Steam & Excursion > At The Shops There Is More Than One Way To Move Equipment!

Steam shops were always filled with motive power under various stages of repair.  That meant the shop crew had to have means available to move this equipment around during various stages of repair.  We see some of that here.

We see here the Southern Pacific's Los Angeles General Shops in the late 1940's.  While the shop foreman and one of his workers discuss their next move we see from small to large the means available to move equipment at the yard. 

SP #565 was originally built in 1903 as an S-5 0-6-0 and numbered #1109.  In 1939 the LA Shop forces turned her into this streamlined shop goat with a relatively fancy paint job for the tasks she was assigned.

It was all about keeping the repairs moving forward.

Martin



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/16 04:25 by LoggerHogger.

---

LoggerHogger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Steam shops were always filled with motive power
> under various stages of repair.  That meant the
> shop crew had to have means available to move this
> equipment around during various stages of
> repair.  We see some of that here.
>
> We see here the Southern Pacific's Los Angeles
> General Shops in the late 1940's.  While the shop
> foreman and one of his workers discuss their next
> move we see from small to large the means
> available to move equipment at the yard. 
>
> SP #565 was originally built in 1903 as an S-5
> 0-6-0 and numbered #1109.  In 1939 the LA Shop
> forces turned her into this streamlined shop goat
> with a relatively fancy paint job for the tasks
> she was assigned.
>
> It was all about keeping the repairs moving
> forward.
>
> Martin

Interesting device in the foreground. Looks like a lawnmower on railroad wheels.

I suspect 565's steam source was the shop steam service. Correct?

What is that piece of equipment in the lower left side of the picture?

Cumbresfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I suspect 565's steam source was the shop steam
> service. Correct?

565 is not a " fireless cooker "...it has a firebox.....
Chris

> > I suspect 565's steam source was the shop steam
> > service. Correct?
>
> 565 is not a " fireless cooker "...it has a
> firebox.....

Oil fuel?  Sure isn't room for much coal.

Lighter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > > I suspect 565's steam source was the shop
> steam
> > > service. Correct?
> >
> > 565 is not a " fireless cooker "...it has a
> > firebox.....
>
> Oil fuel?  Sure isn't room for much coal.

Coal on the west coast, and on the Southern Pacific at that?????   Of course it's oil fired!

Don't forget that until the early 1900s, the SP was a coal-burning railroad (it would be accurate to state that coal was imported to the West Coast from the far reaches of the globe).



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/16 18:23 by johnsweetser.

johnsweetser Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don't forget that until the early 1900s, the SP
> was a coal-burning railroad (it would be accurate
> to state that coal was imported to the West
> Coast from the far reaches of the globe).

I think you will find that the SP changed from wood burning to oil burning, Only a few areas, such as the EP&SW used coal.

HotWater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> johnsweetser Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Don't forget that until the early 1900s, the SP
> > was a coal-burning railroad (it would be
> accurate
> > to state that coal was imported to the West
> > Coast from the far reaches of the globe).
>
> I think you will find that the SP changed from
> wood burning to oil burning, Only a few areas,
> such as the EP&SW used coal.

An article in the SP Trainline magazine a couple of years ago about SP's conversion to oil fuel would disagree with you.
SP was burning coal in California in the 1880's, 1890's and the early 1900's. There were coal mines in California.

They had a huge coal port pier north of Santa Monica, coal was brought in by sailing ships from as far away as Australia,
Doheny of oil fame worked on SP to use oil, but it took a long time to figure out a good burner design.




 

The SP used coal on many of it's engines operating out of Los Angeles for quite some time.  Here is #1791 in LA.  She clearly is a coal burner.

Martin

---

OK, I'll stand corrected. I always thought that, what little coal there was in California, was not really well suited for steam locomotive fuel and thus "good coal" was brought in by the ship load.

Is that asbestos lagging on 4424's firebox and boiler?
 

TexasEagle77 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is that asbestos lagging on 4424's firebox and
> boiler?

Of course, as that's just about all that was available back in the steam days. There was none of the fancy "fibre-glass" based, and other space age material, in pads that we have today.  

Thanks Jack!

I thought so but had just never seen what it looked like on a locomotive. I've seen the modern lagging used after removal of the asbestos lagging. Can't believe they didn't remove that stuff from 4014 before dragging it all the way up to Cheyenne.


Ricky Dolifka
Austin, Texas
Austin Tinplate Trackers

 

HotWater wrote:

 >I always thought that, what little coal there was in California, was not really well suited for steam locomotive fuel and thus "good coal" was brought in by the ship load.

Basically true.   The March 8, 1875 Santa Barbara Free Press reported that the California Pacific Railroad presently uses Mount Diablo coal but that the line will soon use Coos Bay [Oregon] coal.

Until the early 1900s when fuel oil came into use, the Southern Pacific, unlike the Central Pacific, was almost strictly a coal-burning railroad, starting in the 1870s.  As I stated before, the coal came from the far reaches of the globe, including Australia, England, British Columbia, etc.  Some early newspaper articles:

December 3, 1874 Visalia Weekly Delta (1:6) - "The English coal is better for many manufacturing purposes than any we can get from Australia or Vancouver Island, which are are chief sources of supply for imported coal."

July 2, 1879 Los Angeles Herald - told of SP coal from Departure Bay (British Columbia) and from Sidney (Australia).

Sept. 8, 1886 San Francisco Chronicle - reported that imported coal supplies in California were abundant and cheap, due to the fact that the ships coming from foreign ports to load wheat often carry coal and iron to California "at mere nominal prices, taking them on sometimes for ballast."

February 8, 1907 Nevada State Herald (Wells, NV) - reported Harriman lines buying coal in Australia.

Shipping coal to California was an extensive enterprise.  The September 25, 1888 Los Angeles Express  reported that there were 13 ships unloading coal at San Pedro.

Even the Central Pacific over the Sierra Nevada converted from wood burners to coal burners, which began happening around 1886.  Some of the coal the CP used came from Utah.  The July 27, 1900 Wadsworth Dispatch reported:  "For a year past, from three to five trainloads of company coal from the mines in Utah have passed through Winnemucca daily."
 



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/28/16 16:18 by johnsweetser.

Rick
In California that would require building a tent over the engine and men in space suits removing it. Very expensive. Far cheaper in at
Cheyenne.

Posted from iPhone