Steam “pushers”

Are you running DCC? Or conventional?

I don't see why that rear dummy idea wouldn't work! The only think to be careful of is how much weight you're putting at the rear of the train. Could cause derailments if you have light cars in the middle.

Won't you end up having to make up the train considering the weight of each car--almost like a real railroad's marshalling yard? That's pretty cool.

If you use DCC, then just give both locos the same address, or consist them together so  you can control them with one throttle.

I had a friend with a large HO layout based on 1928 with a long helper grade.    since steamers require individual crews, he did the same.    He had an operator run each loco and they had to work together.    It was quite fun.

On straight DC, both locos would run the same direction, but the speeds may not match.   You could use two identical locos.

I personally do not like dummy locos, either diesel or steam.    all of my locos are powered.    That is just a preference for me.

I operated a helper on a layout, pushing trains up to the Horseshoe Curve.  It was DCC and both engines were controlled separately.  Great fun to make sure there was slack in the couplers about midway in the freight.

Ed

Years ago I experimented with a TMCC led consist with a DCS pusher on the rear. Both were steamers. I run exclusively Kadee couplers. I set up the TMCC engine to run a previously recorded route. Starting and stopping in a set spot. Once the lead engine was underway. You could watch the slack taken up in the Kadee’s. You ran the pusher with the DCS remote and basically just kept your eyes on the couplers till you found the right matching speed steps. When the hill was crested the TMCC lead engine slowly came to a stop. You would slowly ramp down the DCS engine trying to match it and then uncouple the 2.

@prrjim posted:

..On straight DC, both locos would run the same direction, but the speeds may not match...

The speeds do not have to match exactly. As long as they are close, that's good enough.

It is a common misconception that to MU two locomotives (or to double-head steam) that their speeds have to match perfectly. It simply is not true. If one locomotive is a little "faster" than the other, when they are coupled on the same train, it will pull a little harder on the train than the "slower" locomotive. As long as it is not slipping its wheels, you are OK. The "faster" locomotive should be in the lead, with the "slower" locomotive as the rear-end pusher, or the second unit in a diesel consist.

Interesting.  My experience is with triple steam in front, and I have not tried pushers.  My mis-matches include Williams 0-6-0s paired with scratchbuilt, and 2-10-2/4-10-2 combos.  The 2-10-2s have different driver diameters (different scales) so all are mis-matched.  Doesn't seem to affect anything.

I even have a 2-6-6-2 with slightly different gear ratios on each engine - no problem.  I run straight filtered DC power.

I would have said "triple-shotted" or "triple headed" but with Rich lurking I am no longer sure of the proper terminology.

@bob2 posted:

..I would have said "triple-shotted" or "triple headed" but with Rich lurking I am no longer sure of the proper terminology.

It would be “triple-slotted”, not “triple-shotted.” Triple-headed is good, too.

Just don’t use the word “lashup” and you’ll be fine.  👌

Weaker engines make the best pushers.  It may be possible to reduce the tractive effort of steam pushers by removing boiler weight.  I have a few plastic O-Scale 2R steamers which were custom-made some years ago.  They aren't much at the head end of a long freight alone, but are superb in shoving a freight without derailing. All DCC.  Unfortunately, I have not heard from the fabricator of my engines for years and don't believe he is still in the business; therefor I am unable to pass along sourcing information.

I have a steep grade that can use a pusher with a longish train and usually run alone so I use two wireless throttles, one in each hand.  After the train passes the switch where the pusher is waiting, I throw the turnout and send the pusher off to "catch" the train. Once it’s caught the rear of the train I control it’s speed to keep the train going at the same speed. At the top I slow both engines to a stop and uncouple the pusher and send the train on and return the pusher to the siding.  

Peter

Peter E B,

If you remove the movable part of the KD on the pilot of the pusher, you can just slow the pusher to break contact and back it downhill without stopping the train.

Ed

@Ed Kelly posted:

Peter E B,

If you remove the movable part of the KD on the pilot of the pusher, you can just slow the pusher to break contact and back it downhill without stopping the train.

Ed

Hi Ed, only possible if the rules allow pushing against a caboose – usually not allowed in the transition era, right?

@Ed Kelly posted:

Peter E B,

If you remove the movable part of the KD on the pilot of the pusher, you can just slow the pusher to break contact and back it downhill without stopping the train.

Ed

Uncoupling on the fly.  Saw it on the prototype (with diesels of course), and it is a beautiful thing to watch.  The guy on the caboose reaches down and turns the angle cock so that the air remains bottled from the rear end of the caboose forward.  He then lifts the uncoupling lever and signals the helpers to stop the shove.  As they slow down the air hoses separate and the helpers go into emergency and stop while the train continues on.  Probably more of a nuisance when you have a FRED on the rear end, but that's not my era nor problem.

@Sarah posted:

Hi Ed, only possible if the rules allow pushing against a caboose – usually not allowed in the transition era, right?

Usually allowed with all-steel cabooses.  Wooden cabooses typically had to be coupled behind the assisting engines for safety; some allowances being made for steel underframed wood cabooses.  Requirement to have the caboose behind the helpers required a full stop, switching and another brake test before proceeding; much more difficult.  Modelers wishing to replicate a moving cut off of helpers whould be better off using steel cabooses or claiming their wood cabooses had steel underframes.

