2-10-0 #1630

Discussion in '2-10-0 Decapod' started by mike, Oct 1, 2004.

  1. mike

    mike Guest

    1630 in operation at the Illinois Railway Museum during the summer of 2004

    17207- 1630.jpg
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 21, 2005
    Joe Lovett likes this.
  2. U-3-b

    U-3-b Member Frisco.org Supporter

    Joe Lovett likes this.
  3. With in the last few years I have read that IRM has been working of Frisco 1630 and recently have been just adding finishing touches to her. I got my copy of Historic Trains Today in the mail last week and I was reading it and starting on page 19 is a list of steam engines that are going to run in 2010. I was slowly reading seeing alot of familar engine names and numbers then I flipped the page to page 20 and looked under Illinois and there she was. Frisco 1630 is listed under engines to operate in 2010!!!!:) I wonder if she will leave IRM's trackage and do a bit of excursion work on BNSF? I would love to see that Decapod come sout hon the A&M to Van Buren,AR. Maybe it will be possible now. As far as I know this is the only Frisco steamer running, but some others are underway. Be real cool to have a Frisco double-header(One can Wish). Dose anyone else on here know of the plans of where to operate the 1630?
    Ship it on the Frisco!!!


    Murphy Jenkins
     
    Joe Lovett likes this.
  4. gbmott

    gbmott Member

    Murphy

    The Federal Railroad Administration in the last few years has adopted very specific inspection and testing requirements for steam locomotives that will operate on common carrier railroads regulated by the FRA. The certificate issued when everything has passed is good for a fixed number of operating days and once those have been used up, reinspection and testing is required. This tends to make restoration and continued operation very expensive if you want to operate on a regulated railroad.

    I don't know, though I will try to find out, but I strongly suspect that 1630 is being overhauled to meet state boiler inspection requirements but not to meet FRA requirements. Seeing it in Van Buren would be nice indeed, but would only be possible if it were FRA-certified.

    Fort Smith was home to a single 1600 -- 1626, but she was an oil-burner and looked somewhat different by not having the air pump mounted on the pilot beam. My recollection is that 1626 exclusively worked coal off the Mansfield Branch because of the light rail found there and replaced the 4-6-0's (630 and 709 were both Fort Smith engines) that had formerly worked the branch.

    Gordon
     
    Joe Lovett likes this.
  5. Thanks for the info Mr. Mott,

    It always cool to learn about the equipment that used to run around my hometown. I sorta figured that 1630 would be restricted to IRM's line. It would just be cool to see it tour like 1522 did. One reason I'd like to see it on the A&M is it is local and they already have passenger cars. They are a Class III so shouldn't be as hard getting steam on there. Just getting 1630 from IRM to Arkansas would be fun to watch(Still dreaming here). Just be cool to have one Frisco engine running though. My dream would be to see Frisco 4003 run, but I don't have a million to spend fixing her up.
    Thanks again.
    Ship it on the Frisco!!!


    Murphy Jenkins:)
     
  6. frisco1522

    frisco1522 Staff Member Staff Member

    I wouldn't look for 1630 to make it out of the museum. I don't know if she is covered by FRA, but the museum trackage does connect to the general rail system and crosses public roads.
    1630 was converted from 5' gauge by putting wider tires on her, as were the other Russian Decapods. They shouldn't run anywhere were there are self guarding frogs on the switches because they ride up over it. Makes for a very rough ride and is tough on the engine and track.
    Go to Union and enjoy watching her run there. They have quite a nice operation there.
     
  7. gbmott

    gbmott Member

    Don

    That's an interesting observation about the self-guarding frogs and one about which I had not given any thought. Now I have to do a little digging and try to determine when it looks like self-guarding frogs came into general use in yards and terminals. Anyone know off-hand?

    Yes, IRM does have a nice operation and a very impressive collection, both transit and "steam railroad". Incidentally, I asked one of their Board members recently whether they had completed their work on 1630 and he said no, that they had run into some problems that, while fairly minor, had delayed completion. He wasn't sure whether it would actually operate this season or not.

    Gordon
     
  8. fireboy

    fireboy Member

    on regrades the 1630 model from Bachmann it is correct except for the air compressor witch is mounted on the side not the front of it. i WISH ether they change the number or the position of the air compressor so do u agree or disagree?
     
