G Scale Model Train Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,334 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have a Connie and a Annie. I don't know what they were modled after.

My Question is..... Would you ever see those two double heading?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,716 Posts
The Annie is #12 at the Tweetsie railroad. Google Tweetsie and you'll find lots of photos.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
474 Posts
John,
Torby is correct on the Annie. The Colorado Railroad Museum has a RGS #20 that is very close to the Annie. There is also a loco at the Huckleberry RR in Michigan that is similar to the Annie.
The Connie was a small 2-8-0 and ran alot south of the border and on a few islands, but some in other locations. A couple VERY similar locos are in tourist operations today.
Most likely, these would not have run in real life together, BUT REMEMBER, IT IS YOUR RAILROAD, so my theory is do what YOU like!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,195 Posts
JJ, for your consideration:







The prototypes were actually 30" gauge for the Connie and 3ft. gauge for the Annie but the models look pretty good together. You do need wide radii for your curves and the Annie has to be the helper engine but it does work!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
759 Posts
the Annie has to be the helper engine


Not to be a nitpicker or anything but...

Shouldn't the helper be cut in behind the lead locomotive? I was under the impression that train orders were always given by locomotive number, and I know they referenced the lead locomotive number on other trains, which meant that the lead locomotive should never change (unless given new orders).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,716 Posts
Don't you love all those moving parts in the Annie's valve gear? Great to watch!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,468 Posts
Kenneth, I don't know anything about train orders but when I rode the Cumbres and Toltec behind a double header, the lead loco took off and headed back to Chama after we topped Cumbres pass.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
In the case of the D&RGW, I believe that orders were either given by train number in the case of a regularly scheduled train or by road engine number. For example the San Juan ran as train 115 eastbound and train 116 westbound regardless of the locomotive in charge of the train. What I have seen on a narrow gauge forum with regard to D&RGW train registers is that all concerned locomotives were noted with the road engine (second loco) listed as the loco of record with a helper also listed. In cases where helpers ran light engine before or after the regular train, they were ordered as extras. The case mentioned with two locos on the point was normal in the case of many two engine trains on most passes. There were trains that had two locos on the front, but freights often had helpers located mid train or just in front of the caboose. The split helpers allowed trains to cross bridges without stopping to uncouple helpers to avoid overloading the bridges. Pushing on the caboose was not done because of the risk of pushing right through the caboose if the lead loco should slow down suddenly. I hope this helps.

Paul
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,960 Posts
Seeing doubleheaded locomotives on a narrow gauge line would have been very much the exception. So, in terms of the original question, the answer would most likely be not in normal, everyday service. The D&RGW was probably the most common exception to that, but they had the steep grades and long trains that--really--no other narrow gauge operation had. Having said that, if your railroad has the resources to burn twice the coal, pay twice the crew salary, and use twice the water to move a handful of cars from point A to point B, then have at it. It does look cool to have two locos on the point.

Later,

K
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
61 Posts
The Waynesburg and Washington R.R. double headed all freights out of Washington PA bound for Waynesburg PA, the helper would cut off at the top of the Summit (Summit Siding) and BACK all the way back down to Washington. Of course the W&W R.R. never used anything bigger than a 2-6-0.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,578 Posts
Posted By East Broad Top on 11/25/2008 1:04 PM
Seeing doubleheaded locomotives on a narrow gauge line would have been very much the exception. So, in terms of the original question, the answer would most likely be not in normal, everyday service. The D&RGW was probably the most common exception to that, but they had the steep grades and long trains that--really--no other narrow gauge operation had. Having said that, if your railroad has the resources to burn twice the coal, pay twice the crew salary, and use twice the water to move a handful of cars from point A to point B, then have at it. It does look cool to have two locos on the point.

Later,

K

Of course, if they NEEDED two locomotives, and did NOT want to "burn twice the coal, pay twice the crew salary, and use twice the water to move a handful of cars from point A to point B", then, by gum, the crew could DOUBLE the grade, even if it was 25 miles of curving uphill, burn MORE than twice the coal, twice the crew salary, and twice the water to move a handful of cars from point A to point B, in addition to taking the shipment time more than double for the move of a handful of cars from point A to point B, and tying up the single track grade AND the passing sidings at the top AND the bottom for an extended length of time, why naught?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
318 Posts
Before the K27 arived, the D&RGW would typically tripple head 2-8-0s on its freights going east out of Chama.

The C&TS will stil oftenl double head K36 locomotives for its passenger trains on the same grade.

They have to uncouple one locomotive to cross Lobato trestle and then recouple because of the load restrictions on that bridge.

Many Narrow Gauge railroads are mostly downhill when carring loads but it they had a large uphill grade (like the 4% one east of Chama) they would use whatever it took to get the loads over the hill.

Also common was one on the front, a mid train helper and one on the rear. This was done to avoid over loading the bridges.

For snow removal a tripple headed consist behind the snow plow was also not uncommon.

Stan Ames

www.tttrains.com/largescale
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,334 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Well what I ended up doing it re building the bridge and re grading the grade. But I will still double head them anyway.

Mabye I will get another Connie.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top