# MTH 4-6-0 CamelBack



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

A new arrival to round out my steamer fleet. It currently has PS/1, that's getting removed in favor of TMCC with Cruise Control and RailSounds 4.

The Camelback has an interesting history, apparently they weren't all that popular, the engineer is sitting in a bad place.


----------



## novice (Feb 2, 2011)

Sweet looking engine - I like the 2 tone colors


----------



## gc53dfgc (Apr 13, 2010)

Ed is going to be jealous of that because it's a Jersey Central.


----------



## Zeke (Feb 22, 2011)

Nice looking engine, gunrunner. Enjoy!

I'm curious as to why a steam engine was ever designed this way? What was the supposed advantage?


----------



## tooter (Feb 26, 2010)

Hey John, 

That's very nice driver detailing on your camelback. I have the baby version of yours... 










...with not so nice driver detailing.  

Greg


----------



## gc53dfgc (Apr 13, 2010)

Zeke said:


> Nice looking engine, gunrunner. Enjoy!
> 
> I'm curious as to why a steam engine was ever designed this way? What was the supposed advantage?


If I recall correctly they either (A) had two individual boilers. (B) was a normal 0-4-0 given more whieght drives, and length added on to it. or (C) the more likely is it was an attempt to increase visibility as opossed to being at the rear of the engine so switching could be done better and people didn't run over things as much but this doesn't actually work fully as the boiler is still in dead center of them.


----------



## Zeke (Feb 22, 2011)

gc53 - Interesting. Thanks for the explanation!


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

Zeke said:


> Nice looking engine, gunrunner. Enjoy!
> 
> I'm curious as to why a steam engine was ever designed this way? What was the supposed advantage?


I suspect this is the reasoning.



> *Safety problems*
> 
> The camelback was not a very safe design for its crew. The engineer was perched above the whirling siderods, vulnerable to swinging and flying metal if anything below should break. The fireman, meanwhile, was alone and exposed to the elements at the rear. The Interstate Commerce Commission banned further construction of camelbacks, but gave exceptions to allow some to be completed. In 1927, further orders were completely prohibited on grounds of safety.
> 
> Many camelbacks were converted into end-cab locomotives. the advent of the mechanical stoker and its associated underfloor machinery placed cab floors and tender decks higher, and from that vantage point the engineer could see ahead.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

choo choo said:


> Hey John,
> 
> That's very nice driver detailing on your camelback. I have the baby version of yours...
> 
> ...


Looks like you used hot water to wash yours, it shrunk! 

There are a lot of moving parts on the siderods on this locomotive.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

novice said:


> Sweet looking engine - I like the 2 tone colors


I like the new avatar, wonder where you got that idea.


----------



## novice (Feb 2, 2011)

gunrunnerjohn said:


> I like the new avatar, wonder where you got that idea.


LOL - thanks for noticing - of course it came from my benefactor - YOU!!!


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

novice said:


> LOL - thanks for noticing - of course it came from my benefactor - YOU!!!


Here I thought we had cured you of that habit.


----------



## novice (Feb 2, 2011)

Working on it - sometimes though, a hammer is the only way to get things done 

The right tool, for the right job


----------



## tjcruiser (Jan 10, 2010)

That's too funny!!! Love the av!

TJ


----------



## Big Ed (Jun 16, 2009)

gc53dfgc said:


> Ed is going to be jealous of that because it's a Jersey Central.



Now why would I be jealous?


I had one for a while now.:thumbsup:


----------



## gc53dfgc (Apr 13, 2010)

big ed said:


> Now why would I be jealous?
> 
> 
> I had one for a while now.:thumbsup:
> ...


Ah but two engines is always better than one engine.:laugh:


----------



## gc53dfgc (Apr 13, 2010)

choo choo said:


> Hey John,
> 
> That's very nice driver detailing on your camelback. I have the baby version of yours...
> 
> ...


Isn't that an 0-6-0 camel back or am I missing the front wheels?


----------



## tooter (Feb 26, 2010)

gc53dfgc said:


> Isn't that an 0-6-0 camel back or am I missing the front wheels?


Yes, it's an 0-6-0 and the center drivers have no flanges so that it can negotiate extremely small radius curves...









Greg


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

Actually, the MTH Camelback will do O27 curves, and all it's drivers have flanges.

*choo choo*, it sure looks like the center drivers have flanges in that picture.


----------



## tooter (Feb 26, 2010)

Yeah, they do. Here's a better photo... 










Greg


----------



## pookybear (Feb 3, 2011)

Hello everyone,

The Camelback locomotive looks the way it does because of a simple
design feature. The firebox. The coal used in the general area of the 
NorthEast is hard coal (Anthracite coal). This type of coal unlike soft 
coal (bituminous coal) found elsewhere. The problem and the benifits of
hard coal is it is low in Volatiles. Only has around 7 to 12% by volume.
Bituminous coal has anywhere from 20 to 40% by volume.

This makes hard coal very clean burning. But also makes it slow burning.
This should also be read long and cool burning as well.

So when Anthracite coal from Pennsylvania was used in Steam Locomotives
a larger firebox was needed then in conventional engine design. This was to make up
for the cooler and slower burn of the hard coal. More coal was 
needed in order to produce the same amount of heat for steam production.
The firebox became so large as it left no more room for the controls. These
were moved forward to the location of uncommon Camelback design. This
is also why one does not see Camelbacks in other parts of the country.

Because of safty issues with the Camelback design, and the lack of 
communication between the engineer and ashcat the design was abandoned.
Newer advances such as air injection into the firebox made this possible
and still being able to use the hard coal. Or the change over to oil fired
SteamLocomotives.

I hope this helps out.

Pookybear


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

choo choo said:


> Yeah, they do. Here's a better photo...
> 
> 
> Greg


It's really odd, the previous shot really makes it look like those have flanges.


----------



## tjcruiser (Jan 10, 2010)

Pook -- Excellent background info on the camelback ... "necessity is the Mother of Invention!"

John -- I agree ... Greg's first photo sure tricked the eye!

TJ


----------



## tooter (Feb 26, 2010)

I took the flanges off for the second photo, 
and then put them back on. 

Greg


----------



## tooter (Feb 26, 2010)

Hi Pooky, 

Thanks for the fascinating background on camelbacks. Your knowledgeable input is always appreciated here. :thumbsup:

Greg


----------



## Big Ed (Jun 16, 2009)

gc53dfgc said:


> Ah but two engines is always better than one engine.:laugh:


Your right one can never have too many CNJ Engines a few of my N, CNJ's,













gunrunnerjohn said:


> It's really odd, the previous shot really makes it look like those have flanges.





tjcruiser said:


> Pook -- Excellent background info on the camelback ... "necessity is the Mother of Invention!"
> 
> John -- I agree ... Greg's first photo sure tricked the eye!
> 
> TJ


Yes CNJ had a few Camel backs. Good little workers.:thumbsup:
So what if they came apart once and a while.


Greg got out his lathe and took them off.:laugh:
Sure looks like it in the one picture.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

He must have a "ringer" locomotive that he trots in to confuse us.


----------



## gc53dfgc (Apr 13, 2010)

big ed said:


> Your right one can never have too many CNJ Engines a few of my N, CNJ's,
> 
> View attachment 9667
> 
> ...


I could understand 2-3 CNJ RS-3's but a whopping 5 on a 4x8!


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

gc53dfgc said:


> I could understand 2-3 CNJ RS-3's but a whopping 5 on a 4x8!


I count six unless that one on the left isn't a CNJ.


----------



## Zeke (Feb 22, 2011)

> I could understand 2-3 CNJ RS-3's but a whopping 5 on a 4x8!


Well, if you're gonna do it, might as well do it right! :laugh::laugh::laugh:


----------



## Big Ed (Jun 16, 2009)

gc53dfgc said:


> I could understand 2-3 CNJ RS-3's but a whopping 5 on a 4x8!


That layout is not 4x8 but a 35"x48".



gunrunnerjohn said:


> I count six unless that one on the left isn't a CNJ.


Yes there are 6 the one on the end is a "weathered" one the nephew did. The one with the wheels off the rail.


----------

