Dismiss Notice
PLEASE READ THIS THREAD REGARDING SITE FUNDING AND SERVER CHANGES
Dismiss Notice
ANOTHER GREAT FRISCO RAFFLE!

Q & A: Steam Engine Fuels & Assignments and Engine Treminal Ops...

Discussion in 'General Steam' started by TAG1014 (Tom Galbraith RIP 7/15/2020), Jul 15, 2009.

  1. TAG1014 (Tom Galbraith RIP 7/15/2020)

    TAG1014 (Tom Galbraith RIP 7/15/2020) Passed Away July 15, 2020 Frisco.org Supporter

    I think my questions would be a good one for Don Wirth, but probably also others. In steam days at a large terminal like St. Louis or Springfield, how were the assignments doled out for the engine roster? What happens when they need an oil burner and only have coal burners in the house? How far in advance were the needed engines prepared? How many spares were available? I know they used oil burners on freight and coal burners on passengers etc. etc., but for us who grew up in diesel era, some of these things are very mysterious. My only knowledge of engine servicing is seeing a passenger train arriving in Springfield, fuel and water added and maybe a unit switched out. Big questions, inquiring minds etc...

    Thanks, Tom
     
    TAG1014 (Tom Galbraith RIP 7/15/2020), Jul 15, 2009
    #1
  2. Iantha_Branch

    Iantha_Branch Member

    I don't know about any of that, I didn't even realize that coal burners were better for passenger service than oil. I thought it didn't make a difference.
     
    Iantha_Branch, Jul 15, 2009
    #2
  3. yardmaster

    yardmaster Administrator Staff Member Administrator Frisco.org Supporter

    Tom-
    I'm far from being a good resource.

    That said, I do know that most pictures I've seen and most research I've done seem to indicate that most passenger trains in the steam days were oil fueled, where coal predominated on freight.

    The exception seems to be in the SW areas (OK, TX) where quite a few of the freight locomotives were equipped with oil bunkers in the tender. I have to assume this was partially due to the easy availability of oil.

    I don't recall how the passenger locomotives were handled at the Springfield depot, but I know I've read in the old Frisco Employee Magazines that the SL-SF started running its passenger power through the intermediate terminals, with servicing at the end of each run (e.g. 807/808 and 805/806 would take the same motive power from St. Louis to Memphis with no power change in Chaffee).

    I'll look forward to information on locomotive assignments. One can generally tell what classes were used where and when through the various print sources available, but I'm sure there's more to the story.

    Best Regards,
     
    yardmaster, Jul 15, 2009
    #3
  4. TAG1014 (Tom Galbraith RIP 7/15/2020)

    TAG1014 (Tom Galbraith RIP 7/15/2020) Passed Away July 15, 2020 Frisco.org Supporter

    I guess my questions should be more "genric." No particular city. I was thinking what would be some of the duties of an engine terminal superintendent--Like deciding which engines were first out? Like: "A day in the life of a steam engine terminal supervisor."
    How would they cope with the two kinds of fuel (A diesel superintendent just has ONE kind!)? And what went in to choosing engine assignments? For example, in the days just before diselization and streamlining, the Texas Special had become such a heavy train, that 4500 coal burners were used as the power (Oil burners 4500-4501-4502 were pulling the Meteor). What would a terminal supervisor do if a 4500 weren't available? Who had to make such decisions? How did they do it? Not quite like changing one E-8 for another...

    Tom
     
    TAG1014 (Tom Galbraith RIP 7/15/2020), Jul 15, 2009
    #4
  5. TAG1014 (Tom Galbraith RIP 7/15/2020)

    TAG1014 (Tom Galbraith RIP 7/15/2020) Passed Away July 15, 2020 Frisco.org Supporter

    F M Hopefully--Coal burners wouldn't be better for passenger trains. Oil burners were much cleaner!

    Tom
     
    TAG1014 (Tom Galbraith RIP 7/15/2020), Jul 16, 2009
    #5

Share This Page