LEW: I enjoyed your narrative re stoker types and methods of firing very much. I was especially interested in your remarks re the Hanna stokers. In the Staufer book "Thoroughbreds" in the "From the Men" section he confirms that L-2 #2706 was equipped with a Hanna. Of more interest to me is that he also stated J-3 Hudson #5432 had a Hanna. Do you have any first hand experience with this Hudson? I have heard that it was a "west end" engine. (I have the builder's plate from Hudson 5432.) To All: The Headlight article on the Niagaras should not have commented that #5500 was the first to have an air horn applied, as it could not be confirmed. This was a simple mod. Older fellow members of the NYC Historical Society heard that the air horn application was a possible safety issue, as a broken whistle cord and also the distance to the whistle from the engineer's position made the whistle difficult to hear in bad weather with the cab windows closed. Note that I am unable to confirm this info positively, but feel it is worth repeating. The bells were also relocated on the Niagaras from behind the pilot to a location above the valve gear yoke on the engineer's side of the engine. This change was evidently made since bells were freezing and became inoperative in winter weather. (The streamlined Hudsons were also delivered with the bells behind the pilot, and evidently were not relocated while these engines were streamlined. With regard to use of Niagaras on the Michigan Central, if these engines had a clearance restriction, then it would have been listed in a Michigan Central employees operating timetable. I do not have any MC timetables, but perhaps someone who has one (some?) can check this for us. I think it more likely that "Power Control" in NY kept these engines within certain assignments, in rotation, to maximize monthly mileage.
Tom, glad to hear from you again. I was getting worried about your well-being. Welcome back. LEW has added a lot of technical info to this forum.
Glad you enjoyed.No I never fired a Hudson although we did double head a few from Elkhart-Indianapolis when they were moving steam to the B4 in 1954-55.A west end engine could mean it stayed west of Cleveland or Toledo but my guess would be Cleveland.This information on the whistle could be correct and probably a combination of all.I have not been to Elk. for 21 yrs.and the old ones are gone that could tell us This is true about the bell.We had this same problem with the GP-7, 9 until they moved them above the headlight.Again I think you are correct on running the 6000's.When the diesels started taking over the MC with their many good passenger trains went from the hudson to diesel and there wasn't any need for the 6000 except on the B4. LEW
I need to make a correction concernig my article on feedwater heaters. I said the 2900 L-2 had a elesco feedwater with a recprocating water pump.They had a centrifugal pump and loss of 15lb. of boiler pressure did effect the water delivery from this pump. Lew
Was there that much difference in the performance of a centrifugal vs. reciprocating pump in the feedwater system?
It was only on the 2900 series that had this promblem.These engines carried 225lbs. pressure and once you lost the 15lbs. and you usually was starting to have trouble with the fire,for some reason these pumps were very sensitive to the boiler pressure below 210lbs.Fire problems was usually caused by a change in the coal.You would be going along and the fire would be doing just fine,suddenly the coal would change. The company used coal from the strip mines in southern In.and we called it Indiana real estate.There wasn't any way for you to know the coal was going to change until all at once the fire started burning a dull red and the boiler pressure started dropping.Now you had to increase the stoker speed for more coal and forget about the smoke and see if you can hold the pressure and check the depth of the fire.With this dirt coal you have to keep a thin fire to make it burn.You will have to rock the grates,not shake them to get your fire the right depth,in fact I have left the grates slightly cocked with this coal to get all of draft I could to make it burn. All of the 2900's that I fired had this problem,some more than others. I don't know if these pumps were a little under sized or what but the reciprocating pumps never gave problems unless they needed repairs. LEW
If the boiler pressure (steam) dropped, wouldn't that in turn lower the resistance that the pump had to overcome to force water into the boiler? I know I'm missing something here in trying to understand exactly how all these processes are related to each other. "Indiana real estate," eh? You mean you guys out west didn't get that high grade coal that the NYC-Chi guys did? [ 22. July 2002, 20:47: Message edited by: fitz ]
I never could find out why this pump acted in this manner.I have been telling what took place but not all of the actions. When the steam pressure was 210-215 lbs.the pump would supply the boiler and if you opened the steam valve it would supply more water than the loco was using.This is as it should be if the pump is normal.The problem was as the steam pressure dropped below 210 it seemed as if the pump slowed down more and at 200 lb. the pump even though the control valve to the pump was wide open would not supply the boiler.It was as if for every 1lb of steam you lost you would lose 3lb.to the pump and the pump would slow down, the pressure acting as a governor.The 2800 L-2 had coffin feed water heaters and used a centrifugal pump but not this underpumping problem.All pumps would slow down as the steam pressure dropped but not to this extreme.Also this slow down did not start until the steam pressure was below 195lbs. on all of the other pumps.As you say all things being equal you should have been able to supply the boiler down to about 180lbs.and you could except with the one pump.If all 2900 had this problem I don't know but the several that I fired did.In fact there was a point if you were trading water for steam ,forget the pump and use the injector.I don't know if I answered questions or created more but sometimes you react to a problem and never know what caused it because you can't get to the information. LEW
It sounds like the centrifugal pumps could get you into a dangerous situation of low water. Why did the centrifugal pumps remain on engines? Were they less expensive, easier to maintain, or what?
LEW, the light bulb just lit up over my head. I keep forgetting (duuuh) that all appliances operated either by steam or by air. It's kind of a catch-22 when the steam pressure drops off, everything slows down. I guess I never thought about things like "at what pressure (or lack of) does the pump stop working at normal capacity?" Thanks for all of this great information. Steam engines were (are) fascinating creatures.
My father told me that the 2800's were better engines than the 2900's...but he never told me why. Perhaps LEW's post is the reason!
Hank,When you had this water supply problem and after every thing was back to normal you took it in stride and accepted this flaw on these engines, always ready when working on these engines.If there had been 2 or 3 boiler explosions and someone had survived to tell the story something may have been done.If you reported the pump they would have tested with 220 lbs.boiler pressure and would OK the pump.The engineer or myself would have to hold their hand and make sure the pressure was 195lbs. and when it showed it was not suppling the boiler they would say use the injector that's what it is on there for.So the problem was never admitted to exist. LEW
As with everything else, without the word EXCEPT, the world as we know it could not function.Some of the L-3s had elesco feed water heaters and the same water pump as the 2900s.I don't remember having any water problems with these engines.Of course they may have recognized the problem as used on the 2900s and corrected this on the 303?.I can't believe it was anything more than a larger supply pipe from the turrent to the pump. LEW
