Author Topic: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread  (Read 15066 times)

Matt Latham

  • Museum Member
  • Gandy Dancer
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« on: November 18, 2008, 07:50:25 PM »
I am considering building an On2 model of #52 and forgot to get some measurements when I was at the Museum last year. I was having so much fun, I forgot.

I searched the WW&F web site and Discussion Forum, but could not find any information.

Does anyone happen to know the distance between the axles? Some pictures I have indicate it may be in the 30" to 36" range? Anyone also happen to know any other specs for #52, like length, width, height?

Hopefully I'll get back to the Museum in the next year or two to get some detailed measurements, but right now a trip from Texas back to Maine does not look promising.

Thanks for any help.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2012, 09:53:48 PM by Ed Lecuyer »
Member, WW&F Railway Museum.

Ed Lecuyer

  • Administrator
  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,352
    • View Profile
    • wwfry.org
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #1 on: December 13, 2008, 06:30:10 PM »
MODERATORS NOTE:
Automatic Bell on #52 has been converted from the pre-July 2008 WW&F Discussion Forum.
Some formatting may have been removed or modified from the original postings that appear quoted in this topic.
Information contained within this post may be superseded by more recent postings and conversations.

Joe Fox wrote:
Quote
Hi guys,

I have posted a few videos of the automatic bell on #52 on YouTube. Please be sure to watch them. The one in the link is only 53 seconds long, so it shouldn't take that long to build up on any computer. The link is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnRWFSXxHAs

Please let me know, either here, or on YouTube, what you think of the video. Talk to you guys later.

Joe

John McNamara replied:
Quote
Nice video, but boy that bell gets real annoying real quick!

Joe Fox replied:
Quote
I find it a nice attachment. Now 52 sounds more like a real engine. Talk to you guys later.

Joe

Bruce Wilson replied:
Quote
Nice video Joe and as a former operator of no. 52, I'll say that the new bell ringer is a big improvement. Sounds nice and the ring pace is appropriate.

The no. 2 G.E. diesel at Edaville was equipped with an automatic bell ringer back in 1997 and I have thought since that the device needed a restrictor placed in the air line, to slow it down. The ring pace is at what I would call a heart attack pace. The bell would ring both incredibly loud and at a ridiculously frantic pace. I quickly learned that by manipulating the air operating lever in the cab, that I could get a much slower speed to the ringer.

So, now that no. 52 has her bell squared away, how about getting a nice sounding horn for the critter. That squealer that she has now is God awful.

Stephen Hussar replied:
Quote
The video looks good Joe -- nice and steady, and bright. I still find it amazing what these little digital still cameras can produce for motion video, with sound!
John, the bell sounds better in person, quite a pleasant tone actually. One minor drawback to capturing video clips with digital still cameras, it's the limited range in the audio. Add to that the natural compression associated with uploading anything (especially to youtube) and things start to sound pretty thin. But hey...a few years ago this technology didn't exist, so I think it will only get better!

Joe Fox replied:
Quote
Thanks for your comments. Bruce, I almost posted that maybe we ought to try to get a new horn for 52, but I think the one that is on it now is fine, because a nicer sounding horn, might be louder. Talk to you guys later.

Joe

Stephen Hussar replied:
Quote
Found this site a loooong time ago and had it bookmarked. Fun to listen to some of these audio files. The Leslie S3J has a pretty sweet sound. Turn on your speakers and click on the link:  http://www.dieselairhorns.com/sounds/S-3J_PC.mp3



More air horns can be seen and heard at: http://www.dieselairhorns.com/sounds.html?album=5

gordon cook replied:
Quote
Quote
Found this site a loooong time ago and had it bookmarked. Fun to listen to some of these audio files. The Leslie S3J has a pretty sweet sound. Turn on your speakers and click on the link:  http://www.dieselairhorns.com/sounds/S-3J_PC.mp3

If we put one of those things on #52 people will think that the Maine Central has a new branch line!

