posted
I was perusing my 2/12 issue of "Trains" and noticed a picture in the article on steel mills of a Heisler fireless locomotive. I could not find any reference to it in the article. After studying the picture for a bit I began to wonder if compressed air was used. Compressed air is often overlooked as a motive power source. Think of WWII torpedoes. I investigated further and discovered that the fireless locomotives came in variants of geared V twins turning drive shafts and conventional cylinders operating driving rods. The technology was highley touted as to efficiency, simplicity, low speed power/torque production, no air pollution, faster than a Shay, ease of operation, and so on. My question is what happened? Why did the railroads discontiue the use of these fascinasting engines? I would be interested in any comments that would explain the fireless locomotive demise. And I know that there are some of you out there who are able to do so. Thanks.
Posts: 140 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is an Amtrak forum. It must be mentioned that Amtrak (so far as I know) has never had any fireless locomotives. There. The Amtrak-oriented message requirement has been met.
While I don't know much about fireless locomotives, I'd suspect that operating range before needing refueling is awfully short. Doesn't seem that fireless locomotives could develop sufficient power to haul long trains, either.
They likely were most useful in conditions that would not permit open flames or noxious exhaust.
Posts: 2236 | From: Evanston, Ill. and Ontonagon, Mich. | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Straying 'off forum' but 'on topic', my understanding is that fireless locomotives were mostly used as industrial switchers - often in situations where the 'product' was flammable and could be set off by a spark from the locomotive stack. A munitions plant comes to mind. Another situation would be the rayon plants near Johnson City, TN which actually employed a fireless locomotive as their swithcer into the late 1960's.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry about the "off topic" comment. I realized after posting that this should have gone elswhere.
Posts: 140 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't worry about the thread being off topic. After all, a thread might begin with an Amtrakish subject and end with, say, old-timey barbershops. We do like to meander hither and yon on this forum. Now: Why hasn't Amtrak adopted fireless locomotives? Anyone know?
Posts: 2236 | From: Evanston, Ill. and Ontonagon, Mich. | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TwinStarRocket: They are still working on fireless dining cars?
Or to build a better automat!
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
As much trouble as they've had with locomotives that seem to "spontaneously combust" en route, I think Amtrak's operating people would find fireless locomotives a godsend!
Posts: 1530 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hopefully this will be on topic. Mr. Notelvis you are accurate concerning fireless locomotives. I might add that not only was the fire danger eliminated from combustion but electric sparking also was not present making a safer work place, not to mention elimination of air pollution. As to Amtrak using these engines, I cannot see an application for heavy or long distance passenger use. But this technology is over one hundred years old. It would seem that there might be a reason to revisit it as an application for short haul lightweight runs that incorporate many stops. Perhaps feeder lines to connect with mainline traffic. One of the fireless' virtues was reported to be an abundance of torque at low speeds. They were reported to have a range of about 95 miles hauling several cars. Thus as Mr. Notelvis mentioned they were used as switchers and I also found that they served in logging operations. Perhaps improved btu efficiency, metallurgy, etc. resulting from current engineering sophistication would provide a practical application for this unique motive power for the above-mentioned type of passenger service?
Posts: 140 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have seen published (but would be hard pressed to put my fingers on it now) photographs taken in perhaps 1967 or maybe even 1968 of the Fireless Switcher meeting the daily freight train on the standard gauge remnant of the East Tennessee (& Western North Carolina during the narrow gauge days) Railroad at Bemburg, TN between Johnson City and Elizabethton.
What is remarkable is that the ET was still using a pair of Southern Railway 2-8-0 steam locomotives as it's sole power so the photo shows a meet between two steam locomotives operated by different owners. Such meets were extremely rare by the 1960's.
The rayon plants and their railroad are long gone. I think a Super Wal-Mart and an even more super parking lot occupies the space today. Moreover, the last 10 miles of the ET ceased operation 7 or 8 years ago. The rails were, after protracted wrangling, lifted just a few weeks ago and the R-O-W will soon become the 'Tweetsie Trail'.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
