Williamson to Portsmouth A s

[NW Mailing List]

Sorry, thinking in terms of IRONTON and referencing Catlettsburg, KY where 
we dispatched tank trucks into Williamson at 83 hwy miles.

Oak


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "NW Mailing List" <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
To: "NW Mailing List" <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: Williamson to Portsmouth A s



> The mileage between Williamson and Portsmouth was/is 112.  After the 

> introduction of A tanks in 1952 the run was made non-stop.

>

> EdKing

> ----- Original Message ----- 

> From: "NW Mailing List" <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>

> To: "NW Mailing List" <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>

> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 8:20 AM

> Subject: Re: Williamson to Portsmouth A s

>

>

>> There was a huge coal and watering point on the N&W at Prichard. Don 

>> Mills

>> ----- Original Message ----- 

>> From: "NW Mailing List" <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>

>> To: "NW Mailing List" <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>

>> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 4:48 PM

>> Subject: Williamson to Portsmouth A s

>>

>>

>>> Road mileage is less than 90 miles so where did they take a brake on the

>>> four hour trip (not including watering somewhere along the way?

>>>

>>> Just musing about this and realizing that 20 plus mph for a coal drag of

>> 250

>>> cars (mid fifties w/lots of non rolling bearing cars was a damn good

>> result

>>> even if it was a prevailing downhill drag. I can honestly say that at 

>>> Coal

>>> Grove I've watch thousands of these drags work their way west, and loved

>>> every second of the passing; day or night - Grandparents lived on US 52

>>> adjacent to R of W overlooking the Ice Creek bridge.The night was the 

>>> best

>>> just to listen to the coming burst of overwhelming sound and the rail

>>> colicky - clack of 250 cars, great sleep sound.

>>>

>>> Now 65 years later this discussion does really add to the memory, to

>>> understand tech facts underlying what it took to create this great piece

>> of

>>> world history (the foundation of this part of world civilization's

>>> transition to the industrial/eco system of what we thought was the

>>> outstanding level we were living at in those decades. Surprising that

>>> today's resurrection of Rail will possibly have another great impact on

>> this

>>> century.

>>> Steam being used does not surprise me when you see what "chips" have 

>>> done

>>> for all other forms of power generation/ecology. But I would suspect 

>>> that

>>> the final package this new steam would arrive in will not resemble

>> anything

>>> you are visualizing in these discussions of  A,Y&Js.

>>>

>>> Fun thinking.

>>>

>>> Oakie G Ford

>>> IRONTON, OH

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> ----- Original Message ----- 

>>> From: "NW Mailing List" <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>

>>> To: "NW Mailing List" <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>

>>> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 3:03 PM

>>> Subject: Re: [steam_tech] Re: TRAINS.com latest- can steam make a

>> comeback?

>>>

>>>

>>> > Let's try this again.  I posted most of this before, but I believe it

>> will

>>> > answer at least one or two of the questions posed here.

>>> >

>>> > The best I can do on an estimate of a Class A's capacity on level

>> tangent

>>> > track, at the total evaporation and firing rate N&W expected, is about

>>> > 4,200 trailing tons at 60 mph. This reflects a maximum of about 5,550

>> DBHP

>>> > at 40 mph, the usual high point on an A's DBHP curve.

>>> >

>>> > It is highly unlikely that an A every pulled 7500 tons at 60 mph on

>> level

>>> > track.  I believe that would take over 10-11,000 drawbar HP.  AnA is

>> good,

>>> > but not that good!

>>> >

>>> > Now if you give 1218 about a 0.2% downgrade and enough distance.....

>>> >

>>> > N&W rated its locomotives very conservatively, and the often quoted

>> 5,300

>>> > DBHP is usually considered at the rear of the aux. water tank. Toward

>> the

>>> > end of steam, the A's were developing slightly more than this in order

>> to

>>> > get 16,000-18,000 ton trains from Williamson to Portsmouth in 

>>> > something

>>> > less than 4 hours. That's where the 5,550 figure comes from.

>>> >

>>> > There are many examples of A's running a steady 60 mph on time 

>>> > freights

>>> > nos. 84 and 85 (some of O Winston Link's recordings), but I've not 

>>> > been

>>> > able to directly relate a trailing tonnage figure to this speed. As a

>>> > result, the above estimate is derived from Davis equations commonly 

>>> > used

>>> > by the RR industry during the 1950's.

>>> >

>>> > Using the same estimating method as above, I changed the tonnage to 

>>> > 4500

>>> > and the grade to -0.022%, the average downgrade grade from Williamson 

>>> > to

>>> > Portsmouth. The estimated maximum speed was 60 mph. An A didn't 

>>> > average

>>> > this speed from point to point. This is the best guess I can make as 

>>> > to

>>> > why the A was rated at 4500 tons Wmsn-Ptsmth.

>>> >

>>> > I also agree with John, please sign your posts.  We would like to know

>> who

>>> > we're talking to.  Based on the Steam_Tech site I have a pretty good

>> idea,

>>> > but other on this board likely won't.

>>> >

>>> > Dave Stephenson

>>> >>

>>> >>> > Let's see if 1218 can do 60 mph or more with a

>>> >> 7500 ton train, as the Class A has been reported to do since an early

>>> >> test, and numerous times since> then.

>>> >> >

>>> > ,

>>> >

>>> >

>>> >

>>> > ________________________________________

>>> > NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org

>>> > To change your subscription go to

>>> > http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list

>>> > Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at

>>> > http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/

>>> >

>>> >

>>>

>>>

>>> ________________________________________

>>> NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org

>>> To change your subscription go to

>>> http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list

>>> Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at

>>> http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> -- 

>>> No virus found in this incoming message.

>>> Checked by AVG.

>>> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.24.2/1471 - Release Date: 

>>> 5/28/2008

>> 5:33 PM

>>>

>>>

>>

>> ________________________________________

>> NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org

>> To change your subscription go to

>> http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list

>> Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at

>> http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/

>>

>

>

> ________________________________________

> NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org

> To change your subscription go to

> http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list

> Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at

> http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/

>

>