I am in favor of anything that would be more melodious than the horns on the 52 now, however. My 2 cents is that we're probably scaring the daylights out of our passengers, neighbors, and the wildlife now.
_________________
Gawdon

Allan Fisher replied:
Quote
#52's Horn gets plenty of our Alna Neighbors riled up - and that's why I opposed whistle posts going up  and a rule that says we have to blow for the posts.

Until we get #52's Horn "Fixed" , we should put out a general order to have #52 , with or without train,  approach each crossing prepared to stop and only use horn when vehicle is seen.

It's either that , or take the chance that we will be further restricted on #9 & #10 whistle blowing, just because people hate the sound of #52's horn.

Bill Reidy replied:
Quote
How about a nice Hancock whistle?



A sound sample can be found here:  http://atsf.railfan.net/airhorns/h4700_3.wav

The New Haven used Hancock whistles in the 1950s as they sounded similar to steam whistles.  The New Haven dieselized in 1952.

Bill

John McNamara replied:
Quote
With regard to whistle posts, I was very much in favor of them because for a long time there was a great deal of inconsistency about what we were supposed to do at Sutter's. One day, it was "blow only souithbound." The next day it was "blow only northound." Sometimes it was "blow both ways." Also the rules seemed to be different for steam than for diesel. The only thing that I could be sure of at Sutter's was that whatever I did was wrong

All three locations at which there are currently whistle posts have their hazards, especially Jayne's Way and Trask.

If the problem is that 52's horn is too loud, we should fix that problem, rather than require special rules for 52.

I might add that the automatic bell ringer evidently eliminates manual bell ringing, meaning that what were previously bell signals (forward, back, and acknowledge) will now be toots of the obnoxcious horn!

Stephen Hussar replied:
Quote
No 52's horn sounds as though when you pull the cord it's either on or off, with little or no "ramping" up and down -- as there is with a steam whsitle. I've never had the pleasure of pulling the cord on 52 so I'm wondering if this is a fair description.

Bill, I really like the way those Hancock whistles sound, but I think they're rare. Also, weren't they outlawed by the FRA for not being loud enough?

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
The Leslie horns are for full-size locomotives and are designed to be quite loud. The Hancock 4700 has not been manufactured for some years and is coveted by whistle collectors. They sell for well over $1,000 on eBay. The Hancock is nice and mellow, but uses an enormous amount of air. I don't know if no. 52's air compressor and reservoirs could provide sufficient air.

Even substituting an air whistle for the horn may not work due to the volume of air necessary. I have a couple of air whistles that I will bring with me next week if there is any interest in trying them.

Stephen Hussar replied:
Quote
Quote
The Hancock is nice and mellow...

I've wondered why something like a Hancock has not been tested in service on commuter rail systems where local NIMBY's have successfully won moratoriums on horn blowing at grade crossings...

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
The Hancock whistle is not loud enough to meet the federal regs. The New Haven had Hancocks on many of its diesels and even on its electric m.u. cars in the 50s and 60s. A number of other railroads used them as well, but the FRA does not permit them any more.

Stephen Hussar replied:
Quote
Quote
The Hancock whistle is not loud enough to meet the federal regs...
That's what I thought. But you would think that SOMETHING...rather than SILENCE would be better than nothing at a grade crossing! 

Bruce Wilson replied:
Quote
The Edaville G.E.'s had Hancocks many years ago, no. 2 had her Nathan installed when the engine was repowered. The Hancock's were nice to listen to, the Nathan can be nice if an operator eases the air into the appliance. If one were to pull the cord fully, the noise is deafening. As a practical joke, I stuffed the horn full of rags one day and when a buddy went to blow two blasts as he left the station, he "fired" the wadded up cloth over the engines hood and about sixty feet up the track. Talk about power...

