Planned centercab transfer unit bash

[jmlaboda]

Curious...

[squirrelhunter]

My understanding was that BLW used electric cables for MU between units just like everyone else, just that their system was incompatible with everyone else because they used a different pin setup and means of interfacing with the throttle because BLW used pneumatic throttles.

[up1950s]

My understanding was that BLW used electric cables for MU between units just like everyone else, just that their system was incompatible with everyone else because they used a different pin setup and means of interfacing with the throttle because BLW used pneumatic throttles.

Sounds right .

From Wikipedia

Sprague's MU system was adopted for use by diesel-electric locomotives and electric locomotives in the 1920s, however these early control connections were entirely pneumatic. Today's modern MU control utilizes both pneumatic elements for brake control, and electric elements for throttle setting, dynamic braking and fault lights.
In the early days of diesel electric MUing there were numerous different systems, some were compatible with one another, but others were not. For example: when first delivered, many F units lacked MU cables on their noses, allowing only for MUing through the rear of the locomotive. That meant that if a train need four locomotives and there were four A units and no B units that a train would require two train crews as the four A units could not be multiple unit controlled, except as two groups of two. Furthermore Baldwin Centipedes were infamous for being unable to MU with any other locomotive even other Baldwin diesels, these locomotives could only be MUed with one other locomotive of the same type.

[delamaize]

Notice the mu receptacle below the drop step, standard issue BLW.  I'm trying to find a close up I have of it open, showing the electrical connection pins.  When I discovered this, I was very much surprised.

Quote from: jmlaboda on Today at 05:02:29:
While later units were sold with an option for electrical m.u. so that they could be m.u.ed with other builders' locomotives

 

[Chris333]

Erie's Baldwins had MU


http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/el/loco/erie1152alb.jpg
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/el/loco/erie1160lbC.jpg
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/el/loco/erie1159alb.jpg

The Erie purchased three types of BLH road freight engines, the four axle DRS-4-4-1500 (1500HP), the AS-16 (1600HP), and the six axle DRS-6-6-1500 (1500HP). These units had air throttles and MU and some with dynamic brake capability

[sd45elect2000]

Actually, Baldwin's MU was electric.

I'm sure there were some functions that were run via a multiple unit jumper like wheel slip, perhaps sanders, forward-reverse headlight control etc. There may be only 11 to 24 pins in the receptacle instead of the current and accepted 27 pin control jumper. It wasn't until the AAR stepped in with some (at the time) guidelines to assign specific pins to specific functions that railroads began to standardize the control systems. Now it is an AAR mandate. The early Baldwins were not throttle compatible with other makes but it wasn't entirely Baldwins fault. Baldwin chose the Westinghouse air throttle system instead of the GE all electric system. (ALCo) . There are advantages to each system but the biggest disadvantage for the air system was the problematic air leaks (especially in winter) that would cripple a consist as well as limit the size of the consist. There are no MU air hoses for independent brakes, sanders, actuating and main reservoir equalizing mounted on the pilots so multiple unit operation with most other makes would have been impossible anyhow.

 For years locomotives from one railroad could not MU with locomotives from another. A good example in my experience working for railroads was the ATSF using pin 19 as an additional control negative. The Milwaukee Road used pin 19 for a positive to operate the bells on the entire consist, when the two were MU'ed it was a direct short circuit.

I know that the FM Erie built engines on the PRR were modified with MU sockets on the nose to enable them to be MU'ed in different configurations but I also know that they used 24 pin jumpers. The FM trainmaster was difficult to run with other models not only because of electrical issues but the locomotive walkways were 2 feet higher than other locomotives.

Baldwin was a builder of steam engines, as with early ALCo engines they were built to work as one locomotive for one job. The builders were slow to discover the flexibility of the new technology and suffered as a result. The exception was EMD who was not an old steam locomotive builder an had no preconceptions on how the locomotive should be designed, EMD was all new technology with an engineering team that took fresh new approaches to design and creativity. EMD was not held hostage to either GE or Westinghouse for electrical equipment which was a huge advantage.

Later in production most builders adapted the EMD system for their locomotives.

Randy

[Iain]

Quote from: jmlaboda on Today at 05:02:29:
While later units were sold with an option for electrical m.u. so that they could be m.u.ed with other builders' locomotives

 

Other than three 70 tonners, NS didn't have anything but Baldwins until the 60s.  Ergo, they had no need to purchase the option for standard mu.  In fact, NS Baldwins could not mu with the EMDs; they had the standard BLW/Westinghouse setup.

[Snark45]

Fairbanks Morris was another user of the air throttles on their units, making m.u.ing an impossibility.

Hi

Hate to nitpick, but it's Fairbanks-MORSE...

Best Regards, Harry

[up1950s]

Hi

Hate to nitpick, but it's Fairbanks-MORSE...

Best Regards, Harry

But sadly they are no morse !

[randgust]

Here's a shot I hadn't seen before - A David Lustig photo of one of these on helper service in Cajon, which didn't last long:


http://ctr.trains.com/en/The%20Way%20it%20Was/Railfan%20Stories/2010/01/Unexpected%20Treasure.aspx

I've seen a very few photos of them in Arizona helper service, only this single shot on Cajon.

If they had an MU receptacle, plate or whatever.... I sure can't see it.  Here's at LA in 1955 for transfer service:
http://www.railroadmemoirsbycrowner.com/photos/atsf/atsf/pages/atsf-23.html
Late shot... 1955, and a pretty good shot of the sill:  http://www.railroadmemoirsbycrowner.com/photos/atsf/atsf/pages/atsf-24.html

This is typical of the 'nest' of stuff by the drop step you'd see with Baldwin-design MU; the additional air connections for MU'ing the throttles together.  My understanding was that the throttle MU's were air hoses, everything else electrical, on original Baldwin designs:  http://www.readingmodeler.com/index.php/articles/89-locomotive-reference/road-locomotives/173-baldwin-as-16
and oddly enough that the second order had EMD-style MU and couldn't MU with the first order....yeah....

And it's not a Baldwin vs. everybody else thing on MU, I've been surprised to find out that on ATSF the 'early' EMD's couldn't MU with 'second generation' EMD's; F3's, F7's, GP's, CF7's could MU together but even a GP20 was considered 'modern'.  I'd found a picture of an SD24 trailing a consist of F7's and was told by a mechanical expert that it was more than likely under tow.  Meanwhile over on the E-L they'd completely rewired all their MU and you'd see SD45-2's MU'd with F7B units, I've got a shot of that myself.

[up1950s]

Randy , that Mountain looks so spic n span for '55 .

[delamaize]

I'm throwing my hat into the ring for one of these crash....ER......bashes. Bought a few h12-44s off eBay.  No prototype for my end of the world, but I've always had a soft spot for these odd center cabs......

[up1950s]

I'm throwing my hat into the ring for one of these crash....ER......bashes. Bought a few h12-44s off eBay.  No prototype for my end of the world, but I've always had a soft spot for these odd center cabs......

On my first I am using an Atlas SD60 chassis with Trainmaster trucks with their long side outward . I am waiting foe a Trainmaster sill that I may use some of the steps and end to substitute the OEM H-12-44' . I'll add some shots of it here tomorrow .

[up1950s]

After removing the H12-44 pilasters the working SD-60 chassis fits like a glove , with just an ideal clearance , widthwise

[Pennsy]

Richie

That is so cool. What did you use for the fuel tank?

Jim