Date   

locked Re: SR Drawing trivia

George Eichelberger
 

Just put that link in the address bar of any Internet browser, and It’ll download and show it to you.

Ike

On Sep 29, 2021, at 9:08 PM, michael DUNNINGTON <cvlwrnut@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

How can we non-techies access the drawing?
Michael Dunnington
On Sep 29, 2021, at 7:28 PM, A&Y Dave in MD <dbott@vt.edu> wrote:

agree. ‘22-28 SU boxcar drawings and I’ll up the ante. 😼

Sent from Dave Bott's iPhone

On Sep 29, 2021, at 8:07 PM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@bellsouth.net> wrote:

Not really a “trivial” thing….

If you have downloaded the Southern wood under frame box car drawing, notice the ends of the wood pieces. The wood grains drawn are not random, they are different for every type of wood and the drawing standard for each was followed. Shop people knew the wood by the way the grain was drawn without other references.

There is a “key sheet” drawing in the collection…someplace.

Ike









locked Re: SR Drawing trivia

George Eichelberger
 

Dave:

Starting from SF-1000, the beginning of the D size drawings, I only got to SF-1084 (drawn 8-27-1916) scanned this week. (Two screen shots are attached.) (Scanning 100 year old linens has to be done carefully.) While we have the scans made from microfilm, I’ll wait until the Oct work session to go high/later in the drawings with the new scanner. I expect most of the detail drawings, for any car, will be A, B or C size drawings. Those are in separate number series (the drawing number is based on its size) but we either have them scanned or, being smaller drawings, they are easier to scan.

Ike

PS To everyone. To limit storage space on the .io server, I will be deleting most attachments and older posts in the next week or so.




On Sep 29, 2021, at 8:28 PM, A&Y Dave in MD <dbott@...> wrote:

agree.  ‘22-28 SU boxcar drawings and I’ll up the ante. 😼

Sent from Dave Bott's iPhone

On Sep 29, 2021, at 8:07 PM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:

Not really a “trivial” thing….

If you have downloaded the Southern wood under frame box car drawing, notice the ends of the wood pieces. The wood grains drawn are not random, they are different for every type of wood and the drawing standard for each was followed. Shop people knew the wood by the way the grain was drawn without other references.

There is a “key sheet” drawing in the collection…someplace.

Ike













locked Re: SR Drawing trivia

michael DUNNINGTON
 

How can we non-techies access the drawing?
Michael Dunnington

On Sep 29, 2021, at 7:28 PM, A&Y Dave in MD <dbott@vt.edu> wrote:

agree. ‘22-28 SU boxcar drawings and I’ll up the ante. 😼

Sent from Dave Bott's iPhone

On Sep 29, 2021, at 8:07 PM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@bellsouth.net> wrote:

Not really a “trivial” thing….

If you have downloaded the Southern wood under frame box car drawing, notice the ends of the wood pieces. The wood grains drawn are not random, they are different for every type of wood and the drawing standard for each was followed. Shop people knew the wood by the way the grain was drawn without other references.

There is a “key sheet” drawing in the collection…someplace.

Ike









locked Re: SR Drawing trivia

A&Y Dave in MD
 

agree. ‘22-28 SU boxcar drawings and I’ll up the ante. 😼

Sent from Dave Bott's iPhone

On Sep 29, 2021, at 8:07 PM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@bellsouth.net> wrote:

Not really a “trivial” thing….

If you have downloaded the Southern wood under frame box car drawing, notice the ends of the wood pieces. The wood grains drawn are not random, they are different for every type of wood and the drawing standard for each was followed. Shop people knew the wood by the way the grain was drawn without other references.

There is a “key sheet” drawing in the collection…someplace.

Ike






locked SR Drawing trivia

George Eichelberger
 

Not really a “trivial” thing….

If you have downloaded the Southern wood under frame box car drawing, notice the ends of the wood pieces. The wood grains drawn are not random, they are different for every type of wood and the drawing standard for each was followed. Shop people knew the wood by the way the grain was drawn without other references.

There is a “key sheet” drawing in the collection…someplace.

Ike


locked Re: Gift and Challenge

George Eichelberger
 

John:

Ignore the first two messages you get and it will simply let you download the file when you check that. It’s “real” and there are no “bugs” in it.