At Edaville, we had our own discretion on many of the whistle posts on the old 5 1/2 mile loop. When the property was gated off in recent years, the general public was restricted from being out along the railroad. I still treated each crossing with the having the potential for activity...pedestrian, ATV, horse, automobile, etc. But, I kept my use of the horn to a minimum and played the device in order to keep it safe and pleasing to the ear.

Edaville had been closed from '92 to '97, with regular operations resuming in September of '99. Local residents became accustomed to the lack of whistles and horns. For some reason, Edaville management provided the motive power with some of the most powerful blasters that could be found. Even the Hudswell-Clarke had an old whistle from a former freight locomotive. You could seemingly empty the steam dome with one pull of the lanyard. Whitcomb diesel no. 5 has something sounding like a tug boat horn. And the "hot rod from hell" Whitcomb no. 3 let's folks in southern New Hampshire know when shes in service.

Remembering the beauty of the steam whistles at the old Edaville, I wanted to offer something respectful from the engines I operated. Played carefully, each had that potential. W.W. & F. Ry. no. 52 just sounds BAD period.

Josh Botting replied:
Quote
Someone found out about the non whistleing at grade crossings for the Maine Eastern, in Rockland last year, hit by the train.

James Patten replied:
Quote
There's a horn mounted pointing south on #52, but it hasn't been hooked up to the air yet, so I don't know how it sounds.  I think that may be Zack's next move on it.

Regarding the north-mounted horn, you can "ramp up" the sound, but it requires a fine control.  When doing so I usually have the horn rope in hand and brace my hand against the gear changing shaft.

Ira Schreiber replied:
Quote
Using some sort of an air regulator would lower the db of the air horn. By simply adjusting the regulator, the volume/sound can be modulated.
Ira

John McNamara replied:
Quote
Quote
Using some sort of an air regulator would lower the db of the air horn. By simply adjusting the regulator, the volume/sound can be modulated.

I think that this is an excellent idea. As James points out, it is possible to blow 52's horn gently, but it requires a very delicate touch and the valve is somewhat sticky. If the pressure could be reduced so that normal blowing techniques provided a reasonable sound, that would be good.

My only concern is whether an air regulator would accumulate condensation and thus have possible rusting and/or freezing problems. Any thoughts on this Ira?

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
A flow restrictor for the air can be as simple as a flat disc with a small hole drilled in it. A smaller diameter air line would also do the trick.

Ira Schreiber replied:
Quote
Wayne is correct, as long as you know what diameter hole for the disc. A very inexpensive air regulator usually has a drain valve. Either would work.

Joe Fox replied:
Quote
Hi everybody,

I see that many people are involved with a new idea for a train horn. I agree that it is loud, but sometimes that is ok. However, the steam whistle is almost as loud, but is more soothing on the ears, and the tones of it can be changed, with a simple touch of the cord. Listening to the horn blow in the yard can be very jumpy if your not watching the engine. Maine Narrow Gauge turns there bell on, when ever the engine first starts to move. However, they only do that because the city has set many restrictions on them for the horns and whistles. Any whstile/horn blowing must be at a minimum, and as quiet as possible I think. I know when the steam engine is running, they barely pull on the cord. Talk to you guys later.

Joe

Stephen Hussar replied:
Quote
How about something like this just for moving around the yard...
http://cgi.ebay.com/SHERBURNE-TRAIN-CABOOSE-BACK-UP-AIR-WHISTLE-BRASS-NR_W0QQitemZ320099396038QQihZ011QQcategoryZ95164QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Mike Fox replied:
Quote
Another idea for changing the air flow would be put in a shut off valve in the line and partially shut it off. allow enough air to flow through to blow the horn. This way, if the horn should be changed and more air is needed, just open the valve a little more. There might already be a valve in line this could be tried with.
Mike

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
Just in case anyone is interested, there is a Hancock 4700 whistle currently up on eBay. I'd post the link, but I have no clue how to do that. Happy bidding!

dwight winkley replied:
Quote
Back up air whistle, you can hear them when they blow. but there is no air on the ends of our cars.

