Home | Open Account | Help | 258 users online |
Member Login
Discussion
Media SharingHostingLibrarySite Info |
Nostalgia & History > SP/ SF Steam "40s"Date: 12/11/12 21:33 SP/ SF Steam "40s" Author: fmaffei Photo one: Commute # 78 [?] leaving 3rd & Townsend SF at the South end curve.
Photo two: Running light,somewhere near Richmond yards. FM Date: 12/11/12 23:45 Re: SP/ SF Steam "40s" Author: MyfordBrowning In July of 1947, the Del Monte's numbers were changed to 77 & 78 between San Francisco and Pacific Grove.
Cliff Date: 12/12/12 02:10 Re: SP/ SF Steam "40s" Author: Evan_Werkema ATSF 804 was a 1902 Baldwin product. It was built as a Vauclain compound and simpled within 8 years. It was assigned to the Valley Division as late as June 1951, when it was transferred to the Western Division in Kansas. It was sold for scrap in April 1953. Love the marker hanging off the corner of the tender. Does the presence of a marker indicate this engine was moving as a "train," and if so, how big of a road crew did a light engine move require in the 1940's?
Date: 12/12/12 02:58 Re: SP/ SF Steam "40s" Author: Steamjocky Not sure what you mean by your last sentance, Evan. Can you clarify?
The answer to your question about the markers on the tender is yes. The definition of a train is: "An engine, or engines, with or without cars, displaying a marker." JDE Date: 12/12/12 08:21 Re: SP/ SF Steam "40s" Author: TonyJ The skyline of "The City" sure has changed since you took that photo, Frank.
Date: 12/12/12 09:03 Re: SP/ SF Steam "40s" Author: Evan_Werkema Steamjocky Wrote:
> Not sure what you mean by your last sentance, > Evan. Can you clarify? If my feeble understanding of crew requirements is correct, a standard road crew in the 1940's for a train with engine, cars, and caboose was five men (engineer, fireman, conductor, two brakemen). I would think 804's cab would be mighty crowded if it was carrying that many people, so I'm wondering if there was an allowance for a smaller crew for a light engine move. Also, were there circumstances where a light engine being moved over the road and which wasn't doing work enroute would still require a five man crew and a caboose (i.e. a cab hop)? Date: 12/12/12 17:03 Re: lite engines Author: timz2 How about helper engines returning to their
origin after a shove? They're probably showing markers, but have no conductor? Date: 12/13/12 01:39 Re: lite engines Author: Steamjocky It would depend on where the photo was taken but I'd guess it was a light engine movement or a helper. To my knowledge light helper engines didn't need a train crew, just an engine crew.
And the other thing about the number of men on a crew; yes, it was normally 5 guys like you mentioned. But sometimes, depending on the territory and the number of cars in the train, there could be 3 or 4 brakemen. This would happen in mountain territory with a long train. I used to have the breakdown of how many brakemen were required depending on the number of cars. JDE |