Ike

On Sep 29, 2021, at 7:42 PM, John Willis <willisjc@zebra.net> wrote:

George,

The file is too large to download. It also has returned this message: the authenticity of the received data could not be verified. Resize the image to something smaller than 156 MB.

John


John C. Willis

Mobile, Al


locked Re: Gift and Challenge

A&Y Dave in MD
 

i was able to view it.

Sent from Dave Bott's iPhone

On Sep 29, 2021, at 7:42 PM, John Willis <willisjc@zebra.net> wrote:

George,

The file is too large to download. It also has returned this message: the authenticity of the received data could not be verified. Resize the image to something smaller than 156 MB.

John


John C. Willis

Mobile, Al






locked Gift and Challenge

John Willis
 

George,

The file is too large to download. It also has returned this message: the authenticity of the received data could not be verified. Resize the image to something smaller than 156 MB.

John


John C. Willis

Mobile, Al


locked Re: Gift and Challenge

A&Y Dave in MD
 

challenge accepted. My gift is on the way.

Dave

Sent from Dave Bott's iPhone

On Sep 29, 2021, at 7:22 PM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:

The new SRHA scanner is in service at the archives. As expected, it does a superb job on our large drawings (linens and blueprints).

I’ve uploaded the full size, full resolution scan for drawing SF-1013, a “Plain Box Car” drawn July 5, 1905. The drawing does not include what car series the drawing is for but the index of SR drawings shown on the print strongly suggest this is not a car proposed by one of the car builders. (As cars got more complex, the index was left off most drawings after about 1906-7.) That’s the “gift”…

The “challenge” includes several opportunities to display models built from the drawing:
Next year’s SRHA (twice postponed) convention in Richmond, VA, next year’s joint meeting with the L&NHS at their annual convention at TVRM, AND to be on display in the future TVRM museum building across the (Turntable Road) street from the archives. Models can be of any scale, including 12”:1’. (A partial cut away model of a “WUF” would be interesting.) I expect the various drawings, plus trucks, are in the archives but we will ask for a donation if anyone wants them all. The Google Drive link to the (177 MB) drawing is:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oGLl1PKvtG_ZviFJRLcz56RR71ZcodJg/view?usp=sharing

Ike

PS Donations for things like $7,000+ scanners are always welcome, and needed.


locked Gift and Challenge

George Eichelberger
 

The new SRHA scanner is in service at the archives. As expected, it does a superb job on our large drawings (linens and blueprints).

I’ve uploaded the full size, full resolution scan for drawing SF-1013, a “Plain Box Car” drawn July 5, 1905. The drawing does not include what car series the drawing is for but the index of SR drawings shown on the print strongly suggest this is not a car proposed by one of the car builders. (As cars got more complex, the index was left off most drawings after about 1906-7.) That’s the “gift”…

The “challenge” includes several opportunities to display models built from the drawing:
Next year’s SRHA (twice postponed) convention in Richmond, VA, next year’s joint meeting with the L&NHS at their annual convention at TVRM, AND to be on display in the future TVRM museum building across the (Turntable Road) street from the archives. Models can be of any scale, including 12”:1’. (A partial cut away model of a “WUF” would be interesting.) I expect the various drawings, plus trucks, are in the archives but we will ask for a donation if anyone wants them all. The Google Drive link to the (177 MB) drawing is:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oGLl1PKvtG_ZviFJRLcz56RR71ZcodJg/view?usp=sharing

Ike

PS Donations for things like $7,000+ scanners are always welcome, and needed.


locked Re: Locos and Traffic on the Atlanta-Birmingham Line

C J Wyatt
 

Generally, Southern Railway did not use sub-division or district names. In the employee timetable for the Birmingham Division, it is simply 'Between Austell and Birmingham - Westbound' or 'Between Birmingham and Austell - Eastbound'.

Jack

On Thursday, September 23, 2021, 09:56:39 PM EDT, James Walton <whovianwil@...> wrote:


By the way, does anyone know what the subdivisions were for the Atlanta-Birmingham line?

On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 11:59 PM James Walton <whovianwil@...> wrote:
I've been trying to figure out locomotive classes and traffic were common on the Southern's Atlanta-Birmingham line in the late 40s and 50s. I don't have a copy of Richard Prince's book, so I'm having to make do with sources like steamlocomotive.com - not exactly ideal. 

