Was Re: Roller Bearings and the Y6-b, Now Y6b Development

Mon Oct 14 21:33:49 EDT 2019

John -

If it was possible to design a 16-drivered compound that would run as fast as the A, which I doubt, given N&W’s phusical limitations (I doubt if they could have gotten such an engine on a 115’ turntable for one thing, boiler overhang at the front and rear-end overhang at the other end would have been monstrous) why would they have wanted to?  Data have come to light that even the Y-7 might have had difficulties there.  Gurdon McGavock was said to have expressed concerns about those very items.

N&W had its bases covered with the 2100s and the As.  Their results speak for themseoves.

- Ed King

From: NW Mailing List 
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2019 2:44 PM
To: List NWHS 
Subject: Re: Was Re: Roller Bearings and the Y6-b, Now Y6b Development

Ed you are misunderstanding what I am saying.  I  am not talking about the Y7.  N&W could have built a compound Y that could have been just as fast and powerful as the A without being overly complex.  It should have helped them financially and operationally to not have 2 different road freight locomotives. 

John Rhodes 

On Mon, Oct 14, 2019, 11:49 AM NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org> wrote:

  The point was that N&W’s financial results using its steam locomotives were refined to the point that any thoughts of working around the margins would probably produce minuscule results.  It was probably a good thing that the Y-7 was never built.  It turned out that the Y-6 would run fast enough (far faster than anyone else’s Mallets, but that’s another story) for those territories where the Y-7 might have worked well.  And the Y-6 retained the economy of the compound.

  The argument has been made that N&W had too many A’s, but, again, what would be the benefit?  It’s arguable that they built too many S-1a engines, too, but again . . .

  - Ed King  

  From: NW Mailing List 
  Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2019 8:32 PM
  To: NW Mailing List 
  Subject: Re: Was Re: Roller Bearings and the Y6-b, Now Y6b Development

  The N&W did a great job and I am not trying to cast dispersion on them.  I am not trying to nit-pick them, I am trying to think about what if.  But it is interesting to think about what the result would have been if coal trains on the Kenova and Columbus Districts and east of Roanoke were operated with improved Y engines that had equal speed capability as the A's.  Would it have improved locomotive utilization to the point to have increased N&W's profitability?

  John Rhodes

  On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 7:24 PM NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org> wrote:

    I find it difficult to second-guess N&W’s motive power decisions in the 1950s.  For the all-steam part of that decade they were carrying gross income over to net at a rate that was the envy of the industry while handling a low-revenue commodity .  They were sparring with the mighty Union Pacific for the top spot in gross ton miles per train hour.  If people want to nit-pick their decisions, they’ll have to come upwith some very impressive facts that nobody else ever thought of to prove their points.  A case could be made that coal trains on the Kenova and Columbus Districts and east of Roanoke  could have been handled more economically with Y engines, but it couldn’t have been handless as fast, and locomotive utilization might have suffered.

    So I, for one, am content to enjoy what they did do rather than try to think up things I think they should have done.  Wnen I hired out on N&W in 1959 they were paying a $6.50 dividend on their common stock, the highest on the nYSE.

    - Ed King

    From: NW Mailing List 
    Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2019 8:32 PM
    To: List NWHS 
    Subject: Re: Was Re: Roller Bearings and the Y6-b, Now Y6b Development

    So no opinions on what the result on N&W's operations would be if they had one loco instead of having to use both A's and Y's?

    John Rhodes 

    On Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 12:19 PM NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org> wrote:

      All,
      N&W instead of expanding the speed capability of the Y Class they created the A Class to take care of Fast Freight, flatter districts and the occasional heavy passenger train.  Later they realized that a single engine type to do all freight jobs would be better for the railroad operationally and financially.  N&W started investigating the Y7 for this role, assuming larger drivers and abandoning compound operation was necessary to meet the objective of a general purpose freight locomotive.

      I propose that in about 1930, N&W could have sped up the compound 58" drivered Y Class to allow it to also do everything that the Class A did as well so that the Class A would have never been designed or built.

      There are 2 issues to a Y class doing the work of an A. 1. Maximum speed and 2. Drop off of drawbar pull at higher speed.

      With respect to 1. The size of the low pressure cylinders and lack of ability to balance them for 70 mph is the issue. Dividing the 2 huge lp cylinders into 3 reasonable sized lp cylinders on 120 degree separation would likely have allowed 70 mph balancing.  

      Also the volume of the lp cylinders is driven by the volume of the hp cylinders. The hp cylinders size on the Y class is driven by tractive effort requirements for the 4 axles of the hp engine.  The lp engine due to size and the starting valve has no issue producing as much tractive effort as needed. Changing the wheel arrangement to 2-10-6-4 would have helped in allowing smaller hp and lp cylinders and balancing while keep TE high.

      Also the 3 cylinder  lp engine with less torque variation in a rotation should allow the lp engine to produce 25000 pounds of TE per axle vs 20000. So a 3 lp cylider Y class should have been capable of 180000 to 185000 pounds of TE versus 160000ish pounds of rating TE for a Y5 Y6.

      The second issue is drop of of drawbar pull at higher speed.  This is an issue of steam flow and pressure drops. A 3 cylinder lp engine and also reducing the cylinder sizes in general will help this tremendously.  But having 2 piston valves per cylinder with the longest practical travel lap and lead will greatly improve middle range and top end power without hurting the low end.  High lead in valve gears can make a locomotive slippery at low speed so variable lead based on cutoff like DRGW did would be appropriate based on what the N&W did with the Y Class. 

      The live and intermediate steam piping from the dome through the superheater throttle  and cylinder steam ports should have cross section of 25% of the cylinder faces not 8-10% on the Y class. 

      Also the Y class need more  steam chest volume about 125% of the cylinder volume.  

      More superheat like 850 degrees Farenheit would have helped but probably required saturated steam cooling of the valve liners.

      Also resuperheating of the exhaust steam to the lp engine would help.  More feedwater heat extraction using a 2 stage setup with open and closed type stages. Basically adding a 2nd shell and tube stage to a Worthington FWH would work.

      When finished with this you would end up with a loco of similar weight and size but have 70 mph top speed 185000 pounds TE and likely 7000 drawbar horsepower on the same coal and water consumption as a Y.

      And in the end Stuart Saunders would have dieselized anyway.

      John Rhodes 

      On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 8:10 AM NW Mailing List via NW-Mailing-List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org> wrote:

        I'd like to throw another possible reason - roller bearing rods have large hubs and may have interfered with the clearance limits on  the lower part of the N&W's load gauge.  With the Y6's 58" drivers and 32" stroke, there's not a lot of room  for a roller bearing rod hub.  IIRC, load gauge interference was a problem with the P&LE's 2-8-4's and they had conventional solid bearing rods and 63" drivers.

        Dave Stephenson

        On Wednesday, October 9, 2019, 9:58:26 PM EDT, NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org> wrote:

        Bill 

              If you’re a Trainorders member (I am not)you can go back and read Wes Camp’s writing on this subject recently . Very interesting  There were

        a lot of reasons why probably it never happened . 

        Larry Evans

        _______________________________________
        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/

      ________________________________________
      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/

    ________________________________________
    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/

  ________________________________________
  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/20191014/efc3503e/attachment-0001.html>