02-16-2015, 05:48 PM
Hi!
I'm actually pondering about logging railway operation. I mean how locomotives were run. I've read quite a lot about the subject recently and viewed hundred of pictures. My question isn't about shays, climax, heisler or locomotives builts specifically for the task like 2-6-2, 2-8-2 and mallets. I'm talking about 4-4-0, 4-6-0 and 2-6-0 we often saw on very old pictures. On many line, these oldies survived quite a long time. My question is about running them in reverse.
I've seen a very few pictures showing them shoving log trains with the boiler facing the consist. You can explain that with the fact they wanted the crownsheet to be covered in water, which make sense when running against a steep grade.
However, many other pictures show you the locmotive pulling a loaded consist, face forward like a real mainline train. Clearly, that means there was a wye or another way to reverse the engine.
Here's my question, was it "common" that railroads devoid of any reversing device would run "standard" locos? Wouldn't it have been wuite risky to shove trains for miles up a hill then run back to the mill or the log pond the tender first? Sounds risky to me. I can understand they could build a runaround somewhere to make sure the locomotive pull the train uphill with empties. The, on the return trip, we would still have the tender running first.
I hope I'm clear in what I'm saying. I know a few railroad had locomotives facing the same direction all their life. I'm just trying to figure out what would have been normal for a logging operation using second-hand ex-mainline locomotives.
Thank you!
Matt
I'm actually pondering about logging railway operation. I mean how locomotives were run. I've read quite a lot about the subject recently and viewed hundred of pictures. My question isn't about shays, climax, heisler or locomotives builts specifically for the task like 2-6-2, 2-8-2 and mallets. I'm talking about 4-4-0, 4-6-0 and 2-6-0 we often saw on very old pictures. On many line, these oldies survived quite a long time. My question is about running them in reverse.
I've seen a very few pictures showing them shoving log trains with the boiler facing the consist. You can explain that with the fact they wanted the crownsheet to be covered in water, which make sense when running against a steep grade.
However, many other pictures show you the locmotive pulling a loaded consist, face forward like a real mainline train. Clearly, that means there was a wye or another way to reverse the engine.
Here's my question, was it "common" that railroads devoid of any reversing device would run "standard" locos? Wouldn't it have been wuite risky to shove trains for miles up a hill then run back to the mill or the log pond the tender first? Sounds risky to me. I can understand they could build a runaround somewhere to make sure the locomotive pull the train uphill with empties. The, on the return trip, we would still have the tender running first.
I hope I'm clear in what I'm saying. I know a few railroad had locomotives facing the same direction all their life. I'm just trying to figure out what would have been normal for a logging operation using second-hand ex-mainline locomotives.
Thank you!
Matt
Proudly modelling Quebec Railway Light & Power Company since 1997.
Hedley-Junction Club Layout: http://www.hedley-junction.blogspot.com/
Erie 149th Street Harlem Station http://www.harlem-station.blogspot.com/
Hedley-Junction Club Layout: http://www.hedley-junction.blogspot.com/
Erie 149th Street Harlem Station http://www.harlem-station.blogspot.com/