  9. U-3-b

    U-3-b Member Frisco.org Supporter

    There has been a flurry of activity on the yahoo IRM group on the 1630. Some of it has been useful and while I think that they are working on her and others there just to get some steam running, from what I read if there is a steam up in 2010 it will not be this summer.

    Steve
     
  10. Brad Slone

    Brad Slone Member Frisco.org Supporter

    Gordon,

    Just noticed your question regarding self guarded frogs, I will try my best to explain it. As far as I know they are a relatively new feature and probably not something you would find on the Frisco. The main spotting feature is that they have no guard rails on either side of the frog, i.e. short rails running parallel to the stock and diverging rails. The frog itself is a large casting, typically magnesium that has for lack of a better description a curb cast on top of the frog above the rail plain. This curb runs parallel to both routes, setting on the outside edges of the frog. This guard catches the outside face of the wheel rather than restricting the flange on a normal frog. I wish I had a photo of one, however the only place I have ever seen them in use was in a new rail yard in McAlester OK. I will see if I can find some kind of photo hope this shed some light on the subject, I will see if I can find some kind of photo.

    Brad
     
    Joe Lovett likes this.
  11. Karl

    Karl 2008 Engineer of the Year Frisco.org Supporter

    Self -guarded frogs seem to have appeared during the post-war 40's; I don't see anything in the literature before then.

    They seem to be the be the descendant of "easer" rails, which were placed on the frog wing rails to help wheels that have developed a false outside flange pass through without problem. See attached illustration from Trautwine's The Civil Engineer's Pocketbook, 1919

    easerrails.jpg
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 18, 2010
    Joe Lovett likes this.
  12. klrwhizkid

    klrwhizkid Administrator Staff Member Administrator Frisco.org Supporter

    A self-guarded frog is typically made of Solid manganese not magnesium:

    "This North American "self-guarding cast manganese" frog without guard rails has raised flanges on the frog, bearing on the face of the wheel as it passes through the frog."

    450px-Cast_frog.jpg
     
    mountaincreekar likes this.
  13. gbmott

    gbmott Member

    I know that self-guarding frogs have been in wide-spread use since at least the late '60's, and I have to assume that the SLSF employed them pretty much the same as everyone else. But they would seem not to have been used in the early '50's at the end of steam as I never recall seeing any restriction in timetable Special Instructions that prohibited movement of 1600's over them. So the question that is unlikely ever to be answered is this: [1] Did the SLSF consciously refrain from using self-guarding frogs until after the end of steam because of the issue with 1600's, or [2] was it just serendipitous that the SLSF didn't have the urge to start using self-guarding frogs until after the 1600's were gone, or [3] were they actually in at least limited use in the areas where 1600's were assigned and limits on their movements were handled locally or even verbally. I doubt seriously if we will ever know.

    Gordon
     
  14. U-3-b

    U-3-b Member Frisco.org Supporter

  15. Brad Slone

    Brad Slone Member Frisco.org Supporter

    Learn something new everyday, I assumed self guarded frogs where a recent invention. As far as manganese, that was what I meant not what I wrote!

    Brad
     
  16. meteor910

    meteor910 2009 Engineer of the Year Staff Member Frisco.org Supporter

    Yep. Magnesium would make a real nice fire from the friction of a wheel flange if any contact was made.

    Ken
     
  17. gbmott

    gbmott Member

    Karl

    When was your Trackwork Standard Plans book dated? This has me curious as I know that self-guarding frogs were commonplace in the industry by the time I started working in the late '60's so I'm wondering if the SLSF was a holdout.

    Gordon
     
  18. Karl

    Karl 2008 Engineer of the Year Frisco.org Supporter

    Sept 1, 1980....


    If you have Clemons' and Key's book on Birmingham look at page 111, which has a pic of East Thomas Yard. Several self-guarded frogs are present, and some of the turnouts have guard rails guarding the self guarded frogs.

    std_plan_toc.jpg
     
  19. gbmott

    gbmott Member

    Thanks Karl -- you learn something every day. I'm really surprised that the SLSF was not using self-guarding frogs by 1980, but that would certainly be what the plan book is suggesting.

    Gordon
     
  20. qaprr

    qaprr Member Frisco.org Supporter

    Self Guarded Frogs were used on the Frisco in the sixties and later. Most major yard renovations included Self Guarded Frogs. Self Guarded Frogs were not used on the main track on the Frisco. The AREA plan was used.
    Mike Lutzenberger
     

Share This Page