before this thread gets deleted I have came up new ideas that could improve mainline steam.

I have came up this idea with Aux. Tenders do they cut the fuel bunker out to increase the water capacity? If they do let me tell this idea. this could work with oil burners but with coal no way. I think that maybe if you leave the fuel bunker intact add the oil tank in the bunker cut a hole and install a copper tube which I think would be best because it's resistant to corrosion through the water tank. cut a hole add a screw plug installed on both ends. Afterwards cut a hole on top of the locomotive's oil bunker weld the pipe and install it on the back of the tender then add a hose and connect both of them. Like that the crew doubled the fuel and water capacity. I don't know if it would work or not but it could worth the try I guess.

Usually the fuel bunker in the regular tender contains a enough oil or coal to boiler away all of the water in the tender and auxiliary tender anyway, so adding more fuel to the 2nd tender isn't going to gain you any range.

As far as I know, most auxiliary tenders have had their fuel bunkers removed so they can hold as much water as possible, though #611's auxiliary tender's coal space still exists, and is roofed over and used for tool and supply storage.

And even with increased range, if the engine is running that much it's probably stopped at least twice already for lubrication, so there wouldn't be any fewer stops.

You're inventing a wild-hare solution in want of a problem.

that's why I said it was an idea and I have no idea if it could it work or not. I did forgot the lubrication part. That's a good point boilermaker. I know if you want to know if something is a good idea or not that's why I have to ask the experts here. I'm sorry for throwing out ideas good idea or not I have to ask.

N&W A’s could run from Williamson, WV to Portsmouth, OH on coal trains without stopping once they adopted auxiliary tenders. Prior to this, they had to make a water stop at Kenova, WV. The addition of the auxiliary tender actually allowed the train tonnage to be increased, as the A’s could hit the grade at the Ohio River crossing at speed. When they had to stop for water at Kenova, tonnage was limited by the locomotive’s ability to start the train on the grade at Kenova.

My guess would be that auxiliary tenders could have improved operations, especially with modern steam, on quite a few railroads.

steamfan765 Never be ashamed to ask a question or dream out loud !!!

Kevin K

I'm not ashamed about asking questions Kevin

steamfan765's bringing up aux. tenders got me to thinking about the railroads that actually USED auxiliary tenders (also called cisterns) in steam days. Specially built cisterns were constructed by the Illinois Central, the Norfolk & Western, and other railroads. I think some might have been converted to carry sand after steam was done. But how many of those specially built steam-age cisterns/auxiliary tenders, have been preserved?

Thanks!

Les

Auxiliary tenders were used extensively in Guatemala in the last years of steam in Guatemala. During the period of government operations, these were mostly old tenders taken from scrapped steamers, with the oil tanks removed. I found the tenders of the Sumpter Valley articulateds in this service after the locomotives had been scrapped, and was able to bring them back to the USA for use behind their original engines, SVRy #19 & #20.

During the period when the FEGUA lines were leased to RR Development Corporation, we used tank cars with end sill level hoses connecting them to each other and to the locomotive tender, allowing us to fill the tender and tank car(s) simultaneously while only spotting once for water. By this time, we only had functioning water tanks in Guatemala City, Zacapa, Gualan, and Puerto Barrios.

During the Mexican Revolution, theft of cordwood from water stations resulted in the locomotives of the Mexicano del Pacifico being converted to oil. Since hostilities frequently kept engines away from the terminal in Los Mochis for as much as a week at a time, the tenders were removed, and tank cars used instead. The one nearest the engine was fitted with a steam coil because they used unrefined crude oil resembling asphalt for fuel. There were usually several cars of water, all hose connected to the locomotive. Of course this reduced train lengths considerably, but the line maintained service throughout the difficult times because of the multiple auxiliary tender setup.

I’ve seen them in use at IRM and TVRM as well as behind 261, 765, the UP steamers, 611, and 4449. Not sure how many of those are “original” though.

Reading Company used auxiliary tenders behind the I-10 2-8-0 engines on the Main Line. They were converted from "squareback" tenders from retired camelbacks. They were also used in fire trains and with steam relief cranes.

RBMN has one and it's 4-6-2 425's auxiliary tender.

Phil Mulligan

Sammy and C-Z:

Yes, I think that most of the auxiliary tenders in existence today are former steam locomotive tenders. I'm not sure that any of the original railroad-built cisterns still exist.

Les

The 1522s auxiliary car was sold to the Ohio Central about ten years ago. It is an original purpose built IC auxiliary, later used in sand service before being restored by the SLSTA for excursions.

Auxiliary water tenders became surprisingly common at the end of big steam, for a number of reasons including track pans being incompatible with required modern boiler chemistry and treatment, dieselization reducing the number of water towers, high horsepower greatly increasing the water rate even with highest cost-effective Rankine-cycle efficiency, and desire for longer safe range on locomotives with better lubrication and maintenance.

Normally there was no need to isolate a modern water-bottom tender from any A-tanks following: they can be hose-connected just as the water line to the cold-water pump and injector(s) is. The alternative is to adapt the system on the GATX Tank Train to the cisterns, with a closed-siphon connection across the top, The problem with that is that it's extremely difficult to maintain primed condition on that siphon, and if the water 'breaks' there is no effective way to re-establish it on the road without pumps and valves,

The problem with 'remoting' oil supply in locomotives burning #5 or other heavy oil is that the entire fuel tract has to be heated and insulated, and the A-tanks would need to have steam piped to them for fuel heating and then require some sort of monitoring to eliminate gassing there. I personally wouldn't think this worth doing, if you catch my drift.

If firing with waste lube oil or #2 diesel/gas oil, the supply is best handled (in my opinion) with a transfer line carried high up, and a motorized transfer pump of some kind. As the level in the fuel bunker lowers, the pump runs between level setpoints to 'top it up' or maintain a desired level periodically.

Multiple tenders may be accommodated it they have the necessary pass-through capability. It's interesting to consider "fuel and water" combination A-tanks for extended service, although the modern expedient of having local fire departments and motorized fuel trucks meet you periodically is a far less onerous solution for most excursions and operations.

Yes, there are ways to top up coal bunkers from trailing cars. They go along with 'ashaveyor' systems (Porta had a couple of thoughts about this) to deal with the 'other end of combustion'. Noe are particularly attractive on a 'historically preserved' engine...