Topics

Why was #12 hated by the ET&WNC Crew?


Tweetsie12
 

Alright, so I know that it's no secret that the ET&WNC crew members didn't exactly care for dear old #12. But I was curious as to why. I know there was some quirk that made the old girl unpopular in the eyes of the crew, but I'm not sure what it was...


William L Vanderburg
 

Several items:  cramped quarters (sitting right next to the boiler), engine brake is behind the engineer, again do to cramped quarters. 

On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 1:59 PM Tweetsie12 <jonahsnyder12190@...> wrote:
Alright, so I know that it's no secret that the ET&WNC crew members didn't exactly care for dear old #12. But I was curious as to why. I know there was some quirk that made the old girl unpopular in the eyes of the crew, but I'm not sure what it was...


Tweetsie12
 

True, but ALL of the ET&WNC Ten-Wheelers had that arrangement to my knowledge (at least in terms of the cramped quarters.) So, there's gotta be more, other than the independent brake being in an inconvenient position for the crew.


Ken Riddle
 

They didn’t hate her, they just preferred the other locomotives.  10 would outpull any of the other ten wheelers.  Cap Allison was at Baldwin when she was built and he had an extra twenty thousands lead cut into both ends of each valve.  She pulled two more loads over Buffalo that any of the rest and was close to the capacity of the 7 but she burned considerably more coal.  7 was an Alco and they are just better engines.

11 was everybody’s favorite.  She steamed good and was very comfortable to operate.  The ten wheelers were short decked except for little 8 and they were operated standing up.  

14 was not much of an engine either they told me.  She was really bad to prime and carry over water.  Her crown sheet was replaced when she was nearly new and they set it too high.

12 spent a lot of time as a hanger queen.  She was the regular engine on the Cranberry local but then went into standby yard service.  Her quadrant and throttle are in an odd position and it makes it mighty uncomfortable to operate.   She just was a Baldwin I guess.


On Feb 5, 2020, at 2:05 PM, William L Vanderburg via Groups.Io <Army30th@...> wrote:

Several items:  cramped quarters (sitting right next to the boiler), engine brake is behind the engineer, again do to cramped quarters. 

On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 1:59 PM Tweetsie12 <jonahsnyder12190@...> wrote:
Alright, so I know that it's no secret that the ET&WNC crew members didn't exactly care for dear old #12. But I was curious as to why. I know there was some quirk that made the old girl unpopular in the eyes of the crew, but I'm not sure what it was...<IMG_2480.JPG>


Greg Carpenter
 

They may have disliked that but all the 10 wheeler engines were like that with the cab forward on the firebox. It all came down to personality. Everyone of those engines were different. They ran different and fired different and had their quirks. #11 was the favorite because just ran overall better than the rest. I believe #10 was the strongest etc etc. #12 just had its own issues of how it ran that they didn’t like especially after the wreck. 


japetranek
 

Hi Ken,

Your comments on Tweetsie engines caught my attention. Two years ago we took the Blue Line train across South Africa. It was a beautiful train ending up in Pretoria. For political reasons only "local" engines could be used and one particular one scared the living daylights out of us. The engine would lurch maybe every 15 minutes throughout the night...almost enough to toss us out of our bed. I tried to walk through the train with no success finding what was going on. Later we received a $2000.00 refund on that trip.

We will be heading back to NC come April.

Art Petranek

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Riddle <keriddle@...>
To: ETWNC <ETWNC@groups.io>
Sent: Wed, Feb 5, 2020 3:19 pm
Subject: Re: [ETWNC] Why was #12 hated by the ET&WNC Crew?


They didn’t hate her, they just preferred the other locomotives.  10 would outpull any of the other ten wheelers.  Cap Allison was at Baldwin when she was built and he had an extra twenty thousands lead cut into both ends of each valve.  She pulled two more loads over Buffalo that any of the rest and was close to the capacity of the 7 but she burned considerably more coal.  7 was an Alco and they are just better engines.


11 was everybody’s favorite.  She steamed good and was very comfortable to operate.  The ten wheelers were short decked except for little 8 and they were operated standing up.  


14 was not much of an engine either they told me.  She was really bad to prime and carry over water.  Her crown sheet was replaced when she was nearly new and they set it too high.


12 spent a lot of time as a hanger queen.  She was the regular engine on the Cranberry local but then went into standby yard service.  Her quadrant and throttle are in an odd position and it makes it mighty uncomfortable to operate.   She just was a Baldwin I guess.




On Feb 5, 2020, at 2:05 PM, William L Vanderburg via Groups.Io <Army30th=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:




Several items:  cramped quarters (sitting right next to the boiler), engine brake is behind the engineer, again do to cramped quarters. 



On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 1:59 PM Tweetsie12 <@Tweetsie12> wrote:

Alright, so I know that it's no secret that the ET&WNC crew members didn't exactly care for dear old #12. But I was curious as to why. I know there was some quirk that made the old girl unpopular in the eyes of the crew, but I'm not sure what it was...<IMG_2480.JPG>


Ken Riddle
 

Well holler when ya get up here Art!!!

