Re: (erielack) Doubleheaders

["Green Family" <davandli_@_frontiernet.net>]

In following this thread, it's been put forth that doubleheading was
commonly done to redistribute power.  That leads me to ask a "possible dumb
question":

Why couldn't a steam locomotive be moved dead-in-tow behind the lead
locomotive?  There must be a good reason or it would have been done.

Dave Green
ELHS #1366



- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Schuyler Larrabee" <schuyler.larrabee_@_verizon.net>
To: <erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 10:17 PM
Subject: (erielack) Doubleheaders


> Harold Brink asked me, offlist, with reference to the "Photos" thread, the
following question:
> __________________________________________
> Were tandem locomotives common?  If so, where when, etc?  I never saw them
in real life as I recall.
> Although I wasn't everywhere all the time and it was a long time ago.
> __________________________________________
> There were two locomotives on that train in the photos.
>
> I concede I don't know the real answer to this.  Rich Young, you have any
idea?  It does seem to me
> that there are enough photos of double-headed steam (and of course, the
four and five-headed pushers
> up the grade out of Scranton to Ararat) that this must have been fairly
common where warranted by
> tonnage and grades.  But was it an every day sort of thing, or a couple
times a week, or what?
>
> Too obvious to mention, but I'll do it anyway:  We're talking steam era
here . . .
>
> SGL
>
>
> The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
> Sponsored by the ELH&TS
> http://www.elhts.org
>


	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	Sponsored by the ELH&TS
	http://www.elhts.org

------------------------------