Got to ask a question here. We hear lots and lots and lots about foreign steam designers, but there is seldom any mention of the people who designed steam locomotives for ALCO, Baldwin, Lima and the smaller builders. No, I am not talking about the well known industrial stylists who developed the streamlining, I am talking about the engineers working for the locomotive builders who did the primary design work on the machines, their systems, and accessory equipment.

What happened that there is almost no mention of these people in written history or interpretive presentations at museums? Were these guys banished and chased out of town after they lost their fight with Dick Dilworth? Does anyone with insight into the steam designers care to offer any details?

PC

In the US, locomotive designs were the result of many people: the railroad's management, the builder's engineers, and the appliance manufacturers. In Europe, the process was much more centralized under one person's leadership (Greenley, Chappelon, etc.).

American steam designers aren't completely unkown.

Will Woodard is well known for his efforts at Lima developing "Super Power" and at Franklin developing poppet valves. He evidently still had quite a few ideas for steam when he died during WWII. Samuel Vaulclain and Ralph Johnson of Baldwin are fairly well known. ALCO seems to be known best for its with their customers' engineers, like Paul Kiefer of the NYC.

One of reasons for the interest in Chapelon is because he wrote extensively about locomotives he studied and his ideas for steam in his book "La Locomotive a Vapeur".

L. D. Porta of Argentina is of great interest because he kept working on steam designs LONG after pretty much everyone else had given up (up until his death in 2003). Porta's philosophy combined Chapelon's ideas on thermodynamics and fluid flow with American machine design practice.

I will agree with you that it's a pity more hasn't been written about the American designers.

Yes, it seems very odd that while there is much writing about U.S. steam locomotives there is so little is written about their primary designers. Several industrial stylists who came up with streamlined sheetmetal to cover the machines are well known, the people who did the primary design work generally are not. This not only applies to textbook accounts of the steam era, steam locomotive designers are seldom identified in information presented with the machines at museums.

One particularly good example of this information vacuum is the case of James G. Blunt, who is well known for the design of a diesel locomotive power truck and whose involvement in many steam locomotive design projects is seldom mentioned.

Seems like a topic that needs more attention, if the presentation of history is a primary objective of this industry.

PC

You can't read anything about British railways (collective, thus lower case r) without finding prominent mention of the names of the famous Engineers (in our context, Designers) of locomotive and other rolling stock. The names are held in great reverence, and rightly so, as these gentleman had vast power in their respective organizations and left their marks on the various systems.

In contrast, there are only a handful of names of American steam loco Designers that are common knowledge. More often than not it is the executives of the builders that had the prominent names. And, as noted, the Designers for the individual railroads had a large hand in many highly regarded designs.

The difference was simply one of organization and culture. Americans tend to attack projects collectively. The way the various UK railways were organized put all that power in the hands of one man. And of course those men tended to be technicians rather than the lawyers or beancounters that ran most of the railroads here, especially in later years.

Nope, not a drop of contempt meant or implied. Just a different culture.

There was a good article in one of the Trains rags about a year or so ago about
CT Ripley of the ATSF...

Henry Greenly was a miniature locomotive designer and engineer, pehaps you are thinking of Sir Nigel Gresley?

Steve

Most North American railroads bought all or nearly all their locomotives from Baldwin Locomotive Works, American Locomotive Company [and its corporate predecessors: Schenectady, Richmond, Brooks, Dunkirk, etc.], and/or Lima Locomotive Works in the USA, Canadian Locomotive and Montreal Locomotive Works in Canada. Typically the RR mechanical dept. would work with manufacturer to specify what the RR required and trade off the practical vs. desireable. Detail design usually was left to the manufacturer. This had the great advantage that detail design was up-to-date, and a lot of "cross-pollinization" occurred. Some RRs such as S.P. and U.P. required use of their "common standard" detail parts as much as possible.

Only a few American RRs built the majority of their locomotives in the 20th century. This had mixed results. Pennsylvania RR was a world leader in the 19th and early 20th century locomotive design and construction. However starting after WW1, their designs start to show problems attributable to the "not invented here" syndrome, for example their very late general adoption of mechanical stokers on heavily used big power such as K-4s and K-5 heavy Pacifics, and the painful development of the GG-1 to replace nearly new boxcab electric locomotives. In contrast, N&W Roanoke shops designed and built most of their later heavy power (2-8-8-2, 2-6-6-4, 4-8-4) incorporating the very best of contemporary state-of-the-art engineering - real leading-edge steam design.

It was not standard practice for either the RRs or builders to publically identify who designed what. This is typical for industry... who would want to publicize which employees are especially valuable (and possibly worth enticing to a competitor)? Often the remaining steam-era records of who designed what are fragmentary at best.

