Can anyone point me to a Web site where I can find track plans, photos, etc... of the Pittsburgh & Lake Erie. I am interested in modelling the P&LE deisel era. I know that the main HQ of the P&LE is in Station Square, Pittsburgh, PA. I would like to model this area. But I need something to start from.
The P&LE used their SW1500's in yard service, local service, and on road trains. MU'ing several together for the hump pusher was common practice. On the road trains it wasn't unusual to have a consist of U28, SW1500, and GP38. If you don't already have it pick up the Morning Sun book on the P&LE. Also the fallen flags web site has numerous photos of P&LE locos and cars.
1) Assuming the use of three SW1500's as a hump yard pusher, would the engine operator ride in the head engine closest to the cars for better vision of the consist?
2) Regarding multiple engine scenarios as such, exactly how do these work in the real world - specifically, how are the engines controlled from one engine's cab?
3) Is there a reason/advantage [mechanically] why they run back to back in some scenarios and front to back on other scenarios or is this simply a lash up outcome based on their direction at the time of their connection?
The engineer could ride in any of the engines and control the consist.
The engines are diesel/electic, and there are only 8 thottle seetings - combination of control wire in that jumper cable between the engines tells the other units which thottle position is to be used.
Many times it is just the arrangement of the units when they are attached in MU. But, sometimes they will have the nose of the swicher leading for collision protection at grade crossings. Also the crew may want the engine facing a certain direction because a yard is on a curve and they will have better vision one way or the other.
Well, I don't know about 3... but when there are 2 together FOR YARD WORK, I've often seen them nose-to-nose, with the cabs on the "outside". I imagine it's because the crew saves steps that way - closer to the cars for coupling/uncoupling. If they need/want to, they can run the MU from the "lead" cab, too.
Probably a bit of both. I like a clear view for operation as much as anyone, but a bit of protection out on the road when you have to deal with crossings is a good idea too. On my MODEL railroad, my road diesels run short-hood-forward and tail-to-tail in pairs, but when I take the SW9s out I use them cab-to-cab on the main (on those rare occassions when I need two of them out there) , and nose-to-nose in the yard.
You can have some fun by putting one on each _end_ of a local... then you never have to deal with a facing point turnout. There's a prototype short line that does this - their local works both ends of the string, with two one-man crews. This was in MR, what, about a year ago? RailAmerica, or something like that.
(Let's see ya do THAT with analog control... talk about a wiring mess!)
Joe Ellis wrote: > You can have some fun by putting one on each _end_ of a local... then you > never have to deal with a facing point turnout.
How would you do this in DCC?
I don't, yet, have DCC, but I thought that you programmed an engine consist, on an isolated programming track, as one engine under one road number. I gather this can now be done on the run anywhere along the rails.
Am I correct that you would need to repeat the effort [drop one engine - reacquire that engine] each time that you were faced with a switching effort along the route?
I really like the "one on each_end_" concept as it would certainly save on installing run arounds [additional switches in certain areas] that are tight for space.
Well, you've almost got your info right. On DCC, you do program the road number into the unit, but it's on a unit to unit basis. To Multi-Unit together the locomotive (ie, build the consist), you do that on the fly/road/etc. You can permanently MU two locos by giving them the same address/number, but I don't, and I don't think its common. Once you've programmed the unit numbers into each individual engine, it stays there. To run that engine on a throttle, you just (usually) dial in the number assigned to it. To run additional engines on the same throttle, you will follow whatever practice your DCC manufacturer uses for MU'ing. On Digitrax, for example, (and likely others) you select the unit your adding on the other cab (there's usually two per hand-held throttle), and then 'add' it to the consist with the first engine. You can then select another engine and keep adding until you run out of engines or track space. (Or the system coughs and says 'enough!'.) :) For running the engines on both end of the train - I'm not sure I'd do that in a consisted unit even with DCC. The slightest hesitation on either end and your train will get pulled apart. On the prototype, one of the engines would be placed into neutral - we don't have that benefit in the scale world. However, it could be done like that without a problem. Me? I'd run them as two separate units, as if the one on the end was a helper. But that's just me - others likely wouldn't. 'till later....
-- Andrew Cummings | email@example.com
Sorry, I forgot to respond to the critical part of your post. :) Too blame early in the morning, and its too cold. :) Yes, if the engines on both ends of the train were MU'd, you'd have to drop one while out on the road, and then add it again when you take off. It really isn't that big of a deal anymore, and can be done out on the road. Things have gotten much easier. :) 'till later....
-- Andrew Cummings | firstname.lastname@example.org
No, you only need the programming track to assign the initial address. MUs you can make and break on the main line, if you use separate addresses for each locomotive.
Well, you would IF you MU'd them... but particularly with the newer throttles (Digitrax DT300-400) it's very easy. However, I've done it a number of times _without_ MUing the locomotives, keeping each one on a separate knob of the throttle. It's NOT that difficult to do, and can be a lot of fun... especially when you get to using BOTH of them at the same time in switching!
Dear Sir, Okay! I accept the challenge. I used to see Conrail crews working the Meadville-to-Corry & back run this way, with two GP10's or GP38's, and occasionally old ratty GE's. I will do it with two simple toggle switches...
Start with two ratty GE's pulling five covered hoppers. Stop short of the facing spur into Turner's Mill, in Cambridge Springs.
Uncouple the lead engine. Run her ahead, past the spur, on to an isolated stretch of main line. Shut off the power to that section (a simple 70' stretch with an SPST electrical switch)
Open the track switch. Run the train & cars into the spur, until clear of the main. Shut off the power to the locomotive. (another SPST elec. switch controlling the spur)
Close the track switch, turn on power to the lead ratty GE. Back it up past the spur track switch, open it. Run on to the spur and couple to the train. Turn on the power to the other locomotive. You now have one on each end of the train.
Back the hopper sandwich on ratty GE out of the spur. Close the track switch. Run the train forward, past the spur, until the leading (formerly trailing) engine is in the isolation section from step 2. Uncouple it, and shut off its power.
Back the lead engine, with the train ahead of it, clear of the spur, then deliver the cars you like. If the cars are not blocked nicely, you may have to shuffle about a bit, or leave some of them with the parked engine.
Reverse this procedure to get the lead ratty GE to her proper place.
There you are - it looks complicated, but you will perhaps notice that the DCC'ed way would be just the same, except for throwing the two on-off switches. You would of course also need to isolate the spur and the
70 scale foot section of the main, which is simple enough, and the spur provides a good place to park the Sperry inspection car while the express flashes by. This is certainly no wiring mess -- and I think I deserve extra credit for using these glorified streetcars in my discussion... Cordially yours, Gerard P.