Steam & Excursion > Even After 37 Years Baldwin Was Proud Of This Locomotive Failure!

When readers of the Baldwin Locomotive Works Company Magazine received their October, 1937 issue, they came across a nice 3-page article inside describing how the construction of Exposition Island in San Francisco Bay was aided by the use of a single Baldwin steam locomotive.  The reader of the article would likely not be surprised that Baldwin was bragging about it's part in bringing about the up-coming Golden Gate International Exposition of 1939, until that reader studied the locomotive that was featured in the article as having been used by the contractor building the island and the infrastructure on the Island.  The locomotive that Baldwin chose to brag about in this article was in fact part of an experiment by Baldwin for the McCloud River Railroad back in 1900 that had proven to be much less successful than Baldwin had hoped. 

In 1900 the MCRR came to Baldwin with a request for a locomotive that could carry more tonnage over the flanks of Mt. Shasta between McCloud, California and the connection with the Southern Pacific at Mt. Shasta City than was currently the capacity of the small Baldwin steam locomotives currently on the MCRR roster.  Even though 1900 was several years before Baldwin began to build articulated locomotives, the engineers at Baldwin were already prepared to experiment with an early concept that would have some of the attributes of what later would become articulated locomotives.

The result of this request by the MCRR was what became the famous "Double-Ender" locomotive that was depicted in the technical magazines of the day as an engineering marvel.  She was in fact 2 separate wood-burning tank engines with an 0-6-0T configuration that were joined back-to-back with a single throttle connecting both engines.  This allowed one engineer and one fireman to crew this pair of engines for cost savings and the hinge in the middle of the connection was to give the engine the flexibility need to negotiate the sharp trackage found on the mountain grade over Signal Butte between McCloud and Mt. Shasta City.

This locomotive was given the #6 on the McCloud roster when it was  put to work soon after it arrived in 1900 from the Baldwin factory.  While the use of a single crew for what would otherwise be 2 locomotives was seen as an immediate advantage when she first entered service, there were problems that soon developed in her operation that quickly erased this advantage.  #6 was quickly seen to still be too ridged in the connection between the 2 locomotives and crews were all too often finding #6 off the rails and in a ditch due to this flaw.

Fortunately, the Baldwin engineers that designed #6 in the first place were concerned enough that this problem may develop that they designed #6 in such a fashion that she could be separated and then used as 2 separate locomotives which is exactly what the MCRR did after only a few short years.  The pair became MCRR #5 and #6 and would remain in service on the MCRR for many more years before being replaced by larger power and both were sold to new owners.

By 1937, when the Baldwin Magazine came out the A.D.Schrader had already spent over one year in building Exposition Island in San Francisco Bay and had another couple years of work ahead of it before the Exposition was to open.  The sole locomotive that Schrader sent to the project was former MCRR #6 as seen in the photo printed by Baldwin for the article.  While Baldwin certainly did not describe the failure of the double-ender experiment in the article, they were still bragging over the innovated design that had lead to #6 being built in the first place.  They also clearly took pride that, even in it's separated form, that #6 was still going strong enough 37 years after she was built to be chosen as the locomotive to help build this famous exposition project.

Today, #6 is long gone.  She would complete the Exposition Island project in 1939 and then go on to work for several more years for A.D.Schrader and then Permanente Metals and finally for the U.S. Maritime Commission on other construction project before finally being scrapped in the 1940's.  While #6 could easily be seen as a failure in many ways, she was still enough of an example of the innovation of the Baldwin Locomotive Works to warrant the pride of that company years later.

Martin



Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 11/16/19 02:19 by LoggerHogger.

---

---

---

Built as Vauclain compounds, and survived as a compound over it's nearly four decades of service.

-LD



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/16/19 03:46 by LarryDoyle.

I assume it was converted to Oil in later years. 

Great stuff as usual Martin.

