a question about drawings in our archives

Tue Aug 7 11:06:29 EDT 2018

Brent,

I would venture to say the N&W Mechanical Department was active in
designing equipment based upon the current and expected needs of the
railway; as such they may very well have created drawings for equipment
that was not produced; for example, see the entries in the NWHS Archives
for the Class BR boxcar:

http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/listdocs/select.php?index=rs&id=2881

The general arrangement drawing clearly indicates these cars were "not
built."  I don't know why they weren't built except that N&W decided it had
other cars that could fill its needs.

My answer to your question would be not to build a car you don't have a
photo of, or other verifiable documentation that it was in service.

My two cents; YMMV

Jim Brewer
Glenwood MD

On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 9:39 AM, NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
wrote:

> It was quite expensive to create detailed mechanical drawings.  It was
> done only when it was anticipated that something was going to be built or
> modified.  Case in point was the Class Y7.
>
> When the Class A was being first built in 1936, there were two schools of
> thought about what N&W needed for a single expansion engine.  One school
> was the 1200’s and then the other was a high horsepower engine like the A
> but with a tractive effort of the Y6’s.  There were sketches and diagrams
> drawn doing the preliminary phase to determine the needed capacity of the
> proposed locomotive.  This included basic cylinder and driving wheel
> dimensions and starting tractive effort as well as the anticipated boiler
> capacity.  When it was determined that the 2-8-8-2 single expansion engine
> was going to be built, the design phase began.  From early to mid 1937,
> about 100 mechanical drawings were made for the anticipated construction.
> These drawing would have been used by the Roanoke Shops to build the Y7.
> The work on the Y7 stopped after about 100 drawings were made.  My *Giant
> of Steam* book goes into some detail why the Y7 design process stopped
> and then cancelled all together in 1943.
>
> To build the Class A’s, almost 1,000 drawings were developed for that
> engine involving about 20,000 man-hours of design work by the motive power
> mechanical design team.  These drawings were not done as “what-if” but were
> done on anticipated construction for a new type of locomotive.  So the Y7
> was only about 10 percent done when its design phase stopped.  It was not
> continued because it was determined it was not needed.  The railway did do
> preliminary diagrams and sketches just didn’t do what-if mechanical
> drawings.
>
> Bud Jeffries
>
> *From:* NW Mailing List
> *Sent:* Monday, August 06, 2018 6:14 PM
> *To:* NW Mailing List
> *Cc:* 'Phil Mortimer'
> *Subject:* Re: a question about drawings in our archives
>
> Hi Phil, as a partial answer.to your question (there are certainly many
> more knowledgeable folks on this subject than I am), but there were some
> exploratory drawings/sketches created that were actually something in
> between the class A and y6b as a potential "follow-up" design as you say.
> The hypothesized Y7 was to be a simple articulated like the class A, but of
> a 2-8-8-2 configuration like the other y class locomotives.  If I recall
> correctly,  the dimensions were maximized to what could possibly be
> conceived that would fit though N&W's clearances (tunnels, bridges, etc.)
> I'm sure it would have been both impressive and glorious!  But the drawings
> I have seen of this proposed beast were only rough dimensions and a general
> conceptual outline,  vs. the type of detailed schematics I am referring to
> in the archives.
>
> So I come back to my original question, and hopefully some of our esteemed
> historians can shed some light here, how safe would it be to assume that if
> I find a drawing for a boxcar with a Climax roof, that at least one of such
> animal actually existed in real life, even if I can't find photographic
> Proof of such?
>
> Was it common for the N&W to do such detailed diagrams for something that
> was only a "what-if"?
>
> Brent
>
> ___________________________
> Dr. J. Brent Greer
> ------------------------------
> *From:* NW-Mailing-List <nw-mailing-list-bounces at nwhs.org> on behalf of
> NW Mailing List via NW-Mailing-List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
> *Sent:* Monday, August 6, 2018 7:02:07 AM
> *To:* 'NW Mailing List'
> *Cc:* NW Mailing List; 'Phil Mortimer'
> *Subject:* RE: a question about drawings in our archives
>
>
> Good morning from the other side of the pond.
>
>
>
> This is an interesting observation. The drawings of locos, railcars and
> passenger vehicles in my treasured 1947 Locomotive Cyclopaedia (Simmons
> Boardman) are real works of art and I assume originally drawn out by hand.
> How these were ultimately reduced for inclusion in a book is a mystery. The
> patient man hours that went into the development of these drawings must
> have been staggering but they are all meticulous.
>
>
>
> In relation to speculative designs I suspect that quite a lot of this sort
> of activity went on to sketch out what might be
> feasible/possible/desirable. I have in my office a drawing of a Baldwin
> Duplex that became the basis of the T1s on the Pennsy and a souped up
> Mallard type A4. It would have been neat to see both in reality.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Phil Mortimer
>
>
>
> PS Was there ever any evidence of follow on designs for the A Class or the
> Y6b?
>
>
>
> *From:* NW-Mailing-List [mailto:nw-mailing-list-bounces at nwhs.org] *On
> Behalf Of *NW Mailing List
> *Sent:* Friday, August 3, 2018 10:26 PM
> *To:* NWHS Mailing List
> *Subject:* a question about drawings in our archives
>
>
>
> I have on occasion prowled about the on-line collection of drawings in our
> archives and it is amazingly extensive.  It is also interesting to me the
> amount of detail that went into these drawings and they seem to encompass
> even the most subtle nuances of changes over time.  I have also found a few
> drawings of interesting things for which I have never seen prototype
> photos, so this brings about my question.  Given the time and detail
> involved in creating these documents, how often would N&W engage in such
> exercises, if they never actually got translated to something that was
> used?  Could there really be that many drawings done that were only
> "what-if" speculations?  Like "what-if" we wanted to add a Viking roof to a
> specific class of boxcar, then it would look like this, and "what-if" we
> wanted to add a Climax roof to that same class of boxcar, then it would
> look like this, etc. etc.   Can it be reasonably assumed(absent obvious
> photographic proof) that if there is a set of drawings showing a particular
> appliance installed on a particular car type that it was actually at least
> done once in real life?  Or was it common practice for these drawings to be
> created based upon pure speculation or the various component offerings of
> the different manufacturers  (ends, roofs, doors, lock systems, etc.) ?
>
>
>
> Brent
> ------------------------------
>
> *Dr. J. Brent Greer*
>
> ------------------------------
> ________________________________________
> 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/
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist6.pair.net/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/attachments/20180807/8b1c38bb/attachment-0001.html>