Jason M Lamontagne replied:
Quote
Some general thoughts.

I believe that 52's horn is merely a truck horn, though I'm not sure.  It doesn't particularly bother me, however I respect that others don't like its sound, and I respect that we have to respect our neighbors.

That being said, I'm not in favor of anything quieter, or perhaps better said, something that can't be this loud.  They are loud for a reason- that reason in my mind is the 18 yard dump truck coming out of Sutter's pit with the AC on and radio blaring.  Safety is safety.

For this reason I'm not particularly in favor on an air flow restrictor, resulting in lower db's.  I offer an alternative, however.

This relates to thoughts I've had about throttle valves in locomotives.  For maximum control in the valve, one needs the control for the travel of the valve itself from full closed to full open to be long- both for maximum leverage and make it easier to find a mid-range when desired.  Simply extending the length of the whistle lever from 3" to 24" may do wonders- we can test it this weekend.

Engineers should remember the whistle policy and the intention of the whistle signal rule- the rule gives the required sucession of blasts for a crossing, but does not address intensity or duration.  The policy, passed as a board approved special policy for the town and posted in Sheepscot Station, addresses those concerns by simply stating "intensity and duration of whistle to be proportionate to the importance and distance the signal is to be conveyed."  Allan or others can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this phaseology is in the whistle rule itslef on NORAC and other "big" railroad rulebooks.

Forgive the silly-ness, but approaching Jayne's Way with limited visibiltiy, I may blow "TOOOOOT  TOOOOOT  TOOT TOOOOOT," while approaching Sutters from the north where you can easily see in both directions, I may blow "TOT TOT TT TOT."  The policy puts this judgement first clearly in the place of the engineer.

I'm not opposed to some different horn on 52 either, as long as it is able to be that loud for that situation when you need it.

see ya
Jason

Joe Fox replied:
Quote
That is understandable. So does this mean that something will be done to make the horn easier on the ears, but still have the capability to be blown at full blast?

Joe

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
There are horn valves with a detent that restrict the air flow for a "town" blast, with a second spot for a full flow for "country" use. I'm not certain who makes them any more, but they are available.

dwight winkley replied:
Quote
I find nothing wrong with the sound of #52's present horn. The horn does have to chimes. It is hard to just blow the softer tone. But it can be done.

My new commit. Why is the rope to the air horn only resting on the top of the horn valve instead of tied to it with a wire or "S" hook?

James Patten replied:
Quote
Zack has hooked in the bell and rear horn to air valves, which are connected to the air system.  The rear horn valve is on the stand which has the throttle, sand valve, and bell valve.  Brad put a long handle on the forward horn valve and removed the rope.

With the long handle on the forward horn valve, you can now "tap" the horn lightly to acknowledge signals.  However you have to have a very light touch with it.

The rear horn valve seems pretty sticky.  I think it's the same style of valve that the front horn has, but there's just the finger's length of leverage so there's not much fine control.  I think the back horn sounds better than the forward horn.  They found a small cut in the horn flare and when they taped it up the horn sounded.

Its location isn't the best but Zack did it quickly to get it service.  Hopefully he can work up a different location in the future.

We used the bell ringer pretty extensively today.  It's a good warning for people around you.

MikeW replied:
Quote
I noticed yesterday that the 52's automatic bell ringer has a curious way of "tailing off" - rather distinctive!

I do have a question though.  When switching in the yard, I noticed the engineers were giving forward, reverse, and stop signals with the horn.  Is it necessary to signal so much if the bell is ringing anyway to warn visitors (and workers) of movement?

Mike Fox replied:
Quote
In my opinion, it is done that way so those around know which way the train is headed. It is also usefull to know that the engineer understood your signal and will now be changing or continuing in that direction.
Mike

Jason M Lamontagne replied:
Quote
I think we could stand to cut down on hand signal acknowledgements in the yard now that they must be by whistle.

