I've been thinking as of lately about the issues with the 3 axle trucks used on steam tenders and their ever increasing scarcity. Seems suitable trucks that would be drop in replacements for steam tenders could be sourced as more and more of the heavy 6 axle flatcars and heavy haul tank cars are phased out.

There can't be too many of these cars left in revenue service?

http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/p/140423/2420862.aspx

https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/18697

My question is, has any effort been made to try and secure some of these trucks as the cars are being scrapped? Either for spares or for swapping under tenders/cranes with plain bearings or damaged trucks?

A certain UPRR steam crane in Oregon would need two sets of trucks to be moved by rail since the brass has been stolen from the crane and tender trucks. The crane I'm thinking of is UP #910004 in Portland OR if it's not been scrapped.

Both of the IC 2600 class steam locomotive tenders went to scrap recently because they couldn't be moved by rail due to vandalized trucks as well. A real shame! Both cars could have been relocated if spare 3 axle trucks with roller bearings could have been swapped under them.

The Union Pacific water tenders are another interesting example. Both of them ride on 3 axle trucks and as far as I am aware UP doesn't have any spare trucks on hand for them? The two old unrestored CSA challenger/turbine tanks ride on older style trucks. They might benefit from the trucks from under some of these freight cars if the UP ever wanted to put the CSA tenders in service as water cars.

Just my $0.02 which is worthless.

Robert

Is it possible to machine the plain-bearing trucks to accept roller-bearing axles?

.

It has been done:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=42963

As you can see from the thread it raises concerns about scrapping increasingly rare heavy-duty flat cars. In general, I personally am not quite sure of the logic of going to the trouble of replacing tender axles with roller bearings when the locomotive it is used with likely has plain bearings and will be scrutinized multiple times a day when in use, unlike a car in the general system. The hassle of dealing with journal covers I guess. It does make sense to stockpile these trucks if the cars they are with are being scrapped but I don't know who would do that. BTW I photographed the crane you mention in Oregon about a year ago, I live six miles from it.

Everyone talks about plain bearings as if they are the end of the freaking world. Word to the wise they are still in use daily in something we all use and abuse daily try your engine in your car or pickup. Those bearings that support your crankshaft connecting rods and camshafts are all plain bearings and the oil they get is some of the nastiest stuff when the oil isn't changed as often as needed. Think about your average lawn mower engine. Who on here changes the oil on that thing regularly. I know I don't change it yearly like I should it goes at least 2 years between oil changes. Yet those engines still keep right on running with a plain bearing protecting them from failure. Yes they can cause issues with the Class 1 railroads as the people that know how to maintain the freaking things are all retired anymore however they are not black magic on how they work.

I'm not sure about AC traction motors, but there have to be thousands upon thousands of DC motors running around every day with plain bearings. The traction motor support bearings, upon which the motor rides on the axle, are plain bearings. At the minimum they get inspected (or should be inspected-) every 92 days, if not at 45 day intervals. The late George Hockaday once remarked to me that they were the most overlooked bearings on locomotives.

Not the end of the world mechanically, but your car engine isn't regulated by the AAR interchange rules, which are the third leading authority that governs the railroads you might want to operate on (behind 49USC and 49CFR), and TM supports are not directly comparable to or inspected/monitored/maintained/banned the same way car axle bearings are.

Had the AAR not self-regulated plain bearings from regular service and participating RRs adhered closely to the rule, they most likely would have been banned by 49CFR by now. The current regulatory situation regarding them allows for more flexibility than a federal ban, so count your blessings. If you want to play in the game you have to know the rules and abide by them or you'll find yourself out of the game, so yes, plain bearings can be the end of the world in some cases. It's the way the world works, and Robert has a valid point about saving/converting parts that will be needed somewhere, sometime.

Engine bearings operate in a controlled environment, mostly sealed from water and dirt, precision machined and pressure fed a filtered neverending supply of cool clean lubrication. They also fail catastrophically within a couple minutes if that supply of oil quits, and the driver has systems in place that inform you of that lube failure within seconds of it happening. So NOT quite the same, really.