I know only that the Southerner and the Kansas City-Florida Special used the line, but not much more.


locked Re: Locos and Traffic on the Atlanta-Birmingham Line

James Walton
 

By the way, does anyone know what the subdivisions were for the Atlanta-Birmingham line?


On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 11:59 PM James Walton <whovianwil@...> wrote:
I've been trying to figure out locomotive classes and traffic were common on the Southern's Atlanta-Birmingham line in the late 40s and 50s. I don't have a copy of Richard Prince's book, so I'm having to make do with sources like steamlocomotive.com - not exactly ideal. 

I know only that the Southerner and the Kansas City-Florida Special used the line, but not much more.


locked Re: Southern Vs EMD

Paul Schmidt
 

Curiously, this letter echoes thoughts that I have passed on to vendors such as Progress Rail, US&S and Alstom over the past several years about signal equipment. The more things change. ...
--
Paul Schmidt
Sequim WA


locked Re: Early Diesel switcher assignments

mike turner
 

Me, too. :)

On 9/22/2021 2:18 PM, rwbrv4 via groups.io wrote:
Can't wait to see the book.
Rick Bell

-- 
Mike Turner
MP-Z35


locked Re: Early Diesel switcher assignments

rwbrv4
 

Can't wait to see the book.
Rick Bell


-----Original Message-----
From: George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...>
To: main@southernrailway.groups.io <main@SouthernRailway.groups.io>
Sent: Wed, Sep 22, 2021 9:10 am
Subject: Re: [SouthernRailway] Early Diesel switcher assignments

Great stuff, Don….thanks!

SRHA has most, maybe all (?) of the Specifications for Southern’s diesels. Three, four or five “Specification Supplements” were common as negotiations proceeded with EMD, ALCo or GE. Although they are available for research, not all have been scanned. In addition to the Specs, the internal and external correspondence files provide rationals for some of the features or changes Southern wanted.

I’ve exported and attached four pages from the (rough!) draft of the SRHA diesel book. Adobe changed their application and fonts since this version was done and I have not updated it so it looks pretty bad. The text will provide some idea of the level of detail that can be included…although sorting through it to determine what is “worth” having in the book is time consuming. (Research and help with the writing and book production is welcomed.) The format will be a standard hardbound “book” style as large horizontal drawings, like the box car books, is not needed.

Ike





On Sep 22, 2021, at 1:48 AM, Don Usak <donusak@...> wrote:

My recollections of SW1500s is somewhat different.  I recall their speed was restricted in that their ability to make transition was not nearly as advanced as mainline locomotives and speed approaching 40 mph could quickly cook the main generator.

My recollection of non-dynamic brake locomotives was when operating on mainline trains, the non-db locomotive would always be put in the lead.  This for several reasons, not the least of which was lack of alignment-control draft system on many of these locomotives, including the SW1500s.  Locomotives like this had two coupler blocks that could be bolted on each side of the coupler pockets to limit the lateral movement of the coupler shank.  Failing to do this, and operating the locomotive behind mainline locomotives with dynamic brake, could cause the non-db locomotive to get buff forced right out of the train during heavy braking. The coupler blocks were left off for normal yard operations.

When I went to Spencer in 1975 we had 28 locomotives assigned to the Spencer Shop.  All were butt-head switchers with many SW1500s.  These locomotives were spread all across many yards on the Eastern Division.  They came to Spencer for regular maintenance; and we could change power assemblies and traction motors.  The only time they went to Pegram was for wheel true, some kind of heavy repair, or 36-month air change.  This could account for lots of sightings of SW1500s on the rear of mainline trains when they were shuttled to and from Spencer for maintenance ---- not being used for mainline power.

At Spencer we never ran SW1500s on mainline trains for power.  When the yard would get loaded we would run extra trains with whatever mainline power we could scrounge up.  We would on occasion run a pair of SW1500s on the Yadkin Local, but never on the Morganton Local. The Albemarle Branch was limited in speed by track so it would not hurt the main generators on the SW1500s.  But the Asheville Line was not so limited and the SW1500s never went on the Morganton Local.

