Still looking to find something on these trucks; did find an online reference to what I should have called "double bearing trucks," a part of a book review on John White's "A History of the American Locomotive, Its Development 1830-1880." This is a retitled soft cover version of the hardback version, which is titled "American Locomotives, An Engineering History, 1830-1880:"

http://books.google.com/books?id=1A4iiG ... ks&f=false

Just in case the link doesn't work, the reference is on page 173 of the paperback edition.

This is the cover of the paperback edition; the locomotive illustrated has a double-bearing lead truck. To our modern eyes, it resembles an outside-framed lead truck as was used on a number of modern locomotives, such as some Canadian National 4-8-4s, early Milwaukee 4-6-4s, and Wabash 4-8-2s and 4-8-4s.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images ... 55&s=books

Still looking, but did find this from a modeler working in the Civil War era:

http://usmrr.blogspot.com/

Still looking, did come across a Mason tender, using a type of truck more commonly associated with that builder.

http://smrtrains.com/engines_2009/mccal ... callum.jpg

I still wonder if the graceful if unusual truck that has been the subject of this thread was actually a commercial product. I wonder if it had a patent?

Ahhhh, you found Bernie's site. A good friend of mine here in NJ, Thom Radice, is part of the loose knit group of Civil War modelers in the US, and Bernie's work - and knowldge - is somewhat legendary. If you read Railroad Model Craftsman, you might remember an article Thom and I did on his HO Western & Atlantic a couple of years back.

Anyway, PM me if you want to talk models... and check out Thom's work at
http://western-and-atlantic-rr.blogspot.com/

The reason I bring this up here is that these gents who are using model railroading as sort of a diorama in motion to capture the war era have developed a treasure trove of research and data. And contrary to what it may seem to someone outside of the Civil War buff circles, there's a lot more too it than The General and look-alike 4-4-0's.

If you have a Civil War era restoration project or interpretive display in the works, I would contact them. While they may bring their research to life in 1:87 and 1:48 scale, their research is all 1:1 goodness.

Rob

The "American Civil War Railroads Historical Society" is a great and very knowledgable group of people about that era. I'm a member, and have had the pleasure of "breaking bread" with Bernie, and sharing a fair amount of contraband Kentucky sour mash whiskey with Thom. The collective knowledge of the 1850-1870 era in that group is amazing. Many of them are current or former Civil War reenactors as well as rail historians.

J3a-614,

Thanks for the reference to the double bearing trucks. Coincidentally, I have both iterations of White’s book on the American Locomotive, but had not absorbed that mention of the double bearing trucks. I can see the logic that would take the bending load off of the axle.

Also, interesting to review the following section on page 173 concerning the Bissell safety truck. I have a piece of railroad iron that I have never identified, but it appears to be a wedge feature. It is a casting that weighs maybe 40 lbs., and has no holes such as would be used for mounting. It appears to be made to be captured for mounting. I have always visualized it to be some type of centering wedge for a truck, but have never actually seen such a part, and never known a truck to use such a friction wedge.

In reading the description of the Bissell safety truck, I think this artifact could be one of the pair of incline plane centering devices described as features of the Bissell safety truck. Because of its massiveness, I had always visualized the artifact to be from a larger locomotive from say the 1910-20 period, but now I could see it from being from the earlier Bissell safety truck era. From various dates, I suppose such a truck with the incline planes could have been running up to say 1900. I sure would like to find a drawing of the Bissell safety truck incline plane centering device, and see if it matches the artifact.

An interesting feature of this artifact is that the incline planes show evidence of slight upset from bearing a load, and the surface has a grooved pocked that is filled with lead, apparently as a lubricating feature.

I see that John White does have an elaboration of the safety truck on line:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/25454/25 ... 5454-h.htm

Here are several photographs of older locomotives with a variety of tender trucks. From the top down, photos no. 6 and 7 show a type of truck that was very common on tenders during the pioneering era. I have done a little research on this truck and would like to know if it had a common name. From what I have learned, those leaf springs carry all of the weight, and the center pivot telescopes to prevent it from carrying any weight.

What I wonder is, how the truck could pivot with the weight bearing directly atop the journal boxes.

http://sites.google.com/site/bostonandm ... ocomotives

Grease. It's no different than those passenger trucks the PRR used with the prominent outside side bearings. These tenders are so short, I doubt the side bearings need to slide more than 1/2" or so to negotiate normal curves.

The Leviathan has a similar arrangement on it's rear tender truck, which shows well at about 0:36 in this video:

http://www.yorkblog.com/greenmesh/2011/ ... -on-track/

At first glance the front truck doesn't appear to have any springs, but closer inspection reveals a pair of similar size springs mounted transversely, that bear on a plate adjacent to the center bearing. This effectively gives the tender a three point suspension, which must have worked well with the rough track of the day.

Looks like those longitudinal leaf spring trucks (whatever the type name is) are under the tender of a celebrity:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_bgDRKmnIMvo/R ... 1836-0.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_bgDRKmnIMvo/R ... 1837-0.jpg

Later photo; looks like part of an RS-3 peaking out behind the tender:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_bgDRKmnIMvo/R ... 1775-0.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_bgDRKmnIMvo/R ... 1839-0.jpg

The page where these photos came from, which looks interesting in its own right:

http://schenectadyhistory.blogspot.com/ ... chive.html

Oh, how many people would want to see this girl run again, even in her current form?

