I don't think anyone has mentioned this idea 're: 1309 and the turntable. Could the rails on the turntable bridge proper be raised? Either with heavier timbers, or with new steel running lengthwise, under the rails? Or a combination of both? Then raise the aproach tracks to match.

As far as the 22.5 degree curvature goes, my first thought was rail greasers, but that may not be the best idea that close to a grade crossing! Perhaps some graphite flange lubricator sticks? Applying them to steam locomotive drivers would be more of a challenge than putting them on a diesel switcher, though.

Cass uses water, ahead of the front wheels on the Shays, and for the entire trip! Perhaps something like this would work; turn on the water just before making the move to the turntable. Guaranteed that the water won't make the mess that a rail greaser would.

I think that this problem can be solved without any major track revisions, such as crossovers and a third switch.

Obviously you wrongly interpreted my post because nothing that I proposed would have made the turntable not to be level or wear unevenly.

Rick, I think that you are very clever and experienced so not to make this into a protracted discussion. I was concerned with an unbalanced turntable since one side will be at an angle. I would not event guestimate the weight imbalance, but I would imagine with a massive weight, balance is critical.... It should be calculated. As a PE, I am probably more concerned with a safe solution that is certified by a PE in that state... Everyone who rides that train watches the engine being turned....so it has to be done properly... You would not want any steam pipe couplings to open up accidentally... This is not a back-woods coal mine...

The dilemma is that you have to keep the platform track safe and also make the turntable lead safe. That is why the 3rd track is a viable alternative. You can adjust that grade without impacting the platform. I don't believe that there is a problem that cannot be solved to add the 3rd track....it may not be cheap...but in the long run, it should be a viable option.

That Big Boy operating territory limitation might have been correct in 1942, except they somehow got from Schenectady to Cheyenne without the cylinders and cab being in a gondola. I'm sure UP had to realign things for them and possibly replace a turntable or two, but that was SOP for newer, bigger steam engines. But today is the double-stack era and a lot of stuff fits now that didn't fit then.

Phil Mulligan

The turntable is level and will have to remain level. There is no other way it can function otherwise.

Rob Gardner

Rick's suggestions are about keeping the turntable level, but changing the profile of the rails atop the level table. Imagine someone inserting shims under the tie plates of just the 15 ties that are in the middle of the turntable - the table would remain level but the rails atop the table would no longer be level. Rick's proposing more complicated versions of that.
You may be overthinking this. Point loads on a beam are still point loads on a beam even when the rail atop the beam is not perfectly horizontal.

I am sure that in practice, locomotives were not always properly centered on the table and the reaction loads at the pit rails were out of balance. This would cause more force needed to rotate. It may impact the load capacity of the assembly... During loading, the forces will be greater, but that is not while moving...in loading it is static. This a long locomotive and probably no wiggle room. Point loads are still there but this is a statically indeterminant load... and nobody will calculate that...tender loads vary...most likely it will be done with an empirical test.

The point is that unless you know for sure the limits of any overdesign for unbalanced loads, that the unbalance may or may not be significant.....meaning if it was designed to handle that, then no problem... My guess is that there is a significant factor of safety.

But when you abruptly change direction on a vertical curve, you put stresses where they have not been designed... The best thing to do is to make the situation as gentle as possible so that there are no surprises.....and it is prudent to seek calculations instead of relying on opinions....

I'm sure Reading T-1's were unbalanced on the turntables. The engine wheelbase is a little over 96 feet while the turntables are 100 feet. This means the weight of the engine is on one end and the weight of the tender is on the other. The same would apply to the K-1 2-10-2's.

Phil Mulligan

A recent photo is a good illustration of how truly "up in the hills" this spot is:

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/799457/

Okay: How about this :
Since #734 isn't currently doing anything and the Turntable Experience apparently is a BIG attraction why not tow #734 to Frostburg, shove it onto the turntable and leave it there ! When a train arrives give #734 a spin, everyone happy. #734 remains in place.

Kevin K

Seriously? WMSR makes an announcement they are embarking on a multi-year endeavor to survey and return 734 to service yet here we are suggesting they're better off drop kicking it to Frostburg to spin on the turntable.

Mods: Please do the humane thing and kill/lock this thread. It no longer serves any purpose.

DC

No, I'm enjoying the overthinking down spurs to nowhere just because it shows actual thinking instead of just reaction.

That wasn't what was suggested. The suggestion was to turn it into a presentable static display in the meantime until it's return to operation is being actively pursued.

Granted, looking at the timeline and what work they intend to/need to do to survey it for return to operation, a static display probably isn't practical. But that's my two cents nobody asked for.

This is why I do a lot of my work by myself without telling anyone beforehand. Just saves a lot of aggravation.

Still have no idea what "calculations" are needed that would be different than the traditional calculations to determine turntable capacity since none of the inputs would change. z

And no, we are not locking the thread. It is a DISCUSSION forum and it violates the first rule of discussion forums to stop discussion because the discussion dares to discuss what one person doesn't want discussed.

Anything that was once made by man can be remade.

The only obstacles are time and money, especially money.