With the bell ringing, anyone nearby should expect movement at any time in any direction (well, not ANY direction- forward and back).

For many signals, having the engine do whatever the hand signal asked for is sufficient acknowledgement, in my opinion.  This plainly isn't universal, but we could help our neighborlyness considerably by thinking about what really is necessary when acknowledging hand signals.

A worthy discussion.

seeya
Jason

James Patten replied:
Quote
It takes a while for the bell to stop ringing once you turn off the valve.  I'm guessing that it has to do with the amount of pressurized air still in the line, and that as it diminishes the intensity of the bell diminishes.

The auto bell ringer is rather new to us, as is now our inability to give taps of the gong on the bell (which prior we gave for acknoledgement and for signaling direction).  I think it's going to take a while for us to sort out what works best and what our policy should be.  I took the first few trips and probably was a little too horn happy at the beginning, but I've started to work out some ideas on how things ought to be done.

Joe Fox replied:
Quote
I agree with Jason, that sounding the air horn for acknoledgements could be minimized. Talk to you guys later.

Joe
_________________
“We are extremely proud of our collection of historical railroad equipment, which is the largest of any U. S. railroad, especially our steam locomotives.”
-Steve Lee-

Joe

John McNamara replied:
Quote
A page or two back in this thread there was discussion of the Hancock air whistle and mention of there being one available on eBay. It was also mentioned that they had been on eBay before, fetching nearly $1000. Well, sure enough, this one went for $809.99. We missed out 

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
When I was railroading for a living, some engineers I worked with would acknowledge a hand signal with a quick twist of the bell valve, which resulted in 2-3 taps of the bell by the clapper. Others learned how to get a muted honk-honk from the horn. Still others would simply wave out the window. I liked the wavers best.

Joe Fox replied:
Quote
The first day the bell was put on, Jason tried various acknoledgements. One being turning the bell on, and then back off. Even if it rang more than two or three times, I knew he got the signal. I don't know what he thought of ringing the bell as an acknoledgement, but I think it is better than using the horn as an acknoledgement. The horn, for personal thought, is good for going foward or backing up. But that is just my thought.

Joe

MikeW replied:
Quote
Given the relatively short consists at WW&F, the hand wave makes sense.  What do the rules say?

Joe Fox replied:
Quote
Two dongs on the bell, or two short blasts on the whistle or horn is an acknowledgement.

Joe

MikeW replied:
Quote
Do the rules say you MUST acknowledge with the bell or horn for every movement?

Mike Fox replied:
Quote
It does not say in the rulebook that every signal has to be acknowledged by the engineer. But if the train is being pushed either backwards or forwards, there needs to be an acknowledgment that the engineer reieved the signals. In the yard, perhaps if the bell was ringing whenever the train was moving would suffice as acknowledgment. the movement stops, so should the bell. Then start it again before movement starts. But as far as coming int the station, the acknowledgment needs to stay the same.
Mike

Keith Taylor replied:
Quote
Wayne,
Granted it's been more than a couple of years since I last ran a Conrail diesel, but there were still ex. NH pups running around with the Hancock air whistles at that time. The nice thing about the Hancock is the sound is directed to JUST tha area it is needed (at the crossing at grade) by the parabolic reflector. That makes it ideal for our use, where you don't want to annoy the neighbors, but you do want to warn folks at the crossing.
As most of the crossing are private, why not kust ask the land owner if they WANT the crossing protected with a 14-l signal.
I used to cross hundreds of private crossings between Kearny, NJ and Harrisburg, PA...and didn't blow the horn for any of them.
Keith

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
Mike, having the bell ringing continuously while moving around the yard will quickly drive the engineer (and everyone else nearby) batty. A few clangs to indicate impending movement and watchfulness on the part of the brakemen, conductors and switchmen should take care of it.