I would. . .

http://www.schenectadyhistory.org/resou ... 99-300.jpg

http://www.schenectadyhistory.org/resou ... e_999.html

The tender trucks of the #999 and the rear tender truck of the Leviathan are indeed examples of the type of truck I am asking about and have referenced in the B&M photos I posted above. I would say that perhaps 40% of the tender trucks on 4-4-0s in the 1870-1890 period were of this type. However, I can only see the outside, so I cannot say for sure that they are all the same in the hidden areas.

I made an inquiry to the National Museum of Transport about how these type of trucks are configured on their C&NW 4-4-0 # 7 (as I recall the number.) The description I was given seemed to confirm that the center bearings are made as telescoping cylinders to remain aligned vertically, but do not bear any weight. All they do is hold the truck’s pivot center. All the weight is borne on the leaf springs and down to the tops of the journal boxes.

So, with the tender trucks of C&NW #7, the big side leaf springs on the sides of the trucks are not just acting as side bearings to stabilize rocking as side bearings do in a conventional truck. Instead, the big leaf springs are the primary and only suspension. They bear all of the weight, and the center bearing bears no weight.

This is a totally unique structural logic unlike any other type of truck. And I have never seen it on any rolling stock other than tenders. The most modern locomotive that I know of that had this type of tender truck were the CStPM&O 4-6-0s built by Schenectady around 1903.

In all versions of this truck, it appears that the leaf springs are solidly attached to the tender side sills, and the spring ends are free to slide in the box-like housings atop the journal boxes. There is one detail about these trucks that varies, and that variation can be seen on #999 in the as-built locomotive compared to the modified version later in its life. With the later modified locomotive, the tender trucks have a raised guide structure rising up from the truck side frames and forking around the sides of the leaf springs at their centers. With the as-built locomotive, this guide feature is omitted. This same guide feature can be seen on the rear tender truck of the Leviathan, and also on the tender trucks of the CStPM&O 4-6-0s.

Dennis, I have looked at that video of the Leviathan, but I can’t see what is under the tank between the wheels. I can understand your mention of there being one or more additional springs supporting the center bearing to create a three-point suspension, but I cannot see that feature in the video. And I understand that C&NW #7 does not have such a feature.

I would like to see the actual design of this truck as used on the Leviathan. I might look into this to see what information the builder can share. Also, it would be interesting to take a close look at the tender trucks of #999. I do not know of any other existing examples of tenders using this type of trucks.

Yeah, the springs are hard to see without sticking your head in under the tender sill (ask me how I know). The front truck springs are parallel to, and right next to the truck bolster, although in this case maybe it's more properly the transom. I have to admit, there was so much to to take in when I saw the Leviathan at IRM that I really didn't give much thought to which end of the springs are fixed, but you are likely correct that they are fixed to the tender frame, and slide on top of the truck frame... be a lot easier to keep lubed that way.



Well, I certainly DO NOT personally know Mr. Kloke, so no help there, but it occurs to me that most of the research and engineering he used was originally done for the National Park Service, for their replica of the Jupiter. I should think that all that research material should be available to the public somewhere.

As a side note, looking at the Golden Spike National Park web site, the U.P. 119 replica does not use this style truck.

I know of one other example of body-mounted springs to which the non-sprung truck swivels. The ammunition boxcars for Woolwich (U.K.) Arsenal had this feature. In their case, the springs are hidden in the sides of the car body, and a floating steel bolster, crossing the width of the car, spans from the sprung bottoms. The truck swiveled on this bolster, and I presume most of the weight was distributed to the side frames of the truck.

In my view, the purpose was that it allowed some of the truck functions to be set aside, lowering the floor of the car body. The end result in this case is a low center of gravity, which is needed when considering the dynamics of minimum gauge operation. The configuration is shown quite clearly on P. 70 of in Mark Smithers' Illustrated History of 18 Inch Gauge Steam Railways.
-O.

Dennis,

I misread your comment originally, and did not realize you were referring to the front truck in describing the transverse springs. So I was looking for them on the rear truck. Now when I look at the video, I can see those springs clearly on the front truck. That is an interesting concept. I wonder if that is based on a prototype design or something developed just for the Leviathan. I can also see a telescoping center pivot on the front truck, which would be necessary for that spring arrangement. Interestingly, that same telescoping center bearing is a necessary feature of the rear truck.

Regarding the design of the rear truck, I don't recall ever seeing a phtoto of a tender equipped with only one truck of that design with the other truck being different.

Drifting slightly off topic here, this photo (originally linked above) is interesting for the details it reveals on the (rarely seen) rear of the modernized 999's tender, including what appear to be three marker lights (one is very likely a backup light), safety chains, and a coupler that appears to be mounted in a link-and-pin pocket, like a logging engine.

http://www.schenectadyhistory.org/resou ... 99-300.jpg

I suspect, since most of the other details seem to be present on period photos of the Jupiter, which was a sister engine to the Leviathan, that they are copied from the original. It appears from the National Park Service web page that there are significant differences between the Jupiter and 119 replicas, so it would appear that quite a lot of research was done before building the engines for the park service, and of course, Mr. Kloke has had the value of not only this research, but also the forty years of experience the park service has had with those replicas. It would be interesting to know where that research now resides.



I think you are looking at this backwards... the original Leviathan predates all those other engines, it almost predates photography. Therefore, it would seem that the three point suspension scheme came first, and was then discarded in favor of having both trucks sprung directly between the frame and journals, before the direct springing finally fell from favor.