Ken

On Feb 6, 2020, at 8:49 AM, japetranek via Groups.Io <jpetranek=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi Ken,

Your comments on Tweetsie engines caught my attention. Two years ago we took the Blue Line train across South Africa. It was a beautiful train ending up in Pretoria. For political reasons only "local" engines could be used and one particular one scared the living daylights out of us. The engine would lurch maybe every 15 minutes throughout the night...almost enough to toss us out of our bed. I tried to walk through the train with no success finding what was going on. Later we received a $2000.00 refund on that trip.

We will be heading back to NC come April.

Art Petranek


-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Riddle <keriddle@...>
To: ETWNC <ETWNC@groups.io>
Sent: Wed, Feb 5, 2020 3:19 pm
Subject: Re: [ETWNC] Why was #12 hated by the ET&WNC Crew?


They didn’t hate her, they just preferred the other locomotives. 10 would outpull any of the other ten wheelers. Cap Allison was at Baldwin when she was built and he had an extra twenty thousands lead cut into both ends of each valve. She pulled two more loads over Buffalo that any of the rest and was close to the capacity of the 7 but she burned considerably more coal. 7 was an Alco and they are just better engines.


11 was everybody’s favorite. She steamed good and was very comfortable to operate. The ten wheelers were short decked except for little 8 and they were operated standing up.


14 was not much of an engine either they told me. She was really bad to prime and carry over water. Her crown sheet was replaced when she was nearly new and they set it too high.


12 spent a lot of time as a hanger queen. She was the regular engine on the Cranberry local but then went into standby yard service. Her quadrant and throttle are in an odd position and it makes it mighty uncomfortable to operate. She just was a Baldwin I guess.




On Feb 5, 2020, at 2:05 PM, William L Vanderburg via Groups.Io <Army30th=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:




Several items: cramped quarters (sitting right next to the boiler), engine brake is behind the engineer, again do to cramped quarters.



On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 1:59 PM Tweetsie12 <@Tweetsie12> wrote:

Alright, so I know that it's no secret that the ET&WNC crew members didn't exactly care for dear old #12. But I was curious as to why. I know there was some quirk that made the old girl unpopular in the eyes of the crew, but I'm not sure what it was...<IMG_2480.JPG>











Lee Bishop
 

I didn't know about the issues with 10 and 14, but that makes sense knowing that they were the ones that went to Alaska during WW2 ("Hey, if we have to send them two of our engines, let's send them those..."). Both were rebuilt by the NP at the South Tacoma shops after one winter in Alaska, and the cabs were moved back. I've always wondered how (or if) their performance improved after that. Sadly, they didn't last too long as they burned in that enginehouse fire at Whitehorse and both were scrapped at the NP yard in Auburn WA after the war.
I have always wondered why, if 11 was better liked, it wasn't saved. You'd think 11 would be doing loops at Blowing Rock today if things went like you'd have thought they would. Maybe it had something do with whichever engine got the most recent work done before the fires were dropped?
I'd long read that 11 was offered to either Johnson City of Elizabethton (I've seen each noted) but was turned down. So, the torches came out...


Ken Riddle
 

10 and 14 were the most recently shopped.  The government chose them, not the railroad.  They took a couple of gasoline tank cars as well.

9 and 11 were offered to each town but they didn’t want them.




On Feb 6, 2020, at 1:50 PM, Lee Bishop via Groups.Io <leebishop1944@...> wrote:

I didn't know about the issues with 10 and 14, but that makes sense knowing that they were the ones that went to Alaska during WW2 ("Hey, if we have to send them two of our engines, let's send them those..."). Both were rebuilt by the NP at the South Tacoma shops after one winter in Alaska, and the cabs were moved back. I've always wondered how (or if) their performance improved after that. Sadly, they didn't last too long as they burned in that enginehouse fire at Whitehorse and both were scrapped at the NP yard in Auburn WA after the war.
I have always wondered why, if 11 was better liked, it wasn't saved. You'd think 11 would be doing loops at Blowing Rock today if things went like you'd have thought they would. Maybe it had something do with whichever engine got the most recent work done before the fires were dropped?
I'd long read that 11 was offered to either Johnson City of Elizabethton (I've seen each noted) but was turned down. So, the torches came out...


johnny graybeal
 

Several years ago, the last time No. 12 had a  major overhaul at TRR, the damage to the frame from the accident in 1925 was finally repaired. I have heard the comment that No.12 rode harder than the other engines. I will say this. No. 12 was on the JC/Pineola passenger train until her accident. After that she did not work consistently (at least as long as the coal chute reports listed the engine number instead of the train number, which was only a year or so after the '25 accident). It is not much of a logic jump to see that the engine was not the same after the accident. With every thing else being equal, the engines being as close to identical as steam engines can be, an engine that rode hard would quickly become disliked. No. 12 also got a new smoke box. If the set up of the petticoat pipe was off by even a tiny amount, she would have been harder to fire too. I know very well the feeling of trying to fire a locomotive with a bad draft. Finally, the 9 pulled the same passenger train with less coal and ran for months on end. I suspect she was the favorite of Sherman Pippin in the 20s. As the years passed, other engineers and other firemen had their favorites. Asking them decades later which one was their favorite, was their answer their first love, or their last??? Hard to say.