I personally don't do dummy locomotives where possible.  But as for multiple locomotives, I make sure they run closely uncoupled with whatever control scheme I'm using (TMCC, Legacy, DCC, or conventionally).  I've run trains that way with locomotives at the front, mid train, and rear without issues.  When using TMCC, Legacy, or DCC I build a consist and then they start and stop together just fine.  Just make sure you aren't going very fast because it will invariably happen that one of the locomotives will decide it doesn't want to go for some reason and then you'll have train cars everywhere.  Happens less then 5% of the time I run trains (I typically always have more then 1 power unit on a train.), but when it does most of the time it's human error or the track needs to be cleaned.  Only once have I actually had a locomotive derp on me.  After picking up the cars and resetting the breaker it ran just fine, and has ever since.  I guess a cosmic ray must have hit it just right.

With a steel underframe cabin car (caboose) PRR freight train practice was for rear end "snappers" (helpers) to push on the cabin.  The platform railings on the cabins had a pair of chains connected to the coupler lift bar and the brake hose line.  So equipped the cabin car crew could uncouple the snapper on the fly at the top of the grade.   An added benefit for crews running west out of Altoona was that steam snappers could be cut off before smoking the cabin car crew in the Gallitzin tunnels.

I've modeled this PRR practice in O scale for many years.  From 1982-2004 we ran helper operations on my railroad in Fairfax, VA.  Control was by DC power – independent control of locomotives in the same electrical block was not possible.  Locomotives in snapper service were carefully assigned so their speed approximated that of the locomotive on the front of the train.  Locomotives in snapper service had their pilot beam knuckles pinned in the open position.  They could push but not couple to the cabin car ahead of them.  This setup prevented derailments on curves should the snapper stall while the front end kept moving.  To simulate uncoupling the snapper on the fly a special power block with a rheostat was installed at the top of the helper district.  With the head end in the next block the helper crew could use the rheostat to reduce voltage to the snapper, creating the uncouple on the fly effect.

My current railroad in Williamsburg, VA was designed for DCC operations.  It features a 4 track Horseshoe Curve scene and helper operations.  We continue to operate with snappers having their coupler knuckles pinned open (the pins are removeable should coupling be desired).   We do not "consist" the head and snapper locomotives, instead using 2 DCC throttles (and crews) the snapper engineer uses his throttle to apply the desired assist.   The crews verbally coordinate starting the train with the snapper crew keeping positive pressure on the cabin car by observing coupler slack in the middle of the train as it climbs the grade.  As the snapper approaches the top of the grade the engineer reduces speed to cut off on the fly.   It's a crowd pleaser to watch a skilled crew work the train - running the snapper is a popular assignment.

@Keystoned Ed posted:

With a steel underframe cabin car (caboose) PRR freight train practice was for rear end "snappers" (helpers) to push on the cabin.  The platform railings on the cabins had a pair of chains connected to the coupler lift bar and the brake hose line.  So equipped the cabin car crew could uncouple the snapper on the fly at the top of the grade.   An added benefit for crews running west out of Altoona was that steam snappers could be cut off before smoking the cabin car crew in the Gallitzin tunnels.

I've modeled this PRR practice in O scale for many years.  From 1982-2004 we ran helper operations on my railroad in Fairfax, VA.  Control was by DC power – independent control of locomotives in the same electrical block was not possible.  Locomotives in snapper service were carefully assigned so their speed approximated that of the locomotive on the front of the train.  Locomotives in snapper service had their pilot beam knuckles pinned in the open position.  They could push but not couple to the cabin car ahead of them.  This setup prevented derailments on curves should the snapper stall while the front end kept moving.  To simulate uncoupling the snapper on the fly a special power block with a rheostat was installed at the top of the helper district.  With the head end in the next block the helper crew could use the rheostat to reduce voltage to the snapper, creating the uncouple on the fly effect.

My current railroad in Williamsburg, VA was designed for DCC operations.  It features a 4 track Horseshoe Curve scene and helper operations.  We continue to operate with snappers having their coupler knuckles pinned open (the pins are removeable should coupling be desired).   We do not "consist" the head and snapper locomotives, instead using 2 DCC throttles (and crews) the snapper engineer uses his throttle to apply the desired assist.   The crews verbally coordinate starting the train with the snapper crew keeping positive pressure on the cabin car by observing coupler slack in the middle of the train as it climbs the grade.  As the snapper approaches the top of the grade the engineer reduces speed to cut off on the fly.   It's a crowd pleaser to watch a skilled crew work the train - running the snapper is a popular assignment.

Sounds like great fun! I'd love to see your layout operate!

@Ed Kelly posted:

I operated a helper on a layout, pushing trains up to the Horseshoe Curve.  It was DCC and both engines were controlled separately.  Great fun to make sure there was slack in the couplers about midway in the freight.

Ed

I did that once on Jim Eudaly's C&O layout in KCMO.  I was a first time visitor and everyone who attended a session had to operate. I was sweating bullets, afraid I was going to derail the train, but it was simpler that I thought. Jim had his Kadee's rigged so they didn't lock and you could fall behind and have to catch up.