Discussion in 'Scratchin' & Bashin'' started by Bill Stone, Sep 27, 2002.
Try this one, http://cprr.org/
Thanks Jon for your research and report. I've frequently wondered what coal tasted like.
T. that Central Pacific website is FANTASTIC. I hadn't known of it. What a great information source. Thanks for finding it.
The Central Pacific (if I said CP, people would think I was speaking Canadian) is one of my favorite prototypes, along with the Oregon & California. And I don't even hold it against them that they both became part of the (ugh) Southern Pacific.
Got your email, t.
The stuff will be in the mail as soon as I get by the PO to drop it in the slot --- tonight or tomorrow, probably.
Shovel On Some More Coal
Locos that burned bituminous coal had to have larger fireboxes because bituminous coal produces less heat than anthracite coal. However it was much cheaper than anthracite coal and many major railroads owned their own coal mines. It also had/has many more impurities than anthracite and produced much more smoke, soot, ash and etc. Generally bituminous coal was used for industrial applications and anthracite was/is used for applications where a more clean burning fuel was required such as heating or industrial processes requiring very high heat. Railroads that used anthracite had easy access to it or owned their own mines and therefore its use was cost effective.
An extremly high grade anthracite coal known as blue coal is/was mined in Pensylvania. It was generally used for home heating because of its low sulfer content and had little noxious odor.
On the bottom of the scale is/was shale coal which for the most part mined in the midwest/west. A few roads used it and locomotive firemen hated it because it required twice the volume of coal to produce a given amount of heat but it was cheap. Many coal fired generating plants use this coal.
Just another tidbit from The Robber Barron's Vault of Useless Knowledge....
Ya know Vic it's only useless if ya ain't sharin' it
ok vic what was the power coal used for (the coal was about the size we would use in ho and did )the reading use to dump the stuff in ship and barges (neat to watch them flip an whole car over) rich
Hey Rich, I'm not familar with the term "power coal" but I suspect that what you are talking about is coal that would be used in coal fired generating plants. In order to produce the most efficent burning and to reduce emmissions the coal is crushed to a uniform size. Its then burned under high pressure to produce superheated steam which inturn drives turbines that power the generators. Depending on what type of firing system that's used the coal may be crushed as fine as dust. I would guess that most likely what you saw was coal that had been thru a crusher to reduce its bulk for more efficent shipping purposes to the generating plants or industries that would require coal of that type or size.
I think Rich may be refering to powder coal, just as Vic said, coal crushed into a powder for more effiecient and cleaner burning. I've been told that when burned in modern systems utilizing jets of air, this coal burns cleaner than oil. There are mountains of coal already mined sitting in Pennsylvania, against the law to use due to the enviromentalists and no doubt those lobbiests who have it in their interest to promote the use of oil. But most of all of course our elected oficials who pander to those groups. It could be used to reduce the amount of oil we import.
Thanks Bill, I've been side tracked on the loco's because of some trestle building theropy. But that little 4-4-0 looks real nice sitting on top of it.
Hey Vic thanks for the coal info.
I remember the slogan now It went something like, "My dress stayed bright when I rode the upon the rails of Anthracite"
Hey Bill, I recieved the brake parts today. They look great!
Like the packaging and letter head too
Have you done anything yet to the engine that started this thread?
Nah. Here I am at 5:30 AM, staring at the 'puter.
Right now I'm spending most of my time trying to finish editing a book that is past deadline (so much for retirement.)
And actually I need to finish another "General" bash that I've been working on, before tearing into the blue one.
This latest one is a bit different. I'm keeping the General boiler and domes (I want it to look like an older - say 1850-60 loco), but using a different cab and stack, new pilot, scratch-built steam chest and cylinders, and (a first for me) changing the counterweights on the drivers. Most of that is done, but the little details, like injectors, valve gear, and handrail posts, are slow going for me. The older I get, the more the tiny parts are difficult for my old fingers.
This one will, I think, be a really pretty little loco, although most people won't notice the bashing, as the changes are more subtle.
changing the counter wieght's is something I still have to do to the brass loco I built. It should make a dramatic change in the appearance.
I've been thinking about giving the engine to my father, Who is the one person that would truly appreciate the effort that went in to building it.
I know the difficulty you have in posting pic's, but try to get one on of the loco when it's finished.
Here's a "work in progress" --- the frame of another Mantua 4-4-0 that I'm bashing. (A stock frame is shown on the left for comparison.)
The pilot has been replaced with a Cal Scale part. It doesn't show well in the foto, but you can see between the staves --- really improves the appearance.
The steam chest and cylinders are scratch built replacements. It's unfinished. There will be nickle silver tops on the brass valve chests.
Note, t., the material removed from the frame. This is what I meant by,"getting some air in there." The rear end of the frame is modified also, to make it closer to prototypical appearance. That meant changing the tender coupler bar, but that doesn't look like a problem.
Bill thats looking real good. Now I see where you meant about the frame. I was thinking through the side. thanks for the pic. To do that on the Rivarrosi I will have to change the pilot truck design so it does'nt show.
Here's another "work in progress" photo. Nothing is screwed together here --- just sort of sitting in place. When it's actually assembled, the pilot will be down closer to the rails where it belongs. Also, none of the small details, or the rods, are in place yet.
This is the frame I showed above. Beyond that, this "General" has a stack from an IHC 4-4-0, and a cab from a Bachmann 4-4-0. The tender truck side frames are also IHC 4-4-0.
t: These are the drivers with modified counter weights I mentioned before.
Looking good Bill. Are you going to build the rod's?
Nah, t., just going to file the rods down a bit, as they are far too oversize for the period. Right now I'm beating my head against the wall trying to come up with decent valve gear. My first attempt was clunky and sloppy, so I tossed the pieces in the trash and I'm starting over on it. It's times like this --- trying to fabricate the tiny parts --- that I wish I modeled in O scale, or even larger.
Bill, I Know what you mean. God is in the details but the devil is too. It took me three attempts to get a tolerable set of crossheads.
looking forward to the next update photo.
Separate names with a comma.