Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Hypothetical American Garratts

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    90
    Thanks
    71
    Thanked 319 Times in 77 Posts
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Hypothetical American Garratts

    I was thinking about building an American style garratt, and am curious as to what American railroads would conceivably have been interested in, had use for, or could have benefited from a garratt locomotive. The only one I really know of was the Rio Grande who considered using a narrow gauge garratt.




  2. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to drosera88 For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Perth. Western Australia
    Posts
    1,299
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks
    4,312
    Thanked 2,698 Times in 856 Posts
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Possibly any of the Colorado 3' gauge lines -in their peak years- could have use for such large engines. The price tag for such big engines pretty much excluded any short line yet they excelled on light rail, high tonnage trains.
    Any mountain railroad, GN and NP come to mind, also CPR & CNR could conceivably make use of Garretts if the Mallet and simple articulated wasn't adopted in the US.
    Things that restricted their use in New South Wales (Australia - home of the mighty 60 class) were tunnels, Ardglen tunnel on the main north line was so tight, clearance wise, that if a 60 class stalled or broke down in it, the crew was trapped, not enough clearance along the cab side. Cowan bank just north of Sydney was a steep grade and the 60 class were only allowed to run there with the funnel uphill in either direction. With such long boilers, water had to be kept over the crown sheet least a 'boiler failure' occurred.
    Cheers,

    Russ





  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to mosslake For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,480
    Thanks
    4,428
    Thanked 1,571 Times in 848 Posts
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There were 3 Beyer-Garratt (0-4-0+0-4-0T) built in 1931 by Vulcan Iron Works:
    https://www.steamlocomotive.com/loco...=Beyer-Garratt
    https://www.steamlocomotive.com/loco...&railroad=adcc

    There is an operational Garratt (2-6-2+2-6-2) 2' gauge imported from South Africa in 1975 by Hempstead & Northern Railroad in Hempstead, Texas:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garratt#United_States

    See also discussion on American Garratt:
    https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/9546?page=2
    Last edited by Scotian_Huntress; 22nd Feb 2021 at 02:18 AM. Reason: added link

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Scotian_Huntress For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    5,988
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    13,355
    Thanked 10,952 Times in 3,324 Posts
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just curious , what advantage would this type of engine have , seems to me that it is really large but the power part of it is quite smaller then for instance a challenger or a bigboy .
    As long as I can model in N-scale, I know I'm not old

    My Flickr Pages

    http://www.janbouli.com

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Janbouli For This Useful Post:


  9. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    5,082
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    17,772
    Thanked 9,554 Times in 3,357 Posts
    Mentioned
    254 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Janbouli View Post
    Just curious , what advantage would this type of engine have , seems to me that it is really large but the power part of it is quite smaller then for instance a challenger or a bigboy .
    And it seems to me that as water and oil/coal were consumed, resulting in diminishing weight over the drivers, tractive effort would proportionately suffer. Not an ideal locomotive where long ruling grades could reach 4%, such as on Monarch Pass.

    I think it would have required a disproportionately, almost impossibly large B-G to compete with the likes of a Big Boy, Yellowstone or Allegheny/Blue Ridge for continuous tractive effort and horsepower.

  10. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Perth. Western Australia
    Posts
    1,299
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks
    4,312
    Thanked 2,698 Times in 856 Posts
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Schmidt View Post
    I think it would have required a disproportionately, almost impossibly large B-G to compete with the likes of a Big Boy, Yellowstone or Allegheny/Blue Ridge for continuous tractive effort and horsepower.
    This is a discussion that's carried on for many years, the merits of the Garratt Vs mallets. If built to the same proportions then a Garratt could be a serious contender. But, not having a locomotive built for mainline US service, it can only ever be speculation as to it's success.
    It's true that TE can vary with the fuel / water load but the same can be said for all makes of geared and tank locos.
    The Bayer-Garratt was an outstanding success in it's intended use. In South Africa's case, as in most others, it allowed a dramatic increase of tractive effort, train size almost doubled, and done efficiently with the existing infrastructure. South Africa got what it needed and didn't have to relay thousands of miles of light rail.
    New South Wales made good use of them as well, the only drawback was the introduction of the first mainline diesels (40 class hood units, a modified RSC3 from MLW), hence only 42 of the ordered 50 entered service, the last 8 were parts only, never assembled.

    http://www.theheritageportal.co.za/a...att-locomotive
    Cheers,

    Russ





  11. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to mosslake For This Useful Post:


  12. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Location
    Brunswick, Ohio
    Posts
    208
    Thanks
    180
    Thanked 655 Times in 179 Posts
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hi Janbouli, the engines allowed sharper curves and lighter rail to be used. The shorter boiler did not swing out on curves and remained centered over the track. It also ran equally well in both directions, just like a diesel. Happy Modeling!
    Happy Modeling

    Bruce

  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BruceNscale For This Useful Post:


  14. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    5,988
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    13,355
    Thanked 10,952 Times in 3,324 Posts
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BruceNscale View Post
    Hi Janbouli, the engines allowed sharper curves and lighter rail to be used. The shorter boiler did not swing out on curves and remained centered over the track. It also ran equally well in both directions, just like a diesel. Happy Modeling!
    Thanks , now they make sense to me.
    As long as I can model in N-scale, I know I'm not old

    My Flickr Pages

    http://www.janbouli.com

  15. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Delray Beach, Florida, USA - Ex Busselton, Western Australia
    Posts
    7,123
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    2,092
    Thanked 3,919 Times in 1,325 Posts
    Mentioned
    173 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I believe when Garrett’s were adopted by give RR’s, their design was tailored to use a lot of common parts from existing mainline fleet locos (x-8-x), whereby minimizing their cost.
    Bryan
    “Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” ~ Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519)

  16. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Bryan For This Useful Post:


  17. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    90
    Thanks
    71
    Thanked 319 Times in 77 Posts
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Schmidt View Post
    I think it would have required a disproportionately, almost impossibly large B-G to compete with the likes of a Big Boy, Yellowstone or Allegheny/Blue Ridge for continuous tractive effort and horsepower.
    Like this? http://www.douglas-self.com/MUSEUM/L...cocrosti.htm#b

    I'm not really sure on how accurate it is to call it a 'garratt' as it has dual boilers like a Fairlie, and four sets of drivers like a quadruplex. Regardless it was the only locomotive with four sets of drivers that actually made it to production and use. Only one was built.

    I've read online that the garratt type locomotive had lots of unrealized potential and that the design still had a lot of room for development and improvement when production ceased.




  18. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to drosera88 For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Canadian American Railroad
    By Southern Pacific in forum Rollingstock
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12th Jun 2018, 04:26 PM
  2. American Models inc.
    By j edgar in forum General Rail Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 25th Aug 2011, 06:37 AM
  3. New americaN module
    By americaN in forum Modular Layouts
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 3rd Mar 2011, 03:54 PM
  4. New FREMO americaN video
    By americaN in forum Modular Layouts
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 8th Jun 2010, 01:30 PM
  5. Why the North American Safety Cab?
    By thirdrail in forum General Rail Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2nd Mar 2006, 10:30 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •