Operations In Water

[George Lortz]

We were chatting earlier about operating locomotives in water.  I found this image on the Internet with no caption, so I'm not sure where this occurred.  At any rate, I think this would be tough on a diesel.

George L.

[Victor Sauerheber]

It kind of looks like Dubuque Iowa. I've seen some other picture of there that look a lot like this.   vic

[Mark Johnson]

It's pretty obvious that operating a Diesel-electric in water would be bad news...I always wondered how much standing water you could run a steam locomotive through. I would think that you'd want it well below any bearing journals, or else you'd have to stop and re-lube everything as soon as you got clear of the water.

Of course, in "ordinary" flooding conditions, running through very much water would be risky in that there might or might not be any tracks below the muddy water!

Mark J

[Ron Marquardt]

If I remember right our rule of thumb for diesels was three inches over the rail.  If the water was deeper than that, the traction motor blowers would suck water into the traction motors and short them out.

As far as steam is concerned, the old heads who worked the south end during the 1937 flood told me that they operated through it until the water got so deep that it put the fires out in the fireboxes.  / Ron

[Gene Remaly]

Ron
Not having a steam locomotive handy to measure, I'm going to guess on some of the measurements.
Lets say the bottom of the fire box was two feet above the rail head, it was probably another foot to the grates. Water would have to be deeper to put the fire out.

I can think of several reasons to not believe the "old heads war stories"
What happens to red hot cast iron grates when submerged in water ? Would pilot and trail trucks been completely under water ? Side rods and valve gearing would have been splashing like crazy. Would the stoker have been under water?
Now about freight car journals. 33" wheels, 16 1/2 inches would  reach the axle center. If the axle journal was 5 inches and the bottom of the journal box was another 4 inches, that means they would take water at about 10 inches.

Food for thought -----     

[Ron Marquardt]

Gene, I can't imagine an old head railroader exaggerating, can you?  Obviously they would have to keep the water from getting to the firebox or they would have been dead in the water, but I don't think the bearings were that big a concern.  Everyone always mentions wheel bearings, but journal bearings on cars were open to the back, and they weren't water tight to the elements, so they were always wet in rainy weather.  I don't think concern for the bearings was as big a factor as some think.  / Ron

[Gene Remaly]

Ron
As sticky as journal box oil was, it would probably stick to the rotating parts and just keep on lubricating them.

Old railroaders always told the truth----------just stretched it a bit ---------

[Eric Reinert]

This is a picture of a couple of Southern Pacific engines in East Portland, Oregon during a flood there in 1948.

(Being oil-burners with a two name road on the tank made this pic easy to find online.)

Eric Reinert

[Ron Marquardt]

Eric, that picture is awfully small.  Could you post a larger one???     / Ron

[Eric Reinert]

Ron,

I don't think the picture I have is any larger or clearer, but here it is.

Eric

[Ron Marquardt]

I was just kidding Eric.  You said "this is a picture" but there wasn't any picture.  LOL,  Ron

PS, I bet the brakeman loved lining switches and making joints under those conditions.

[Eric Reinert]

hahahaha

 

[Ken Weller]

Attached is a picture of a Monon steam engine wading thru water in New Albany in 1937.