Camelback engines

PRR E1 class

NYO&W

It's not a matter of quantity. It's a matter of "uniqueness."

Heck, even the Southern Pacific rostered a camelback, designed to burn inferior Arizona fuel!

And THAT fuel would be?

That Santa Fe firebox looks like nothing I've ever seen; possibly an oil-burner. The UP looks like the front end is set up for coal.

Lackawanna #952

Now to muddy the waters a bit, attached are two pictures of the Winans Camel, where the cab is not on the side of the boiler, but on top.  One of these is in the B&O RR Museum in Baltimore; you can see it in oepration at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=272MSlvUIpI. 

Now if one was only available in O guage

Now if one was only available in O guage...

They were.. and Blow out too!

Here's the scoop:

#738 was built by Schenectady in 1889, builders #2405.

Rebuilt into a standard cab 4-4-0 #40 (road number and the only locomotive in the 40 class) 1892. Scrapped in Topeka 1925.

So, 3 years as a camelback 4-4-2 #738, 33 years as a standard cab 4-4-0 #40.

True, while this classifies the Santa Fe as an owner of A camelback locomotive, it hardly means that camelback locomotives had any influence (other than avoid at all costs) with Santa Fe motive power development like the previously mentioned eastern roads. 

The 738's not even a blip in the Santa Fe all time steam roster.

Rusty

02/05/13: corrected build date typo.

Prr***curve:  Are you saying a Winans Camel was avaiable in O?

All I can do is tell you that I repeated what I read. I was going to tell you that you would have to take it up w/ the author of the book, and I was going to post a pict of one that was in there.......but I just looked over the posts. MWB beat me to it. I see others chimed in also.

It appears PRR did use some to burn that ugly coal they had in those wide fireboxes.

Greg

The PRR built three E-1 4-4-2 Camelbacks (698, 700 and 820) in 1899 to compete with Philadelphia & Reading 4-4-2 Camelbacks that were setting speed records on the Atlantic City Railroad and attracting lucrative passenger traffic between Philadelphia and the seashore. Those "Boardwalk Flyers" arrived and departed from Camden. Designed by Axel S. Vogt, PRR Mechanical Engineer at Altoona, the E-1's ran well. But the PRR did not like the separation of the engineer in the center cab and the fireman at the backhead. A speaking tube device was installed to enable them to communicate. The European six-wheel tender had a tendency to derail. Later 4-4-2's had end cabs. They culminated in the renowned E-6 4-4-2's. No. 460, The Lindbergh Engine, is displayed in The Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania at Strasburg.

Reading......

Thank you for your post, reading it made me see and error on my original post.

"setting speed records on the Atlantic City Railroad"

I said the ACL used them. I meant to type ACR, which is what you typed out, and the real intent for my letters. I saw my error when I read your post!

Man, this thread has legs, doesn't it!

Thanks again, Greg

You're simply not comprehending, Rusty. And it seems you're not even trying to get it.

It's not about QUANTITY. It's not about the INFLUENCE of the design.

Someone made a statement that said only a few roads had camelbacks. I showed that at least three other roads had them. Whether they had one or 500 rostered ISN'T THE ISSUE.

Geeze...

I understand things quite well, thankyouverymuch. 

The addition of three other roads STILL leave the owners of camelbacks in "the few" catagory.  Unless it can be proved that a majority of US railroads owned and operated camelback locomotives.

Quantity and design influence do have a place in this discussion as the camelback locomotive gained a measure of acceptance in the eastern part of the country but not the midwest or western parts of the country.

Rusty

No, you really don't.

By "few," I meant the roads listed in the poster's statement:

with exception of ERIE,  they were unique to the true "anthracite" railroads: DL&W, RDG, CNJ, LV, and D&H

Six roads listed as camelback owners. I added three more to that "exclusive" list. Again, I'm pointing out OWNERSHIP of camelbacks, not HOW MANY.

So, now we've gone from "a few" to "exclusive?"  I guess that makes things all better...

I accept the fact that the Santa Fe owned a camelback.  I haven't denied that fact, given the photograph and particularly since I was able to verify the builder, build year, constuction number and ultimate disposition.

Given that Santa Fe didn't follow up with any other cameback purchases and rebulit the locomotive into standard configuration 3 years into of the locomotive's overall lifespan of 36 years, I don't consider the Santa Fe in the same ownership league as DL&W, Erie, RDG, CNJ, LV and D&H.

Rusty

Can we call a halt to the aregument over semantics?

No...that's what I've always been saying, since the last page. Doesn't make anything better, it just means you're getting it now.

Ownership league? That's a good one. Either a railroad owned a camelback, or they didn't. Period.

How many they owned, when they owned them, who built them, what fuel they burned, or how long they had them is not what I'm addressing. Despite your attempt to change the direction of my point.

kent,

yes I am, two of my favorites were #988 with the wings & #1031 when they went to a rear cab.

Steve,

You're going to have to show me which post I deinied the Santa Fe ever owned a camelback. 

You asked a specific question: "How do you explain this engine--lettered for the AT&SF?"

And my in initial response was: "An anomoly."

That is not a denial.  It also provided an opportunity for additional facts, which I seem to recall being the one to provide them.  If I could have located additional data regarding the 738's life and operation in my reference materials, I would have provided that also.

I would have thought I provided "more or the story" regarding the 738, which also included obsevation, opinion, and the 738's significance(or lack of) in Santa Fe motive power development, but it's clear you're not interested in additional information, just your opinion, being able to say "I told you so" and a raw tally without any

substantiation of who owned what.

Rusty

Thank you for the gentlemanly act Kent. Now perhaps the posts can return to the subject matter of camel backs in general. It really had gotten interesting.

Greg

Now back to Camelbacks!

Although my plate is full at the moment, I've been thinking that the drivetrain from an MTH Railking 2-8-0 would be a great start to modeling an earlier Reading I-8 (when they still had slide valves, anyway.)

wowak:  if you search around on google, you'll find a posting by a person who converted a loco into a Winans Camel.  May give you some ideas.

A Winan's camel is a little outside my time window, but I did just win a DCRU MTH 0-8-0 on eBay that I'm going to use to build a Reading E-8 2-8-0.   Maybe some day if the projects get light I'll build a Winans just to sell.

I worked with a guy who had been a CNJ Fireman and had come to the Santa Fe in 1950 as an experienced Fireman.  He fired camelbacks in commuter service (all hand-bombers, of course), and talked with me about it.  He naturally had to fire the engine, and also look out the left side when necessary to see signals located around left curves, pick up orders if hooped up to the left side, etc.  Communication with the Engineer was by hand signals.  They could not "call signals".

So which railroad had the biggest and baddest camelbacks? 

So how about them diesel camelbacks ...

Alco C415 stored at Council Bluffs 1980 (leased from/returned to Union Pacific)

So what is it, Ace?

I think the operative term is "Centercab". 

Some center-cabs kinda look like a camel.

http://motoriseddandruff.blogs...0_04_01_archive.html

Here's the B&O version that I could not find. Still, I'm happy with mine, and it will look good on the Civil War layout I will eventually build.

And just for funsies, here's another O gauge Camel.