Looking at the V8 powered steam locomotive what are some of the better railroad "kludges" you've seen or heard about? For starters I submit one of my own creations that (for a very short period of time) served as a track inspection vehicle.

Interesting bike. Couple of questions.

It appears you used flat wheels for the front, and then even smaller wheels running against the gage face. How well did that work, especially in areas with significant metal flow?

How well did the rear wheels track?

Would it work with only one rider, or did both bikes have to be pedeled?

Greg

Some where I have some images of a sholder ballast shute we had to make up to distribute ballast to one side when we had real limited tractor access.

The front wheels are common push lawn mower wheels with internal roller bearings double stacked for extra width for better tracking. Those very small inner wheels you see are actually fan shaft roller bearings mounted on 1/2 inch all thread with locking nuts. All of which are found in the hardware section of any Lowe's home improvement store.

The use of the fan shaft bearings works quite well and I've actually found if both riders come close to syncronizing speed only one or two bearings will actually make contact with the rail. However you are correct in that they do tend to catch on rail where the railhead has experienced "flow" and has mushroomed out. However I took that possibility into account in the design and the all thread shafts the bearings are attached to are actually movable and can be raised and lowered to make the contact with the rail face in the best possible spot on any size rail and will slide underneath any flow material.

However I have discovered that these bearings tend to make alot of noise and plan on replacing them with roller blade wheels this summer.

The rear wheels actually track alot better than many people think and I'm regulary asked this question about it. The two bicycles are actually bolted tightly to the frame when the rig is fully assembled. The way the roller bearing are gauged and spread out dosen't allow the frame to twist side to side very much and therefore the bikes are fairly rigid as well. The addition of the connecting bar you see connecting the back of the bikes together and the cross arm attaching that directly to the frame almost eliminated any side to side motion all together.

However the rear wheels also don't have anything built into them to compensate for poorly maintained track, especially on light 90 pound rail like in the picture. It performs very well however you can expect for one of the tires to slip off every so often if the track gauge is poorly maintained. On 135 pound rail it has always performed flawlessly and my cousins and I have wound this thing up to a pretty good clip without feeling hesitant on well maintained track.

The bike also works with one rider. However it does track better with two riders since it obviously would want to twist less with power input from both sides. However I have pedaled the contraption on a ten mile trip by myself without any major problem. I will admit that with the weight if this thing having two riders is alot easier:)

Penn Central is probably the biggest railroad kludge in recent history, although it served something like its purpose for a while. AMTRAK might come in second, and is doing much better than PC did.

dave

I always liked this "prime mover" used by the standpipe installation contractor on the original Washington Metro subway. It's diesel because gasoline engines were not allowed in the tunnel. Others gave him a hard time about it, but he replied that he was the only contractor with air conditioning and am/fm radio!

Some slick tires rather than the knobby mountain bike tires would probably work even better with that railbike setup.

The Cubans also did some kludgy diesel conversions of their own. I am not sure I would call them better; and I don't think they lasted very long, either. Here is one of them.



Some Heisler diesel conversions preserved in the west probably worked pretty good.

The Cubans also converted two of their conventional steam locomotives to fireless by removing the tender and just filling the boiler with steam from a stationary boiler. Since they couldn't be filled with high pressure steam, they did not have a very useful range; and also didn't last very long.

Logging lines were known for using things to the last drop. On Vancouver Island in 1971, I came across this Shay/log unloader at Ladysmith.



Steve

I saw the number on the cab of this 2-4-0 conversion (#1420) and I had to get out my "Trains of Cuba" guidebook that Adolf Hungry Wolf published in 1996 as an accompanyment to his videotape of Cuba steam. Was there a #1420 in Hungry Wolf's book? Yes! On page 58, Baldwin 2-8-0 1420 is shown as being on the roster of the 27-1/2" Narcisa mill. The photo of the 2-4-0 conversion was supposedly taken in 1997, so I guess this could have been where the conversion came from, although then the Consolidation also last a couple sets of drivers. Anyone with any knowledge of Cuban locomotive numberings have any idea if this is how this contraption originated ?

Les

Linville River Rwy #1 is a 3' gauge Shay with a diesel added around 1950. It was owned by the Ritter Lumber Company, and travelled to a number of their operations in Virginia and West Virginia. It still exists, and (last we heard) the owner wants to convert it to standard gauge (heresy!!!)! Those of us restoring the ET&WNC in the Doe River Gorge would love to have it "back", but (the last we heard) the owner wants to keep it. I will include a link to one of the pages with photos.

http://www.shaylocomotives.com/surviving/0949.htm

Another shot of Linville River #1.

http://wizzy.rrpicturearchives.net/show ... id=1763752

It belongs to to Will Harris, "Lost Engines of Roanoke" savior and fellow Roanoke Chapter NRHS member. Will and I talked about the Shay back in December. He is aware of it's history as the only surviving Shay that operated in regular service in Virginia. Will is still interested in restoring it, although I doubt that it would be for operation. With the cylinders missing and the boiler gutted, that would probably be a million dollar project. I would expect that it will someday see cosmetic restoration and display somewhere in western Virginia. Will is currently focused on finishing N&W 4-8-0 1134 for the RR Museum of Va. in Portsmouth. After that, he is planning on surveying his newly aquired 0-6-0t, ex-E. J. Lavino # 34, for possible operation.

Photo of 34

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.p ... 087&nseq=1

34 is no longer on VMT property, it is now at the Chapter's 9th St yard, with N&W 1118 and 1134.

Gary,

What is that little 0-4-0 sitting behind the Shay in Goshen, VA? That looks very similar to an 0-4-0 that used to sit in Marion, VA in front of a motel. If its the same loco I've always wondered what the history is behind it. I saw it when I was very young, visiting relatives in Marion.

That is indeed Old Dominion Soapstone # 2, Will has owned this loco for at least 6 years.

http://www.steamlocomotive.info/vlocomo ... splay=1728

Baldwin 2-8-0 #1420 was intact and photographed stored at Odbulia Morales Sugar Mill in 2003. So, this was not a butcher job on #1420.

This looks like a butcher job on a Baldwin 2-4-0. I have a similiar list in an older issue of the Continental Railway Journal; and I could not account for all of the locomotives in the list. As long as steam locomotives were kept running in Cuba; my guess is that it was an ancient (1800s) Baldwin from the 11xx series that was totally worn out boiler wise, dieselized; and assigned an arbitrary new number.