Here's a shot of my Great-Granddad Clint Ocumpaugh running "the other half", #5 in Glendale, Oregon around 1928-29. My understanding is this would have been the Lystul-Lawson operation. Not sure what else they had for motive power at that point.

Casey

---

czuleget Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I assume it was converted to Oil in later years. 

Bunker is on running board.

-LD

ccarlson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Great stuff as usual Martin.
>
> Here's a shot of my Great-Granddad Clint Ocumpaugh
> running "the other half", #5 in Glendale, Oregon
> around 1928-29. My understanding is this would
> have been the Lystul-Lawson operation. Not sure
> what else they had for motive power at that
> point.
>
This one's still burning wood.

-LD

Very interesting.  I do not remember seeing valve gear like that of those locomotives.  Martin or Larry, would you explain it to us novices?

Good photos all the way around, especially that view of the #5 on Lystul-Lawson!

To answer one of the questions asked, yes, McCloud converted the #6 to burn oil in June 1923.  There are no records suggesting they so converted the #5 before selling it to Weed Lumber on 11/30/1917.

I have some of the original documentation from Baldwin when they built the locomotive on my website at the following:

http://www.mccloudriverrailroad.com/LocomotiveRoster/MR5-6.htm

Attached are two images, one of the locomotive as Atkison #6 and the second is the #6 and some others on the dead line in McCloud, likely sometime after McCloud retired the locomotive on 7/31/1928. 

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/16/19 14:52 by JDLX.

---

---

As to the valve arrangement, Wikipedia has an interesting page on the workings of the Vauclain compound. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vauclain_compound

These used steam twice, once in each cylinder, whcih resulted in more efficient operation and more pulling power but at the price of greatly increased maintenance costs, which is why most were rebuilt within a few years.  McCloud River's 2-6-2 #11, the only other example of a Vauclain compound McCloud owned, could reportedly haul six loaded lumber cars over the hill between McCloud and Mt. Shasta City on wet or dry rail while the simple and roughly similarly sized other prairies the railroad owned could only handle four loaded cars on dry rail and two on wet rail.  

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV 

---

nycman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Very interesting.  I do not remember seeing valve
> gear like that of those locomotives.  Martin or
> Larry, would you explain it to us novices?

As I stated above, they are Vauclain compounds.  The large and small cylinders are the low pressure cylinder above the high pressure cylinder.  The valve gear is a plain vanilla Stephenson valve gear between the frames driving a valve chamber in the cylinder saddle between the frames.

-LD

Interesting that viewers of this thread noticed that both MCRR #6 and MCRR #11 were Vauclain Compunds.  I am lucky to have the number plates off both of these rare locomotives in my collection.

Martin

---

---

Jez, Martin, I'd like to see your garage.

-LD

Thanks Larry and Jeff.  Though I have seen "Vauclain Compound" many times, I never researched what the system consisted of, and probably just did not notice before this the large cylinder above the smaller one.  Use of steam twice, interesting.  Can't believe I did not take the time to learn about it.  Gettin lazy in my old age.
And yes, I would like to see Martin's garage (warehouse, maybe?).

nycman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks Larry and Jeff.  Though I have seen
> "Vauclain Compound" many times, I never researched
> what the system consisted of, and probably just
> did not notice before this the large cylinder
> above the smaller one.  Use of steam twice,
> interesting.  Can't believe I did not take the
> time to learn about it.  Gettin lazy in my old
> age.
> And yes, I would like to see Martin's garage
> (warehouse, maybe?).

On Vauclain Compound engines with small drivers (usually freight or switchers) it was the usually arrangement to put the larger, low pressure cylinders above the smaller, high pressure cylinders for better clearance above the rails.

Stuart

At least one Vauclain compound still exists - Manitou & Pike's Peak #4:

https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,4863730

Here is what the Vauclain Plates used by Baldwin in these locomotives looked like.  These are off Manitou & Pikes Peak #3.

Martin

---