A class and Lightweight rods

NW Mailing List nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org
Mon Dec 14 14:10:54 EST 2009



Thanks for this a very interesting information. A couple more questions:

Were the roller bearing A's able to operate at a higher speed?

I know it's speculation on a lost cause, but would the roller bearing lightweight rods ever have been considered for the next generation Y? Would they have increased the Y's speed?

Which brings up the basic question, If the diesel invasion had failed on the N&W, what would have been the railroad's next step in steam power?

Thanks in advance, Ted (Columbus)

-----Original Message-----
From: NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
To: NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
Sent: Mon, Dec 14, 2009 9:38 am
Subject: Re: A class and Lightweight rods



John,

This is a follow-on to my earlier reply. In addition to the labor and materials, there was a cost to draft the mechanical drawings and to make new patterns, etc. at the foundry to cast the new components of the wheels and rods. There was some cost associated at the smith shop for the differences there to finish the rods compared to the conventional rods.

Otherwise, all eight of these locomotives and tenders were identical.

Bud Jeffries

----- Original Message -----
From: NW Mailing List
To: NW Mailing List
Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2009 7:54 PM
Subject: Re: A class and Lightweight rods


Bud,

Thanks. Other than the increase in labor and materials was the roller rods the only cause of the increase in cost?

John Rhodes


On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 9:56 AM, NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org> wrote:


John,

The railway listed the 1235-37 costing $277,564.00 each; the 1238-42 $300,404.00 each.

Bud Jeffries

----- Original Message -----
From: NW Mailing List



To: NW Mailing List
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: A class and Lightweight rods


Bud,

Do you know the difference in cost between the last produced roller rod and non-roller rod Class A's?

Thanks,

John Rhodes


On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 12:09 PM, NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org> wrote:

Matt,

The last five A's when built, numbers 1238-42, were equipped with the lightweight rods and reciprocating parts with roller bearing connections to enhance long distance running. They were very successful and were built primarly for troop train and passenger service, when needed.

The Class J's were all equipped with this type of rods and bearings allowing them to be assigned to Roanoke and dispatched to Norfolk and Cincinnati on these runs with a minimum of servicing. The five A's could perform similarly on extended runs on troop and passenger service. Beginning in 1955 with the inauguration of time freights 77 and 78, these engines ran to Petersburg and back to Roanoke, and also between Roanoke and Portsmouth, without engine change.

Official N&W literature stated that the Timken lightweight reciprocating parts resulted in a weight reduction of 38 percent from the original type used. The advantages listed was greater reliability, increased availability, lower roundhouse maintenance cost, reduction of hammer blow on the rails, and longer runs without lubrication servicing.

The only other modification required was the counterweights on the driving wheels had to be changed. There was an increased cost to build these five A's when compared to the three A's built at the same time using conventional rods.

Bud Jeffries

----- Original Message ----- From: "NW Mailing List" <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
To: "NW Mailing List" <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 8:40 AM
Subject: A class and Lightweight rods



Were the lightweight rods applied to the last A's a successful application? How was success measured and what was the business / operational reason behind it?

What other changes to the locomotive were required to accomodate the rods?

Matt Goodman
Columbus OH





________________________________________
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/

________________________________________
W-Mailing-List at nwhs.org
o change your subscription go to
ttp://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list
rowse the NW-Mailing-List archives at
ttp://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/attachments/20091214/353dc405/attachment.html>


More information about the NW-Mailing-List mailing list