British railways in the 20th Century usually designed and built most of their locomotives at their own shops. This could result in great designs under a talented designer who was willing to incorporate state-of-the-art knowledge from other RRs and other builders. It also resulted in mediocre designs, apparently because of the "not invented here" syndrome and/or unquestioning adherence to out-of-date RR standards.

British locomotive manufacturers such as North British, Beyer-Peacock, etc. were mostly excluded from the domestic British market, and so were terribly dependant on exports to survive. (This left them especially vulnerable to foreign price & financing competition.) It also limited the amount of cross-pollinization during the design phase.

Another point worth making here (after re-reading the subject line):

I think one of the most outstanding qualities as good engineers demonstrated by Chapelon and Porta was that they intensively studied what other designers had done, especially in the U.S. Chapelon visited the U.S. in 1938 and toured the country to witness first-hand U.S. steam design and operating practices. IIRC he even took a cab ride on a Y-6 on the N&W. Porta must have read every publication remotely related to steam locomotives, coal combustion, stationary steam practice, etc. published in the 20th century. I'm sure both these gentlemen could have named the steam designers of the U.S. builders off the top of their heads.

In contrast it's been mentioned in several articles that U.S. designers were relatively ignorant of international steam practices. This was unfortunate as this information could have benefited U.S. steam design, especially in the 30's and 40's.

Perhaps I should have asked "Is there a lack of respect for U.S. steam designers", it would have been a better wording.

This is one aspect of historical documentation that has always interested me, perhaps because getting to meet surviving diesel designers of the 1940s and 1950s never proved to be that much of a hurdle. There were still people around in the 1970s who had been involved in U.S. steam locomotive design, it seems surprising there was not more interest in them and their stories. Identifying "who" worked on "what" is not all that difficult, you just do a patent search of the locomotive manufacturer.

PC

I'm familiar with the cry that American locomotive mechanical engineers ignored developments in other countries. My research indicates that this is not the case. In my library is an article put out by the ASME regarding the exhaust steam injector being developed in England. It was utilized on many different railroads here in the States (GTW, C&O (utilized on Greenbriars as weight issues prohibited a full fledged feedwater heater), UP, Soo, etc.) In an address before the AAR Mechanical Division, Mr. Winterrowd, an engineer with Baldwin, specifically mentions Chapelon's front end work in France. Also mentioned in the AAR Proceedings are welded staybolts used in Russia. And this was AFTER WWII, during the rise of the Iron Curtain! It is a shame that there is this common misconception that American mechanical engineers were dull and provincial. After researching in the proceedings of the AAR, the ASME and various railroad clubs, I've come to see them as they truly were: brilliant, inquisitive, iconoclastic and passionate about their work. Some of them may have secretly been enthusiasts, as well. Joseph Ennis, who rose to become VP Engineering at Alco, imagines talking to one of his early designs in a speech during a dinner given in his honor by the Newcomen Society. Samuel Vauclain whistfully wants to see an ancient, abandoned Baldwin in Africa in his autobiography 'Steaming Up!'. Alfred Bruce, also an engineer at Alco, laments the passing of the steam locomotive in his book 'The Steam Locomotive in America.' Just like with today's steam professionals, to these distinguished gentlemen, this was more than just a job.
-Chris Zahrt

I recall reading someplace within the last few years that the Blunt truck design has its origins with a design for a tender truck. Anyone have more information?

Greetings:
Thumbnail biographys of numerous American steam locomotive designers can be found in J.N. Westwood"s most excellent book: "Locomotive Designers in the Age of Steam" (long out of print but still available through used books stores).
Each of the "Locomotives in Profile" series books contains a wealth of information on the various designers of the locomotives profiled.
There is also biograhical information on early designers in John H. White's: "United States Steam Locomotive Builders" (still in print).
Some years ago I was chatting with Jack White about the paucity of information on U.S. locomotive designers. He said that one of the problems was that much of what was known about them came from obituaries (which were largely "puff pieces" and often inaccurate) and not from serious biographers.
Perhaps, someday, someone who is really interested in the subject will do the research and produce a book on the subject.
J.David
PS: Westwood also did a book on Russian locomotive designs and designers during the Soviet period. JDC

I've wondered about this issue in the past. It bothers me that it is easier to recall names like Gresley, Churchward, Peppercorn, Bulleid, Giesel, Porta, Kylala, Chapelon and others than their American equivalents. PCook, Chris, and J. David have pretty much explained it above. I think the lack of material about U.S. steam designers is partly because steam innovation was almost a dead issue in the U.S. by, say, 1939 (the year of the introduction of the FT). That was well before enthusiasts and historians began writing much in the way of popular histories of motive power. American designers retreated into the past, while some of the Europeans and others (and their locomotives) were active for many years thereafter. Without original scholarship we won't know the North Americans' names.

Sounds like there is a book vacuum waiting on an author to fill it. Any takers?