Were there any push-pull steam trains in regular operation in the USA ?

Jersey Central, Boston & Albany  had 4-6-4 "commuter engines" used in push pull operations during the steam era. Canadian National also had the same operation. CN #47 survives at Steam Town. 

PAUL ROMANO posted:

Jersey Central, Boston & Albany  had 4-6-4 "commuter engines" used in push pull operations during the steam era. Canadian National also had the same operation. CN #47 survives at Steam Town. 

They were NOT "push-pull" in the true sense, but simply "tank locomotives" that did not have be turned at each end of the run. The locomotive simply ran around the train set, and operated in reverse going back to the home terminal. The steam locomotive was NOT operated from a "cab car" on the opposite end of the passenger train.

The British did, however develop a "remote controlled" steam locomotive for true "push-pull" operations.

K-Line made a model of one of those U.S. tank engines described above. The prototype was not remote controlled, however, you can, with a decent transformer, control the model remotely.

I suspect American union labor might have resisted true push-pull steam trains on the basis of crew safety, and because it might have reduced crew requirements with faster train turn-arounds. It might have been practical only for smaller lighter passenger trains on shorter runs, in an era when much of that traffic was handled by interurbans and later by self-propelled internal-combustion railcars.

Britain still ran some push-pull steam trains into the 1950's, until DMU trains became viable replacements. Britain also had many more light-traffic rural passenger operations until the 1963 Beeching Plan initiated widespread abandonments of branch lines.

Ace posted:

Britain used to have push-pull steam trains for passenger services on various rural lines. These were mostly short trains for relatively short runs, to save the trouble of running the loco around the train at each terminal. The trains had special "driving trailers" for the "train driver", when the train was moving with the loco on the trailing end (or sometimes in the middle of the train). . . The first company to use the system was the Great Western Railway  . . . Control was by rodding and the mechanism allowed the driving compartment to be either one or two carriages-distant from the engine.     

Oh, boy!  I'll bet some good stories resulted from that decision.

I believe Illinois Central commuter trains ran push pull steam, a high mounted light was put on the tender. I believe the Illinois Railway Museum has one such steam engine, I have an old picture of a thin version of me standing in front of it somewhere.

illinoiscentral posted:

I believe Illinois Central commuter trains ran push pull steam, a high mounted light was put on the tender. I believe the Illinois Railway Museum has one such steam engine, I have an old picture of a thin version of me standing in front of it somewhere.

IRM has the 201.

IC 201 was built in 1880 as the 213 with a slope back tender and the tender headlight about the same height as the front headlight.  In 1884 it was renumbered to 221, 201 in 1890, 1401 in 1900 and back to 201 in 1926.  It apparently lost the rear headlight somewhere between 1890 and 1900.  (Rods Down and Dropped Fires: Illinois Central and the Steam Age In Perspective by Richard P. Bessette)

A photo of 1402 shows a cab mounted rear light, but apparently the only reason it's mounted there is to clear the coal pile:

But even a headlight mounted on the cab roof would be useless for illuminating the right-of-way with several coaches in front of the locomotive.  All a high mounted headlight on the tank or cab roof would do is illuminate the roof of the coupled coach.

Don't think the IC commuter engines ran "push."  Pretty sure they ran around the train at  the other end and operated in reverse or were even turned.

Rusty

illinoiscentral posted:

I believe Illinois Central commuter trains ran push pull steam, a high mounted light was put on the tender. 

As I stated previously, there were no true "push-pull" steam locomotive operations in the U.S., which would have required some sort of remote controls for operating the steam locomotive from the other end of the passenger consist. The Illinois Central did use Tank Engines, which ran around the train, and then pulled the train back, with the locomotive running in reverse.

or 2 head end crews.

Some conventional (non-tank engine) Chicago & North Western and Central RR of NJ steam locomotives were outfitted with pilots on their tenders, which allowed for pulling commuter trains backward. Presume the locomotive would uncouple, run around to the other end of the train, and be off. For runs terminating w/o a wye or turn table. Sort of a "push/pull"?

Having run "push-pull" (in reality pull-push) at IRM, I can say pushing 8 coaches, even at around 15-20mph for about 2-3 miles, I would have rather had the option of my locomotive run around and pull my train back tender first to the East Union depot.

Fortunately, I had competent tail hose men.