The reality is plain bearings are antiquated equipment outside of the preservation world. If anyone can get roller trucks for a deal and upgrade stuff...why not?

They dont train people on them anymore, and the tools needed for them dont exist in modern shops. Its as simple as that. I worked as a tech adviser on a move of a car with them, and the 30 year veteran car inspectors, had no idea how to take care of them, simply because they are outdated. It is just the reality of the situation. WE know they work fine, but the days of seeing these move on a class one are over.

Pegasus really hit the nail on the head in terms of motor support bearings, but they are not fool proof either. A friend had a bearing fail on a C40-8, and the only way they knew it happened was the fire coming from the side of the truck set.

I guess you have never seen a roller bearing fail then from a defect in manufacturing or being put together wrong in an assembly. I have and when it did it was very spectacular in how bad it was. Try having a rear end pinion shaft break at the inner bearing race and drop the rollers and race and then the pinion shaft into the rear end of a semi truck doing 70 MPH. By the time the shaft snapped off the shock loading it caused took out the rear end pumpkin the housing on the back rear end. Then as further damage it broke the 4 axle shafts the thru shaft between the 2 differentials plus the front rear end gear. Then it still took out the drive shaft up to the carrier bearing and the one in between the rear ends and 4 air bags and a bunch of air lines and wiring. Total cost to repair which was under warranty since it was a remanufactured rear end that had just been installed but redone wrong just over 15 grand in parts alone. I spent the week in the motel.

BigBoy 4023

Robert,
Took awhile to understand how important support tenders have become.
In today's world, few steam trips could happen without them.

Added this Ogden Turbine Tender... 6-wheel Buckeye truck, to the conversation.
Equipped with SKF bearings. It's quite a piece of gear..
Glad to hear it's been saved.
Would like to add a few comments, if I may.

1) Nothing wrong with plain bearings...If you know how to look after them.
Nobody does on the big roads, so it makes sense not to run them there.

This is where the the museum/heritage lines play a big part.
Teaching a new generation how to safely operate the plain-bearing fleet.

2) Roller bearings have issues of their own.
Have been told by reliable sources, who work on this stuff.
When a roller-bearing on a main axle fails ..it seizes, and sometimes...twists the driver right off the axle. Think about the consequences of that for a moment..

Dennis

Dennis, I agree with your statements for the most part. However, If a steam excursion is to run on the mainline the requirements are for roller bearings on the tender axles among other things. CSX is a good example with their requirements to move the 2716 steam locomotive.

I really like those old B&W photos of the turbine tenders. They are very useful for modeling these tenders.

Robert

Does any know if this is an actual CSX requirement, or are operators converting to make it easier and reduce the number of questions asked by the layers of management, etc..?

Bob

I don't have all my FRA and CFR paperwork handy right this moment. However,

Plain (friction) bearings were prohibited from cars in interchange effective January 1, 1994.

Converted side frames (plain to roller bearing) prohibited for tankcars carrying hazardous commodities effective January 1, 1992; all cars effective January 1, 1995.

Generally railroads adopt the interchange rule when accepting cars on intraline service.

There is nothing I know of in 49 CFR or AAR rules prohibiting the use of friction or plain bearings. However, there's no rule that makes the railroad have to accept equipment with plain bearings, either.

There would be no problems concerning a railroad operating a friction bearing car in MOW or other company service. As a rule though, these cars are roller bearing equipped.

Most railroads require the passenger cars to meet Amtrak standards. This means compliant couplings, roller bearings, updated brake gear, And Amtrak compliant electrical systems for 480v AC 3 phase power.

There is a shortage of compliant passenger cars for mainline excursions these days. Since the heyday of these excursions, the cars have either passed to tourist RR operations, private ownership, or scrapped.

Robert

If we "update all of the obsolete parts of our equipment then what are we preserving?

Robby Peartree