Keith, I agree with you about private crossings and Hancock whistles. I'm still not sure no. 52 could generate enough air to blow one, though. They use a lot of air. Perhaps a Westinghouse interurban whistle would be a good compromise. I have one around here somewhere, if I can only find it!

James Patten replied:
Quote
We've trained everybody to acknowledge signals in some manner.  If the head end is facing away from the engineer then bells or whistles are needed.  Otherwise a wave of the hand or nod of the head will do.
Ed Lecuyer
Moderator, WW&F Forum

Ed Lecuyer

  • Administrator
  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,352
    • View Profile
    • wwfry.org
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2009, 08:24:38 PM »
MODERATORS NOTE:
History of #52 has been converted from the pre-July 2008 WW&F Discussion Forum.
Some formatting may have been removed or modified from the original postings that appear quoted in this topic.
Information contained within this post may be superseded by more recent postings and conversations.

Josh Botting wrote:
Quote
How old is 52 anyway?

Stephen Hussar replied:
Quote
No 52 was built in 1961, so 46 years young!

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
Hard to imagine that anyone was still building two-foot gauge locomotives as late as 1961, but I believe Plymouth built units similar to no. 52 as late as 1968. Our no. 52 was used at Carpenter Steel Co. in Reading, Pa., which had an extensive two-foot gauge in-plant railway into the 1980's. Some trackage is still in use, though all the locomotives are gone. Front loaders and forklifts propel the remaining cars these days.

Plymouth no longer exists, but I believe Brookville would be happy to build a two-foot gauge locomotive.

Josh Botting replied:
Quote
Much older than I......
Ed Lecuyer
Moderator, WW&F Forum

Benjamin Maggi

  • Museum Member
  • Flagman
  • *
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #3 on: October 15, 2010, 10:27:27 AM »
Though this an "old" post (more than 120 days) it makes more sense to add to it instead of starting a new one... especially since the subject is the same.

I too am in the same position as the original poster. Sort of. I am planning on building a 1:13.7 scale model of some WW&F equipment (starting with Combine #6) and will eventually get around to building a model of #52 to pull it. This will be a big model, but to pull the combine I will probably have to cram it with lots of weight.

So far, I don't know of any articles in any magazine that discussed it, nor any prints/plans/diagrams/drawings. I am not in a current financial position to drive up for the weekend to take pictures and measurements, so that is out. Were/are plans available for this engine?

History of the Engine (compiled from snippets found on other webpages)

Originally the 30-ton Plymouth diesel-mechanical locomotive was built in 1961 for the Carpenter Technologies company, which is located in Pennsylvania. In late 1996, the WW&F Museum bought it for their yard and renumbered it #52. It currently operates to help pull the trains in winter (with the aid of the WW&F added plow) and provide another engine when the steamer is not running. It has the pulling power it needs for a fully loaded train. The engine has since purchase been outfitted with running boards and has had a snow plow built for it.

Can anyone add anything to the history of the engine?

PhotographsI have lots of pictures of it which were collected on the internet but none are mine so I will not post them.


« Last Edit: October 15, 2010, 09:00:40 PM by Benjamin Maggi »

Stewart "Start" Rhine

  • Museum Member
  • Trainmaster
  • *******
  • Posts: 2,906
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #4 on: October 15, 2010, 04:43:38 PM »
Here are some measurements of the locomotive from when I worked on it last Spring.

Engine length is 13 feet - not including the couplers.

Distance between axle centers is 56" and the front axle center is 50" back from the front edge of the pilot plate.

Both cast end plates are 56 1/4" wide and 24" high.  They are 8" thick.

The hood is 90" long, measured from the front of the cab and 44" wide, measured at the radiator.  It is 36 1/2" high (from the running boards).   The four hood doors are 26" X 37".  The stack is 17" high.