Rusty

LIRR used diesel "powerpacks" made from old Alco and EMD cab units. They carries HEP and controls. This was regular operations for many years. Sorry, I don't have a picture handy, but look for LIRR online and you will find several good site. I did get a cab ride in a F unit during a fantrip once.

Amtrak also pushes and pulls on its Michigan line. There are and were a large variety of cab cars and converted diesels (cabbages) that also held baggage, HEP and controls.

Al

aoslapas posted:

LIRR used diesel "powerpacks" made from old Alco and EMD cab units. They carries HEP and controls. This was regular operations for many years. Sorry, I don't have a picture handy, but look for LIRR online and you will find several good site. I did get a cab ride in a F unit during a fantrip once.

Amtrak also pushes and pulls on its Michigan line. There are and were a large variety of cab cars and converted diesels (cabbages) that also held baggage, HEP and controls.

Al

OK but, the original poster's subject title concerns "push-pull" operations with  STEAM, as was done in England.

For a period, due to an out of service drawbridge, the Jersey Central operated a shuttle to/from South Kearny utilizing a single coach with a camelback ten wheeler attached to each end!  In either direction the "rear" loco just went along for the ride.

the Los Gatos branch out of San Francisco was unusual in that the engine servicing etc was back at San Jose.  the train ran conventionally to Los Gatos, the engine ran around the train and ran backwards to San Jose.  there was a pilot and a headlight on the rear of the tender.

southern pacific in the bay area; kalmback, pg 44

mikeg

Only thing I can think of that would (slightly) resemble that would be mainline Milwaukee Road passenger trains in Minneapolis, like the Hiawatha. Trains had to back up about 30 blocks thru south Minneapolis to get from the Milwaukee Road mainline to their downtown Minneapolis passenger depot. The engine remained at the front of the train. IIRC the observation cars had a 'headlight' and horn which the conductor controlled, and (at least by the 1930's) the conductor I think had a radio connection to the engineer so he could relay instructions from the observation car's rear.

For a period, due to an out of service drawbridge, the Jersey Central operated a shuttle to/from South Kearny utilizing a single coach with a camelback ten wheeler attached to each end!  In either direction the "rear" loco just went along for the ride.

The Reading ran trains like that with several coaches between the Reading Fair north of the city [now the site of Fairgrounds Mall]  and the Outer Station and Franklin Street Station downtown. The Fair was adjacent to the Reading's Slatington Branch [Wanamaker, Kempton & Southern] and the East Penn Branch as well as the Pennsy's Schuylkill Division. Locomotives were displayed there. The Pennsy even sent a T-1. The Reading and the Pennsy right-of-ways are still visible at former grade crossings from a road that crosses a bridge over the Reading main line to Pottsville, now operated by the Reading, Blue Mountain & Northern. The NS owns the route from Reading Yard to Philly.

Maybe it's a British or European system more suited to quiet branch lines and seeing their busiest traffic on market days. I remember something about the Great Western's cars being converted from steam railcars. I imagine this would have freed up the operations dept. from the somewhat narrow usage of these railcars.

I also recall something from one of Kalmbach's books about a passenger car being regularly sent free-wheeling back down the grade on the branchline, with the conductor at the brake and he had a mouth horn for the crossings. Where was that?

Mt. Tamalpais in Marin Country north of San Francisco used Gravity cars controlled by a brakeman.

Shay locomotives carried the cars up the mountain.

I reckon the Mt Tamalpais Railway could be considered as a "push-pull" operation. The locomotive stayed on the downhill end of the train coming and going, because of the near-continuous 7% grade to the summit station. Other mountain-climbing tourist railways generally did the same when long steep grades were involved.

Apparently there weren't any American push-pull steam trains in regular use for ordinary rural or commuter service, certainly not to the extent that they were used in England. "Push-pull" operation does not refer to bi-directional locomotives that run around the train at each terminal.

Push - Pull: the Hidden Dangers  [regarding disadvantages in event of derailment at speed]
http://danger-ahead.railfan.ne...elby20010228_rs.html

wjstix posted:

. . . Trains had to back up about 30 blocks thru south Minneapolis to get from the Milwaukee Road mainline to their downtown Minneapolis passenger depot. The engine remained at the front of the train. IIRC the observation cars had a 'headlight' and horn which the conductor controlled, and (at least by the 1930's) the conductor I think had a radio connection to the engineer so he could relay instructions from the observation car's rear.

