I was rereading Stagner's "Steam Locomotives of the Frisco Lines" and some items ignited my curiosity. This is but one example: He stated that a 4100 class was good for 4,200 tons from Ft. Scott to Olathe and 5,200 tons from Olathe on into KC and,conversely, 2,800 tons KC to Olathe and 3,500 tons on to Ft. Scott with only 2,750 tons to Springfield. My question is how were these trains made up? To me, the train would be limited to the 4,200 tons- Ft, Scott to KC- but was more tonnage added at Olathe? How was the disparity in tonnage accounted for to maximize train length? Doubleheading? Shorter and more often trains? My earliest memories are of first generation diesels so the concept of this steam era tonnage is foreign to me. Dispatching must have been a nightmare.
KC was very unique because there was a grade that started at Rosedale, KS outbound yard, and went all the way to Lenexa, KS. Since any engine had to start up this grade from a dead stop,they would be filled out to maximum tonage rating for this hill. Coming from Ft. Scott, KS into KC, would be different tonage becasue there was another grade but I do not remember where it was located. There were tables which had every engine tonage rating for all divisons and subdivisions if neccessary going in both dirrections becuase it was usually different. They were caluated using a dinamonitor car, not spelled correctly.
During the 30's-40's, 4100's and 4200's and (later the 4300's and 4400's)were typical power for KC-Springfield freights. For the period, the minimum tonnage rating between these two points for the 4100's (2750 tons, sbd; 2800 tons, nbd) would have made a decent-sized freight train. The 4200's, whose TE exceeded the 4300's and 4400's, were limited to 3200 tons nbd & sbd (ETT 37A); again a typical-sized freight for the Frisco of that period.
Thanks for the details, Karl and Richard. Here's a smattering of information that I've culled from the old Frisco Employee's Magazines; it shows some of the aforementioned 4100 Mikes and number of cars. Best Regards,
Karl, Richard,and Yardmaster: a big thank you. Yardmaster, I hate to show my ignorance, but in your table it shows tons of coal; is this the coal consumed in that stretch i.e.: KC to Ft. Scott? Larry
I am showing my ignorance too! In the remarks section ... What does the EMTs stand for? (maybe empty?) What does the FEM stand for?
Fellas, I should have edited or clarified. My apologies for any confusion that arose as a result. First, Larry, the Fuel column does indeed refer to the fuel consumed between the two points cited. This came from the Locomotive Fuel Performance regular feature that was often published in the "Frisco Employee's Magazine." "FEM" stands for "Frisco Employee's Magazine;" this is for my own reference so I know from where the data came. And MTYs is shorthand for "empties." Thanks for asking. Best Regards,
Can you imagine what it would be like shoveling 15 tons of coal between here and Fort Scott? My great-grandfather said that on the River Division from Chaffee to Memphis, the trip was an eight hour trip and he shoveled 16 tons of coal to make the trip (about 150 miles) on that average -0.06% grade.
Yardmaster-thanks for the clarification-that is a lot of coal as I had no idea that much coal was used. While I'm on the subject of coal, does an automatic stoker just move the coal forward in the tender to be hand fired or does it feed the fire directly? As a side note, would an engine use more than one tank of water from KC to Ft. Scott? I hate to sound so naive on the subject of steam but these are things I know nothing of and I was curious about. Larry
Some firemen might object to the term automatic. Mechanical stoker might be a better moniker. Just inside the firebox door was a distribution plate on which the stoker screw placed coal. Steam jets then blew the coal from the distribution plate to different locations in the firebox. Each jet had its own control valve. It took lots of skill to adjust the stoker to engine speed and to adjust the jets to keep pressure needle right on the "peg". Several Frisco locomotive classes had a coal pusher on the tender. These devices shoved the coal forward for easier access by the stoker and fireman. Depending upon train tonage, speed, tender size, delays, etc, a train would need water at least once between KC & Ft Scott.
There is a web site: http://www.steamlocomotive.com/ that addresses some of these questions in a very general way. The home page has a dark gray bar along the top with keywords. Mousing over each of the words will lead to a drop-down menu. For instance, mousing on Builders/Specs will drop a 3 choice menu: Steam appliances >, Steam Builders, Specifications >. Mousing over those with the ">" leads to more drop down choices. As an example, "Specifications >" leads to "Steam Locomotive Designer," ( http://www.steamlocomotive.com/misc/TractiveEffort.shtml )where you can see the effect of changing driver diameter, boiler pressure, etc. on tractive effort, top speed, etc. I am not sure it addresses water consumption, others on the forum can give actual consumption from specific runs or point to other information about how to predict water use from locomotive power, train size and speed.
I'm glad that you mentioned this. I have one of the old VHS copies of the various NYC promotional shorts, narrated by Lowell Thomas, that show the firebox (with open door) and the steam jets blowing. Talk about keeping a fireman on his toes. For all I knew, however, it was a purely NYC contraption, as much as scooping water on the fly. Best Regards,
Thanks to one and all for the info...that steamlocomotive,com is indeed interesting. I think I'll just go back to my diesels-a lot less complicated. Larry