As far as MU, I recall that main reservoir, actuating, and application & release were fully operational on SW1500s.  And they had to be for the brakes to operate properly when trailing.  I do not recall if sand was simply a run through pipe.

I think we go down the wrong path when we assume that a specification for Flexicoil trucks alone implies that these locomotives were meant to be used in mainline service at mainline track speeds.  Many items in the new locomotive specification are never found on the delivered locomotive.  The builders would supply a "Response to the Specification".  This document would outline those items which the builder could not or would not comply with.  GE was very good at providing this detailed document, EMD not so diligent.  The SRHA archives may or may not have these builders' response documents.

Regards,
Don Usak








locked Southern Vs EMD

George Eichelberger
 

I have mentioned how the Southern was not averse to letting car and loco builders “have it” when they were unhappy about something. Here is an example from the SRHA archives.

If we can presume (hope) the virus situation will improve in NW GA and TN, it is time to make plans to attend the SRHA archives work session on  Oct 15 and 16 (it’s early because Oct 1 is a Friday.) We may extend the session to begin on the 14 or even the 13th as TVRM may be beginning their 60th anniversary that same weekend. In addition to the archives, both TVRM steam locos will be in service (check the TVRM web site), the Baby Trainmaster will be on display and there may be time to check on the progress on Southern office car OC-21 at East Chattanooga. (Anyone thinking about attending needs to send an email to archives@....)

Ike



locked Re: Early Diesel switcher assignments

Curt Fortenberry
 


The part about coupler blocks and mainline use is a very important issue.  Locally, we had an MP15 being moved back to the maintenance shop dead in transit, and the local yard forgot to put in the limiting blocks, and during a braking event on a switch, with the extra coupler movement the thing derailed.  

Curt Fortenberry


locked Re: Preserved Southern Switchers?

Matt Bumgarner
 

Monticello Rwy Museum in Monticello has an NS slug that was made from a Southern RS-3. 

Matt Bumgarner

On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 8:15 PM Jason Greene <jason.p.greene@...> wrote:
I forgot to add the SW-1 at Wadley in the woods. Privately owned. It is ex-G&F and Southern. 

Jason Greene 

On Sep 21, 2021, at 6:28 PM, Jason Greene via groups.io <jason.p.greene=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

8202 at SRM is certainly one. 

Three Rivers Rambler/Clausen have two SW-1s at Knoxville. 

There is a SW-1 at Oakridge I believe. 

To my knowledge no ALCO or Baldwins were saved. No SW-1500 have been saved yet, not sure if any could be but some are in second hands. MP-15s are in same boat as the 1500s. 


Jason Greene 

On Sep 21, 2021, at 6:07 PM, Stephen Warner <sgwarner88@...> wrote:

Bob,

Currently we at SRM are getting close to having 8202 operational again.  We had the Traction Motors and wheels overhauled,  are restoring the cab, and painting the trucks.  Still a ways to go, but looking good. Come by us some day.


locked Re: Early Diesel switcher assignments

George Eichelberger
 

Great stuff, Don….thanks!

SRHA has most, maybe all (?) of the Specifications for Southern’s diesels. Three, four or five “Specification Supplements” were common as negotiations proceeded with EMD, ALCo or GE. Although they are available for research, not all have been scanned. In addition to the Specs, the internal and external correspondence files provide rationals for some of the features or changes Southern wanted.

I’ve exported and attached four pages from the (rough!) draft of the SRHA diesel book. Adobe changed their application and fonts since this version was done and I have not updated it so it looks pretty bad. The text will provide some idea of the level of detail that can be included…although sorting through it to determine what is “worth” having in the book is time consuming. (Research and help with the writing and book production is welcomed.) The format will be a standard hardbound “book” style as large horizontal drawings, like the box car books, is not needed.

Ike

On Sep 22, 2021, at 1:48 AM, Don Usak <donusak@ntelos.net> wrote:

My recollections of SW1500s is somewhat different. I recall their speed was restricted in that their ability to make transition was not nearly as advanced as mainline locomotives and speed approaching 40 mph could quickly cook the main generator.

