fireman.The engineer would instruct the student and watch the student moves as he ran the engine…
BTW…There was written test a fireman had to past before he could become a student engineer…I’m told that covered the throttle ,johnson bar,brakes etc.
His solo road tests would be under the watchful eye of a ARFE…
This still happen\s quite a lot. A cut back conductor with his engineers card will often split the trip with the called engineer to keep up thier skills.