Railway General Knowledge.

[theageofthetra]

What first featured on a locomotive in around 1850 & wasn't repeated again until 1939.

 

[EbbwJunction1]

Was it a form of oil firing?

 

[TheEdge]

A speedo

 

[Cowley]

I wondered if it was the double chimney, but I think that may have been earlier?

 

[DaleCooper]

A speedo

Is that for going through water troughs?

 

[theageofthetra]

None of those. Very few locomotives had this feature.

 

[Cowley]

Mechanical stoker maybe?

 

[theageofthetra]

Nothing that technical.Something that would be obvious to any one who saw it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Another hint- looking at the wheels would help.

 

[Cowley]

It's not something like Boxpok wheels is it?

 

[theageofthetra]

Nothing to do with the type of wheels.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Until that clue about wheels was posted I was starting to wonder about external air brake pumps...

 

[theageofthetra]

Any non enthusiast would notice this feature.

 

[neilb62]

Uncovered driving wheels? I.e. No splashers?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[theageofthetra]

No not that. One last clue- it involves the wheel arrangement.

 

[Cowley]

What about something like an 0-2-2 wheel arrangement?

 

[theageofthetra]

No- am surprised more aren't aware of this one given the 1850 example is one of the oldest photos of any locomotive & I believe the oldest of any US loco. The 1939 one is very famous too. One last guess before I give the answer.

 

[neilb62]

4-2-0 rigid?

 

[theageofthetra]

Nope. The Camden & Amboy built in around 1850 a loco so truely hideous only its designer could have loved it. It was a Crampton 6-2-0 type with the first ever six wheel bogie. Needless to say it suffered from adhesion (and asthetic!) issues with so little weight available for traction. A photo of it in 1850 is believed to be the oldest surviving photo of a US loco.

Well in the intervening 90 years US locomotive designers didn't seem to learn from this early mistake and they repeated it with the stunning looking but equally adhesion issue plagued PRR S1 duplex of 1939 a 6-4-4-6 & one of the largest locos ever built.

Open floor.

 

[neilb62]

A popular holiday island had (closed 1937) a railway with an adhesion worked incline of 1:31, it was known for passengers to have to get out and push! Where was it?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Calthrop]

A popular holiday island had (closed 1937) a railway with an adhesion worked incline of 1:31, it was known for passengers to have to get out and push! Where was it?

Would this be the railway on Barbados -- initially 3ft 6in gauge; from 1899 on, 2ft 6in -- with its incline at Conset?

 

[neilb62]

Yes, I'm going on Monday and had no idea about the line until the guide book landed this morning! Your beach sir.....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Calthrop]

Yes, I'm going on Monday and had no idea about the line until the guide book landed this morning! Your beach sir.....

Have a good time ! (If you want rail action in the ex-British Empire West Indies nowadays, you need to go to St. Kitts: also 2ft 6in gauge, tourist -- former sugar-cane -- line.)

I like gauge-related questions: here's one, about Australia's old-time strange ways concerning gauges (now largely standardised).

In the period 1917 -- 1927 (peak era of this particular craziness): for someone travelling by rail from Brisbane to Perth -- how many changes of gauge would they need to undergo en route? ("Over and above", further changes of train would have been necessary; however, question is about number of breaks-of-gauge en route -- additional info "welcome but not obligatory".)

 

[Cowley]

I've got a feeling it was three? Without googling it I probably couldn't elaborate though.

 

[Calthrop]

I've got a feeling it was three? Without googling it I probably couldn't elaborate though.

Three is significantly too few -- sorry, sport !

 

[Cowley]

Three is significantly too few -- sorry, sport !

Ok Bruce, I've got no idea then.

 

[neilb62]

Pure guess. 12.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Calthrop]

Pure guess. 12.

The situation was mad, but not that mad ! Far, far less.

 

[Cowley]

Well I think they had at least standard gauge, 3' 6" and 5' 3" over there and I'll assume with them and perhaps some narrower gauge lines thrown in involving more changes I'll go for seven changes on the journey?

 

[Calthrop]

Well I think they had at least standard gauge, 3' 6" and 5' 3" over there and I'll assume with them and perhaps some narrower gauge lines thrown in involving more changes I'll go for seven changes on the journey?

You're getting warmer, vis-a-vis neil62's suggestion; but need to go further in the direction you've gone in, therefrom.

Only 4' 8-and-a-half", 3' 6", and 5' 3" are involved in the journey concerned; but "in various permutations and combinations".

 

[EbbwJunction1]

How about five?