My recollection of non-dynamic brake locomotives was when operating on mainline trains, the non-db locomotive would always be put in the lead. This for several reasons, not the least of which was lack of alignment-control draft system on many of these locomotives, including the SW1500s. Locomotives like this had two coupler blocks that could be bolted on each side of the coupler pockets to limit the lateral movement of the coupler shank. Failing to do this, and operating the locomotive behind mainline locomotives with dynamic brake, could cause the non-db locomotive to get buff forced right out of the train during heavy braking. The coupler blocks were left off for normal yard operations.

When I went to Spencer in 1975 we had 28 locomotives assigned to the Spencer Shop. All were butt-head switchers with many SW1500s. These locomotives were spread all across many yards on the Eastern Division. They came to Spencer for regular maintenance; and we could change power assemblies and traction motors. The only time they went to Pegram was for wheel true, some kind of heavy repair, or 36-month air change. This could account for lots of sightings of SW1500s on the rear of mainline trains when they were shuttled to and from Spencer for maintenance ---- not being used for mainline power.

At Spencer we never ran SW1500s on mainline trains for power. When the yard would get loaded we would run extra trains with whatever mainline power we could scrounge up. We would on occasion run a pair of SW1500s on the Yadkin Local, but never on the Morganton Local. The Albemarle Branch was limited in speed by track so it would not hurt the main generators on the SW1500s. But the Asheville Line was not so limited and the SW1500s never went on the Morganton Local.

As far as MU, I recall that main reservoir, actuating, and application & release were fully operational on SW1500s. And they had to be for the brakes to operate properly when trailing. I do not recall if sand was simply a run through pipe.

I think we go down the wrong path when we assume that a specification for Flexicoil trucks alone implies that these locomotives were meant to be used in mainline service at mainline track speeds. Many items in the new locomotive specification are never found on the delivered locomotive. The builders would supply a "Response to the Specification". This document would outline those items which the builder could not or would not comply with. GE was very good at providing this detailed document, EMD not so diligent. The SRHA archives may or may not have these builders' response documents.

Regards,
Don Usak


locked Re: Early Diesel switcher assignments

Don Usak
 

My recollections of SW1500s is somewhat different.  I recall their speed was restricted in that their ability to make transition was not nearly as advanced as mainline locomotives and speed approaching 40 mph could quickly cook the main generator.

My recollection of non-dynamic brake locomotives was when operating on mainline trains, the non-db locomotive would always be put in the lead.  This for several reasons, not the least of which was lack of alignment-control draft system on many of these locomotives, including the SW1500s.  Locomotives like this had two coupler blocks that could be bolted on each side of the coupler pockets to limit the lateral movement of the coupler shank.  Failing to do this, and operating the locomotive behind mainline locomotives with dynamic brake, could cause the non-db locomotive to get buff forced right out of the train during heavy braking. The coupler blocks were left off for normal yard operations.

When I went to Spencer in 1975 we had 28 locomotives assigned to the Spencer Shop.  All were butt-head switchers with many SW1500s.  These locomotives were spread all across many yards on the Eastern Division.  They came to Spencer for regular maintenance; and we could change power assemblies and traction motors.  The only time they went to Pegram was for wheel true, some kind of heavy repair, or 36-month air change.  This could account for lots of sightings of SW1500s on the rear of mainline trains when they were shuttled to and from Spencer for maintenance ---- not being used for mainline power.

At Spencer we never ran SW1500s on mainline trains for power.  When the yard would get loaded we would run extra trains with whatever mainline power we could scrounge up.  We would on occasion run a pair of SW1500s on the Yadkin Local, but never on the Morganton Local. The Albemarle Branch was limited in speed by track so it would not hurt the main generators on the SW1500s.  But the Asheville Line was not so limited and the SW1500s never went on the Morganton Local.

As far as MU, I recall that main reservoir, actuating, and application & release were fully operational on SW1500s.  And they had to be for the brakes to operate properly when trailing.  I do not recall if sand was simply a run through pipe.

I think we go down the wrong path when we assume that a specification for Flexicoil trucks alone implies that these locomotives were meant to be used in mainline service at mainline track speeds.  Many items in the new locomotive specification are never found on the delivered locomotive.  The builders would supply a "Response to the Specification".  This document would outline those items which the builder could not or would not comply with.  GE was very good at providing this detailed document, EMD not so diligent.  The SRHA archives may or may not have these builders' response documents.

Regards,
Don Usak

181 - 200 of 2287