I have always wondered why all steam locomotives weren’t built cab forward. I would imagine one reason would be the safety of the crew in case of a collision. I know there was a specific reason for the SP units to be built this way.
|
The cab forward arrangement only works with an oil fired locomotive. I think railroads thought it was safer for the crew if all of that boiler was in front, just incase they hit something.
|
| Posted by SES on June 4, 2021 | |
Cab forward design is great except for one thing - getting the fuel oil or coal all the length of the locomotive to the cab where the fire box was. This design was made possible, I'm guessing, when coal fired steam engines were a thing of the past and Bunker C oil was the fuel of choice. As heavy as Bunker C was, I'm sure it may have been a challenge to get it up front to the firebox
|
Cab-forward locomotives protected the crew from intense heat build up in tunnels, and the SP had plenty tunnels to contend with.
|
One of my earliest memories was viewing these steam belching mammoths when visiting the Taylor Yard with my Mother to pick up my Dad. Dad worked at the Pacific Fruit Express car shops with only one car and both working this was a daily affair. This went on from the time I was a per-schooler to graduating high school (1950).
The was a great fear of hitting a gasoline truck but this never happened. Now I note just about every thing outside a switcher is cab forward. This is just another example of user designed functionally with crew dissatisfaction with the effect of exhaust during passage thought the snow tunnels of the SP route over the Serra Nevada mountains.
|
According to an article in "Trains" magazine (IINM) many years ago, these engines were built this way because of the long tunnels and snow-sheds in northern California. You're right about the problems of comfort versus safety--there's not much protection for the engine crew in a setup like this! That may have been another reason why some roads had their "hood" unit diesels set up to run long-hood forward. B&O had a good number of GP-7 and 9 units set up that way. Anyway, these cab forwards are amond the classiest steam engines ever built and I'm glad you shared this photo!
|
SP's cab forwards were all oil-burners. The cab-forward design was to keep smoke and fumes away from the engine crew in the tunnels and snowsheds on the line over Donner Pass.
|
To build a cab forward Steam locomotive you need to burn oil or have a power stoker that could transport coal from tender to firebox. They were built this was to get the engine crew out of the fumes from the locomotive. Yes cab forward does place crew in a vulnerable position. Same reason many 1st gen diesels were designed to run long hood forward.
|
SP crews were suffocating when they were running trains through snow sheds. First some crews ran their locomotives in reverse, and then SP ordered cab forwards. The SP locomotives burned oil, which made getting fuel from the tender down the length of the boiler to the firebox much easier.
|
@Andrew bringing the coal from the tender along the boiler to the front is a tad difficult.
|
@Andrew Compolo. I think the big reason was fuel. The distance from the tender to the firebox meant that the cab forwards had to burn a fuel that could be pumped. (i.e. oil) That wasn't a problem for the oil fired Espee, but oil was less readily available on the east coast so the cab forward design would have been impractical east of the Mississippi. And like you said, cab forwards were built for a unique situation that was prevalent on the Espee (lots of tunnels and snow sheds) so railroads running in flat terrain or in areas with no tunnels didn't have to worry about smoke filling up the cabs.
|
IIRC it was because there were so many tunnels and it became a safety issue not being able to see, as well as a health issue for the engineers breathing the smoke and cinders from a forward smokestack.
I love these card photos. They really capture the history of the Baldwin locos before being sent to the individual railroads. Keep them coming!
|
I wondered the same thing. My son reminded me that when using coal or wood, access to the tender was required. Still looks like an interesting design!
|
| Posted by Kibu on June 9, 2021 | |
To clarify, it wasn't just oil burners which were turned into cab forward locomotives, but those were the best options. Other nations either had a second cab at the back where the fireman worked, or like Italy basically turned a tank engine around and only carried water in the tender.
|