Steam & Excursion > Not All New Designs Of Steam Locomotives Proved To Be Successful!

You can almost see it in the faces of these men whose job it is to pick up this mess and get the track back in operation.  Each of them appear to be thinking, as they look toward the camera, "I knew this was going to happen with this new locomotive".

The engine that is in this hapless condition is newly delivered McCloud River Railroad #6.  She was Baldwin's early experiment with what would later become articulated power.  #6 was a one-of-a-kind 0-6-0T+0-6-0T which meant she was 2 0-6-0T's joined back-to-back with one throttle controlling both engines.  With the hinge in the middle it was intended to give the flexibility and power of 2 locomotives working together but with just one crew.  Needless to say, as we see here, the idea did not work on the McCloud's steep grades with tight curves.

After only a couple years of #6 straying off the rails in the fashion we see here, she was separated to become #5 and #6 on the roster.  Both separated engines would serve the MCRR for many more years and each would later be sold to other operators who would use them well into the early 1940's.

Well, it was worth a try anyway!

Martin



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/20 03:27 by LoggerHogger.

---

Both of them compounds to boot.  Is there a picture of them before or after the wreck.  Must have been a crazy looking contraption.

Here are her specs and her builders photo.

Martin



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/20 06:58 by LoggerHogger.

---

---

I have some additional pictures and info on a website at the following:

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

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV

Posted from iPhone

I'm curious.  DId that require the use of one or two firemen?

Maybe a 2-6-0T+2-6-0T would have worked better?

mcfflyer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm curious.  DId that require the use of one or
> two firemen?

The records I have show they did use 2 firemen.  You would have lots of running back and forth to get wood and to put it in the 2 fireboxes.

Martin

I have often wondered how the drawbar between the two engines was arranged.  A simple drawbar/buffer arrangement like that used on a conventional engine/tender would be way too rigid to handle the lateral movement on the back of the engine when entering a curve.  The front engine would nose into a curve, and the cab would swing wide in the opposite direction.  With a conventional drawbar, the amount of sideways displacement would be quite limited, which would tend to make the engine bite hard against the outside rail, and inevitably -as seen here - derail.  Once the rear engine was in the curve, the lateral displacement would be much less.  From looking at the cab overhangs, it doesn't look like there was much lateral movement intended between the engines.

If they had designed the engines with less space between the back driver and the back of the cab, it might have worked a bit better.

Sam Vauclain was a great salesman.....

Earl

Here are the factory drawings of the drawbar and throttle controls.

Martin

---

---

Good idea but yeah looks like it would straighten curves and probably rode like a lumber wagon lol!