Steam & Excursion > NYC’s Centipede Tenders....

I’m curious ...

Are there records of strong discontent ( from NYC RR managers ) with “ Centipede “ tenders used on Hudsons, and Niagaras?

I don’t remember reading about unsatisfactory experiences with NYC’s use of them..


W.

Wes, I have no first hand knowledge of complaints about them, but Tom Gerbracht mentioned in his "Know Thy Niagaras" that the PT types sometimes derailed when backing up, usually on switches. The Central had 6 different types of these tenders, designated PT-1 through PT-6, having various coal and water capacities. To me it looks like they may have been longer than UP's, with quite an overhang in the rear. The ones used on the main line had water scoops. I suspect that they were as much of a problem backing up as we have seen reported here by UP crew members.

W:

One place to try is https://groups.io/g/NYC-Railroad

This was the old yahoo group. In the past there was a diverse group there which did include some NYC railroaders. Perhaps there is someone there that had at leased fired the engines with Centipede tenders or has talked to engineers back in the day. I know the NYCSHS had a couple of articles on the design of tenders and testing of the water scoops in its Headlight magazine written by at guy from the NYC engineering department back in the day. (IIRC, the first tests resulted in burst tenders at speed before overflow pipes were added.)


Victor A. Baird
http://www.erstwhilepublications.com



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/21/18 19:40 by wabash2800.

Victor, the rupture of the tenders is a fact. These later ones had baffles and diverters that slowed down the incoming water and actually allowed them to scoop at 80 mph. Gerbracht's "Know Thy Niagaras" has quite a lot of discussion on the various tenders. The PT stood for Pedestal Tender on the Central.

I'm glad you mentioned the Niagra book. I just ordered a copy, since I missed the boat on the Hudson book... And the Gordon McCullough UP book (out of stock just this month.)... ah well, I guess they'll be available again someday.

I look forward to learning about the highly acclaimed NYC Niagras.

What advantage did the centipede tender have over, say, a 16 wheel tender like a PRR "Coast to Coast" model that has two 8 wheel trucks instead? (or I guess an 8 wheel and a 6 wheel if you match the Centipede's 14 wheels).

I recall the advantage was extra water capacity on the centipede tenders due to less space taken up by the trucks. But, only if the thing stayed on the tracks!

Posted from Android

nycman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Victor, the rupture of the tenders is a fact.
> These later ones had baffles and diverters that
> slowed down the incoming water and actually
> allowed them to scoop at 80 mph. Gerbracht's
> "Know Thy Niagaras" has quite a lot of discussion
> on the various tenders. The PT stood for Pedestal
> Tender on the Central.

According to NYC internal records, the "PT" indicated "Passenger Tender", i.e. NOT "Pedestal Tender".

mdogg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I recall the advantage was extra water capacity on
> the centipede tenders due to less space taken up
> by the trucks. But, only if the thing stayed on
> the tracks!

That depended on the individual railroad. Railroads such as NP, UP, did indeed want the "extra water capacity" of the pedestal type tenders. However, the NYC wanted extra coal capacity (over 45 tons?) since they could always add water while on the move with their highly successful track pan water scooping procedure. On the NYC, locomotives assigned to passenger service, i.e. Hudsons and Niagaras equipped with "PT" tenders, only took on coal at Cleveland, Ohio, between Chicago and Harmon, NY, while water could always be taken on at many, many locations enroute.

The eight axle tenders on Santa Fe and Pennsy look a little longer then the seven axle pedestal types. Maybe length was a consideration. The centipedes have a more compact appearance.

Posted from Android

Jack is right, Passenger Tenders. They are pedestal "type" tenders. And yes, they held 46 tons of coal, and the one for 5500 held 47 tons.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/22/18 15:59 by nycman.

Many people do not realize that Lima often built tenders for different railroads. To add to this discussion I am enclosing a photo of my NYC PT-4 tender plate. This is supposed to be from NYC 4-6-4 #5405. When you collect long enough, you get to see a little of everything. I am also including a photo of my damaged Alco plate from the first Super Hudson #5405. A damaged plate is better than none as not many NYC steam plates survived.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/22/18 18:04 by steamfan759.

---

---

You have a treasure there with 5405's builder's plate. Yes, Lima built many of the NY Central's PT tenders.

Here's an example of one of NYC's centipede tenders, built by Lima.

Jack Bejna
Los Angeles, CA

---