The top of the radiator is 66" above the rail head.

The cab is 60" long and 57" high at the center.  It is 50" wide.  The rear windows are 20" wide by 22" high.  The cab doors are 27 1/2" wide by 51 1/2" high.  The door glass is square, measuring 17 1/2" by 17 1/2" 


Benjamin Maggi

  • Museum Member
  • Flagman
  • *
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #5 on: October 15, 2010, 05:32:16 PM »
Stewart,
WOW! Thank you so very much. What I will do now is take some of the photographs I have found and use your dimensions to sketch some rough drawings. You have been very helpful!

Pete "Cosmo" Barrington

  • Museum Member
  • Engineer
  • ****
  • Posts: 602
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #6 on: October 16, 2010, 07:18:38 PM »
Be sure to keep us posted with photos of your work, we'd love to see it!  ;)

Matt Latham

  • Museum Member
  • Gandy Dancer
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #7 on: January 10, 2011, 12:44:34 AM »
And I am very late in replying. A big thank you for the measurements Stewart. It helps with my planning.

Matt Latham in snowy Flower Mound, Texas
Member, WW&F Railway Museum.

Keith Taylor

  • Museum Member
  • Engineer
  • ****
  • Posts: 692
  • Life Member
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #8 on: May 08, 2011, 01:43:31 PM »
After the Annual meeting yesterday, I went for a ride which was my first behind No. 52. It was very apparent to me that when travelling south, the horn is excellent at warning the folks on the train of upcoming grade crossings! I wonder if it has been considered to add a second horn on the south end of the locomotive and aimed south so motorists on the crossing will get the full benefit of the warning....and the hearing of the passengers will be spared?

Keith

John McNamara

  • Operating Volunteers
  • Inspector
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,454
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #9 on: May 08, 2011, 04:14:38 PM »
There are two horns on 52 - one facing north and one facing south for exactly the reason you mention. If the south horn was not used on your trip, either the engineer forgot to use it, or it was temporarily out of order.

-John

James Patten

  • Administrator
  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,736
  • Loco for 6
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2011, 04:31:08 PM »
I was engineer on the 3 PM trip Saturday.  Keith, I can assure you that I used the south horn when traveling south - and also when the engine was on the south end of the train pushing north.  You would have known if I used the north-pointed horn and you were next to it - it's quite loud!
« Last Edit: May 08, 2011, 06:20:35 PM by James Patten »

Keith Taylor

  • Museum Member
  • Engineer
  • ****
  • Posts: 692
  • Life Member
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #11 on: May 08, 2011, 05:13:25 PM »
That south horn must be a real doozey!

Next time I will wear hearing protection when I ride next to the engine....

Keith

Joe Fox

  • Museum Member
  • Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,192
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #12 on: May 10, 2011, 06:02:38 AM »
And just think, those aren't anything more than truck horns. Just imagine if we could get the 5 chime train horn that Maine Narrow Gauge has. I love that thing. Believe it or not, the horns on the 52 should actually be louder than what they are now. The FRA requires a train horn/whistle to be between 90-92 decibals.

Joe

Dwight Winkley

  • Museum Member
  • Fireman
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #13 on: May 10, 2011, 06:27:58 AM »
Sometimes the (I beleive) south horn only "plays" one of the two horns. Than it sounds out of tune. As James said, If I am traving south pushing a car with passengers be it a passenger car or a work car with members than I will blow the north horn. If I were to see a automobile etc, approching the crossing than I would swith to the south horn. The passengers would soon cover there ears.
dwight

Mike Fox

  • Museum Member
  • Superintendent
  • ********
  • Posts: 4,952
    • View Profile
Re: WW&F No. 52 - Official Work Thread
« Reply #14 on: May 10, 2011, 08:47:43 PM »
I could bring my 4 chime for a trial run but the neighbors would not be impressed. It does make the ears tingle.
Mike
Doing way too much to list...