This, although steam powered until 1941, was merely a long reverse movement, rather than a road movement in the opposite direction with the engine shoving -- a very big distinction.  Southern Pacific did the same thing with the Daylight and all of its other Los Angeles passenger trains until Los Angeles Union Passenger Terminal opened in 1939.

Espee trains had to make a long reverse movement down street trackage in Alameda Boulevard, to reach SP's Central Station.  (All were steam powered, as the only SP passenger diesel of that era was a jointly owned EMC E2, used only on the City of San Francisco.)

As information, all the observation cars that I know of were equipped with at least an air whistle and an air valve which could be used to give audible warning and stop the movement.  Streamlined observations often had a white light at roof level on the rear (SP and ATSF notably) plus a rotary air valve ("caboose valve") inside the car for the Trainman controlling the movement to use in making a smooth stop.  I witnessed such a movement first-hand in 1957, on Rock Island's southbound Twin Star Rocket, which pulled past the junction of the north/south and east/west CRI&P lines and then backed into Des Moines, under control of the Flagman.  He opened a panel in the side wall at the rear and sat in a lounge chair of the parlor-observation car, where the rotary valve was located.  Other controls in the panel were the rear light, marker lights, and air valves for the windshield wiper and air horn.  Because all control valves on the Rocket's cars were set for graduated release, the rotary valve was used differently than it would have been used on the caboose of a freight train.

CNJ 3676 posted:

For the benefit of those not familiar with the British push pull steam operation being discussed, posted below are a few images of this type of equipment as seen in preservation. The interior shot is particularly useful as it shows the Driver operating the train from the cab of the auto-trailer...   

Bob

Many Thanks for those photos of the real thing. I've been wondering how they rig "remote control" for a steam locomotive. Remote control of train brakes is easy enough (vacuum brakes on most English trains). The driver would also need throttle and cutoff controls (someone can correct me on "proper terminology"), which sounds cumbersome with manual linkage through the train.

A simpler possibility (I wonder if they did this?) would be with a "ship telegraph" arrangement which simply relays instructions to the fireman. This would need only a single lightweight manual linkage through the train but it would certainly keep the fireman busy with multiple duties.

Or they could just use whistle signals. I've read that was sometimes done.

The regulator of the auto-trailer is connected by linkage to a rotating shaft which runs the length of the coach. It is then connected to a similar shaft under the locomotive via a telescopic coupling. When the regulator in the coach is moved, it turns these shafts thus controlling the locomotive's speed as if the Driver were running from the engine cab. The valve gear or cutoff setting is controlled by the Fireman in the locomotive cab.

I hope this helps.

Bob  

CNJ 3676 posted:

The regulator of the auto-trailer is connected by linkage to a rotating shaft which runs the length of the coach. It is then connected to a similar shaft under the locomotive via a telescopic coupling. When the regulator in the coach is moved, it turns these shafts thus controlling the locomotive's speed as if the Driver were running from the engine cab. The valve gear or cutoff setting is controlled by the Fireman in the locomotive cab.

I hope this helps.

Bob  

That's very interesting, thanks for the info. So the fireman was expected to adjust the cutoff as required, and only a single linkage was needed for the regulator (throttle).

Perhaps the control cab used a steam whistle, since English trains used vacuum brakes instead of compressed air (with rare exceptions).

Before the first Cascade Tunnel was constructed, Great Northern crossed Stevens Pass using a series of switchbacks. However, I am not sure if trains would push through one switchback and pull through another, but the possibility is there.

On a side note, the first 2 mile Cascade Tunnel is still there and the area has lots of trails and open to the public and the tunnel portals viewable and can even be walked up to, the tunnel itself is closed to the public. The second 8-mile Cascade Tunnel is still used by BNSF to this day. 

WBC posted:

Before the first Cascade Tunnel was constructed, Great Northern crossed Stevens Pass using a series of switchbacks. However, I am not sure if trains would push through one switchback and pull through another, but the possibility is there.

On a side note, the first 2 mile Cascade Tunnel is still there and open to the public. The second 8-mile Cascade Tunnel is still used by BNSF to this day. 

A switch back is simply a reverse movement, just as backing trains into a depot.  The engineer is still safely tucked away in his locomotive and a there's a brakeman operating a tail hose during the movement.  All the brakeman can do is "dump the air," he has no control over the locomotive's throttle.

It hardly compares to full fledged "reverse operation" that the Brits and most of today's commuter operations execute.