Steam & Excursion > Handbrakes?

How many steam locomotives had handbrakes? I'd imagine they would be connected to the lead tender truck, if there was such a thing. If no handbrakes, how were idle steam engines secured? Chocks? Chains around the wheels?

CPR_4000 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How many steam locomotives had handbrakes? I'd
> imagine they would be connected to the lead tender
> truck, if there was such a thing. If no
> handbrakes, how were idle steam engines secured?
> Chocks? Chains around the wheels?

I'm pretty sure very few steam locomotives had a handbrake on the tender. That said, the Southern Pacific GS class locomotives did have a handbrake on the tender, however with SP4449, we never used the handbrake. We simply used the "driver chains", which have a chain in front of and behind the drive wheel. We generally chained 3 out of 4 drivers.

Of all the steam locomotives I have been around, only one had a handbrake for its tender, and it was former US Army locomotive.  Everyone used a chain wrapped around the right rear driver for securement.

Thanks, that's kind of what I thought. I'll have to start looking for chained drivers in roster shots! The question occurred to me when I realized that Atlantic Coast Line diesels didn't have handbrakes, and I wondered if that was a holdover from steam days. Guess it was.

CPR_4000 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks, that's kind of what I thought. I'll have
> to start looking for chained drivers in roster
> shots! The question occurred to me when I realized
> that Atlantic Coast Line diesels didn't have
> handbrakes, and I wondered if that was a holdover
> from steam days. Guess it was.

The Atlantic Coast Line thinking on handbrakes on diesel units was, as required by the ICC, later FRA, handbrakes were subject to regular inspection. However, if the diesel unit did not have a handbrake, then there was no "federal inspection" required. Thus early diesel purchases from EMC/EMD had a "handbrake delete" requirement.

4-6-2 S.P. 2472's tender (class 120-C-3, 12,000 gallons + 4,000 gallon oil, 243,000 lbs [IIRC] when full) has a handbrake on the front wall, accessible from the firing deck in the cab. S.P. swapped tenders fairly frequently - tenders had to seperated annually from the locomotive to remove, clean, and inspect the drawbars. Tenders had standardized cab deck heights and standardized oil/water/airbrake connections, so swapping wasn't a problem in many cases. I strongly suspect that all S.P. tenders had a handbrake.

When towing a steam locomotive dead in train, you'd want a handbrake if it had to be set out on a siding in case of a hotbox or other mechanical problem. 

- Doug Debs

 

SP 1785 in Woodburn OR has the same brake as you mentioned, but according to Earl apparently 1744 doesn’t.

Posted from iPhone

Just this afternoon we set a handbrake on the tender of  a steam engine and the other two next to it have them on the tenders as well (one Rogers and two Baldwins).  We also use chain chocks.
 

So would it be possbile to do some damage if you forgot to release it before under way? <G>

Victor Baird

wabash2800 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So would it be possbile to do some damage if you
> forgot to release it before under way?
>
> Victor Baird

Of course, i.e. flat spots the wheel on the tender. Maybe that is way most railroads did NOT have handbrakes on their steam locomotives.

It appears that even ACL's SD45's didn't have handbrakes; here's a photo of 1026 where, if you look carefully, it appears that a patch has been welded over where the handbrake notch would have been on the nose.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/rrpa_photos/64130/ACL-1026.JPG

wabash2800 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So would it be possbile to do some damage if you
> forgot to release it before under way?

It probably wouldn't go well if you forgot the chains, either.

DWDebs/2472 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 4-6-2 S.P. 2472's tender (class 120-C-3, 12,000
> gallons + 4,000 gallon oil, 243,000 lbs when
> full) has a handbrake on the front wall,
> accessible from the firing deck in the cab. S.P.
> swapped tenders fairly frequently - tenders had to
> seperated annually from the locomotive to remove,
> clean, and inspect the drawbars. Tenders had
> standardized cab deck heights and standardized
> oil/water/airbrake connections, so swapping wasn't
> a problem in many cases. I strongly suspect that
> all S.P. tenders had a handbrake.
>
> When towing a steam locomotive dead in train,
> you'd want a handbrake if it had to be set out on
> a siding in case of a hotbox or other mechanical
> problem. 
>
> - Doug Debs
>
>  
Yep, you're right, 1744 did have a hand brake on the tender.  I forgot that one.  In defense, we never used it, relying on the age-old driver chain...

Earlk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> DWDebs/2472 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > 4-6-2 S.P. 2472's tender (class 120-C-3, 12,000
> > gallons + 4,000 gallon oil, 243,000 lbs when
> > full) has a handbrake on the front wall,
> > accessible from the firing deck in the cab.
> S.P.
> > swapped tenders fairly frequently - tenders had
> to
> > seperated annually from the locomotive to
> remove,
> > clean, and inspect the drawbars. Tenders had
> > standardized cab deck heights and standardized
> > oil/water/airbrake connections, so swapping
> wasn't
> > a problem in many cases. I strongly suspect
> that
> > all S.P. tenders had a handbrake.
> >
> > When towing a steam locomotive dead in train,
> > you'd want a handbrake if it had to be set out
> on
> > a siding in case of a hotbox or other
> mechanical
> > problem. 
> >
> > - Doug Debs
> >
> >  
> Yep, you're right, 1744 did have a hand brake on
> the tender.  I forgot that one.  In defense, we
> never used it, relying on the age-old driver
> chain...

You wouldn't need it unless the tender has been seperated from the locomotive.