Another ignorant question

Actually, tenders were sized so that a locomotive could run from one fuel depot (coal or oil) to another without risk of running out of fuel. That is, an engine was designed to run over at least one division without have to refuel en route. So engines of all sizes would be refuelled equally often, regardless of fuel. All division and most subdivision points would have fuelling and watering facilities. Division points were generally about 100 miles apart. Subdivision points were built for several reasons, of which refuelling might not even be the most important one. Towards the end of the steam era, the larger engines had huge tenders so that they could run over two or more divisions with only crew changes and watering.

Water was used up more quickly than fuel, so water tanks and standpipes for refilling the tender were spaced along the line as needed, closer in hilly country with lots of grades, and further part in flat country.

If your question conceals a curiosity about fuel efficiency, then AFAIK there was no significant difference between oil and coal fired locos. Appliances such as super heaters and feed water heaters had a greater effect on fuel efficiency than the fuel itself.

HTH

The efficiency was about the same, but the oil used, if I remember right, had a bit more energy per weight than most coal (coal varies a lot depending on where it comes from). Thus, for situations like the Milwaukee Road Hiawatha, oil was used because they could go further with the same weight of fuel.

Wolf spake thus:

Don't forget those lines that had track pans installed so that locomotives could scoop up a tenderfull of water on the fly (like the NY Central at Tivoli).

Coal more often than oil, water more often than oil. Oil areas were further apart than the others.

_____

Steve

I've read that in the early days of railroading (1831-1850ish) the era that interests me the most, they stopped for water about every 10 miles and for coal and the general engine lubrication about every 100 miles.

Wayne

Don't forget that the early days they used wood and could not stack that much on those small tenders.

" snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com" (aka sockpuppetus curtus) spake thus:

Peek-a-boo, "Curt", we see you!

Curt, the only thing you know about railroading is from when Rev. Billy Bob used to play "hide the tank car" in your butt.

I once watched a documentary on mummies that said at one point in Egypt they were finding so many mummies that they used them to fuel trains.

These responses are getting just about as irritating as "Curt" is. A shame too, as you often contribute to the group in a more positive way. How about stopping the childishness?

Peek-a-boo, STEVE CAPLE we see you!

I am > " snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com" spake thus:

We drug you? Fuck dude you are being pushed around here like the bitch you are.. little punk being passed around the cellblock.

Oh, and get cancer soon!

brad

STEVE CAPLE your drug use is showing. Your post below Steve is a sad lie. You are obsessed with me

Hi Curt,

Far from it, we just enjoy throwing your crossdressing ass around here like the bitch you are.

Obsessed? You are the one posting all the new messages with "Steve Caple" and "Brad" "Jack" or who ever else is beating you down. We could care less about your unemployed ass- but I love responding to your messages- its fun!

Praying a major stroke disables you soon, brad

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote: >

The other advantage was that you didn't need to stop every 100 miles or so to clean the fire and empty the ashpan...

Steve Caple wrote in news:hjm5rh12gnl0$.1lptw4e9jgb2a$. snipped-for-privacy@40tude.net:

AS a suggestion, why don't you guys who can't get along, conduct your feud/flame/childish behavior vis email or on another newsgroup?

Reserve your posts that contribute positively to this group.

Thank you

Use your news-reader's filter or kill-file abilities. that _really_ cuts down on the garbage.