<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Jim,<br>
<br>
My apologies for the late arrival.<br>
<br>
What Chris states didn't change much from the steam era when there
were more runs to more tipples. Every run was different, in part,
because, "the type of moves really varied from one coal operation to
the next." Some tipples were stub-end (Crumpler), but most were
run-arounds with an inlet switch above the tipple and an outlet
below. Typically, empties rolled by gravity from the delivery tracks
down to the tipple tracks for loading, then down to the outlet
tracks. <br>
<br>
Especially on the East End, significant grades were a constant for
every job, so the (one) engine was dispatched running forward if
there was a turn on the run, otherwise it was dispatched facing
upgrade. Some runs took all of their empties, others some or none,
and picked them up along the way at storage points where mainline
runs had set off empties and picked up loads the previous night. And
picking up their empties could vary day to day, by location, by the
numbers, and from one extreme to the other.<br>
<br>
At various points, the engine could be pulling empties or shoving
them ahead, depending on run-around opportunities and switch
arrangements ahead. Loads stayed next to the engine and could be on
both ends. The crew would have the adjacent main track for however
much time, pending superior movements. Even branchline shifters had
a passenger run to consider. For example, your North Fork job
routinely made <b>three</b> different runs up the branch per shift
because of a mix of facing- and trailing-point moves at various
tipples that totaled a million tons per year, and all while dodging
the passenger run.<br>
<br>
Then there was the nearby Keystone tipple on the main line that
rated almost a million tons a year by itself. Seems easier than the
North Fork Branch, except that the tipple was jammed into a bend in
the hollow such that the delivery track capacity was only about 35
cars. Every local job in the area was on call to work it, including
the North Fork Branch passenger job between runs. Picture a Class M
working a huge tipple on the main line. In 1950.<br>
<br>
And this was just in the Greater Northfork area of special interest
to you. The variety that makes Pocahontas Division operations
difficult to characterize in broad generalizations is what can make
it so interesting to model. On multiple levels, no two jobs were the
same and no two days were the same. So answers to many questions may
depend on specific jobs and/or locations. Ask away and we will
answer best we can (soon as we can). More to come.<br>
<br>
Grant Carpenter<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/17/2025 4:14 PM, NW Mailing List
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:mailman.12075.1763425419.722595.nw-mailing-list@nwhs.org">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
Jim,
<div>During my era of dispatching, the type of moves really varied
from one coal operation to the next. We typically referred to
the mine runs as “shifters”. A “turn crew” was usually a
mainline crew that was designated as a “one day job” which meant
that regardless of where they went on a train or in a taxi they
would terminate back in their original home terminal at the end
of their shift.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regarding the directional status of locomotives, during my
career the setup of a consist to have a short hood in each
direction became more and more an expectation. I didn’t have
too many mine operations that were worked with a single
locomotive in a traditional “deliver empties then pull loads”
operating plan. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>At the operations where this was the case, most crews would
choose to handle empties with long hood lead and the much
heavier loads coming back out with short hood lead on their
engine for better visibility. If the operation happened to be
near a “wye”, it was not uncommon to turn the engine after
delivering empties before pulling the loads to maintain a short
hood lead for any move where they were handling cars. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>My guess is that turning the engine like this was much less
prevalent in the eras of steam and high hood diesels with dual
controls. I’m interested in what Grant’s input will be on this
for the steam era. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thank Ya’n Out,</div>
<div>Chris Dalton </div>
<div>Bluefield, WV
<blockquote type="cite">On Nov 17, 2025, at 11:26 AM, NW Mailing
List wrote:</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="auto">Jim,</div>
<div dir="auto">Only one engine. If there was no way to turn
the engine for the return trip, the engine ran backwards
out of the terminal.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Jimmy Lisle</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div align="left" dir="auto"
style="font-size:100%;color:#000000">
<div>-------- Original message --------</div>
<div>Date: 11/17/25 9:07 AM</div>
<div>Subject: loco motions</div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<p style="margin-bottom:0in">If I am remembering correctly
the things I have read heard in the past indicate that a
mine servicing run (was this called a turn?) in the part
of the Pokey in which I am most interested, would begin
with a train comprising a string of empty hoppers
sandwiched between a couple locomotives, one of which
was facing West while the other faced East. </p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in">From my meager understanding,
there were two typical track arrangements for tipple
sidings. They both began with a turnout off the main
line followed by additional turnouts whose number varied
according to things like the number of sized of coal
produced, storage track configuration, run-around track,
re-connection to the main, etc. </p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in">In one example, a coal
operation would have only one turnout on the main. This
would necessitate one of locomotives with a cut of
empties to cut off from the rest of the
(?turn/job/movement?) and move the empties into the mine
trackage. Did the rest of the train remain on the main
in the rain blocking other traffic? Also, was there a
preference for whether the servicing unit proceeded
moving forward or in reverse for this part of the
operation? If there were no run-around track at the
mine, the locomotive would have to push his empties past
the tipple for gravity feeding purposes, cut them loose
after sufficient brakes had been set, move back down to
where this mine's loads had been stored, couple up, move
this string down to the main, reattach to the rest of
the turn and move on down to the next operation.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in">This account contains much
conjecture on my part, and my purpose is to learn how
things really worked such as when those locomotives were
run forward and when they ran in reverse along with
other specifics of the operations along my most beloved
portion of the Pokey.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in">If this is of interest to
others or I get response (Grant, hint, hint), I will
follow up with additional questions and conjecture.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in">Jim Cochran</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>