I'm kinda new and a steam dcc guy. Can I assume that an EMD FT-B w/dcc on board is really a diesel loco w/o the loco shell?
An FT-B is a diesel unit the same as a FT-A but has no CAB.
Bob
Quote from: bob39520 on April 04, 2011, 02:16:16 PM
I'm kinda new and a steam dcc guy. Can I assume that an EMD FT-B w/dcc on board is really a diesel loco w/o the loco shell?
No it has a shell. It is an FT-booster unit that is coupled to at least one FT-A unit 99% of the time. It is often coupled to either a second FT-A or FT-B. It can be used to increase the amount of rolling stock that can be pulled.
Quote from: ACY on April 04, 2011, 03:35:51 PM
Quote from: bob39520 on April 04, 2011, 02:16:16 PM
I'm kinda new and a steam dcc guy. Can I assume that an EMD FT-B w/dcc on board is really a diesel loco w/o the loco shell?
No it has a shell. It is an FT-booster unit that is coupled to at least one FT-A unit 99% of the time. It is often coupled to either a second FT-A or FT-B. It can be used to increase the amount of rolling stock that can be pulled.
I have an old model railroad magazine with an article on one road that modified a B unit for an engineer to operate for switching purposes but doubt I could ever find the magazine in the pile I think the fellow did one for his model railroad. It would be an interesting Bash.
Rich
That must be the extra 1%, note I said 99% of the time, because I recall hearing about something like what you mentioned.
Most FT-A's were semi-permanently coupled to FT-A's and perhaps FT-B's but some were built with couplers on both ends and an operator's station next to an additional porthole in the middle. This suggests an unusual modeling project - adding an extra porthole to a an FT-B. Added to the end of an A-B-A-B lashup, it would be sure to elicit comments and questions from friends and fellow modelers. You could explain to them how some railroads used A-B-A sets coupled with draw bars but would occasions add a coupler equipped FT-B when they needed more power for a trip or two. Be sure to point out the extra window which allowed a hostler to move the unit around the yard when not coupled to a cab unit.
It you could imagine sitting in the engine compartment of a large truck, right next to the engine and right in the fumes, and then trying to drive the truck when your vision was limited to a 18" hole cut through the fender, you will know how a hostler felt when moving one of these unit. He stood right next to the prime mover in an unpressurized car body filled with fumes and exhaust. He had a great view out to the side but none to the front or the rear.
the concept of a b unit was not applicable to steam, due to the differences in control systems. basically, the b unit was remotely controlled from the cab of the a unit except in rare instances. diesels were able to be set up so that multiple units could be controlled from the leader. most of the time this was done electrically, but at least one builder used compressed air for this control. on the locomotives i was on board, usually there is a switch which can set an individual locomotive up for lead, trail, or isolate. a b unit would presumably be permanently set for "trail" as the lack of a cab would preclude it operating in the lead or by itself except in an emergency, or for servicing. the b unit was designed to always be used with other locomotives, thus a cab was unnecessary.
all ftb's are not alike. as designed, the ftb was intended to be permanently coupled to an a unit using a drawbar instead of a coupler. this drawbar took up much less room than the coupler did, so the drawbar end of an ftb is closer to the center of the truck than the coupler end. therre were "short" ftb's intended to be permanently used between two a units. these were a couple feet shorter than the coupler equipped ftb's, because there was no need for the extra length for the coupler mounting. at least one railroad, santa fe, modified their ftb's with couplers at both ends, using a special coupler which actually draped over the axle closest to the end of the unit.
railroads found the lack of flexibility inherent to drawbar connected units to be a big disadvantage, and subsequent model of b unit had couplers on both ends. this lack of flexibility would eventually doom the whole concept of the b unit inself. railrroads found that having a fleet of locomotives that could only be used in the trailing position resulted in sometimes not having enough locomotives to run the needed trains, even though there were b units available they could not lead. the ability of any locomotive to be set up for trailing status with the flick of a switch, effectively making them a b unit, then to be just as easily switched beck to "lead" status made the b units obsolete.
Found the magazine with a B unit used as a switcher with engineer and also radio control at a mine some years ago. RMC September 1978. Could be an interesting Bash for someone with a mine spur on their layout. The author did quite a bit of research for this article.
Haysi 1 was the B unit. Do a Google search for Haysi 1.
http://clinchfieldcountry.com/photos/haysi.htm
The B unit question triggered this in my mind.
Rich
And now for the rest of the story.... I bought a CMX track cleaner that recommended driving it with a 4 axle (8 wheel) diesel loco. As my biggest loco is an 0-6-0 switcher, I looked at diesel loco's w/dcc just to drive the CMX. As all my equipment is Bachmann (Spectrum), I checked out their locos and found the EMD B units w/dcc and couplings on both ends that were much less costly than the locos. From what most of you were saying, I guess I could run the B Unit like a loco to push the CMX (this thing weighs a pound in HO). Please advise if I am wrong on this assumption.
Also I want to thank those members who provided much needed (on my part) background on B units. Prior to asking for info here I tried a few Google searches and got very little info.
Bob
an ft a would be a better fit for a steam era layout. or possibly a 45 or 70 tonner. for an ftb, you'd need an fta to go with it.
is the cmx that brass tank car with the pads underneath? if so, my friend has one. we could experiment to see what will pull it, but i am pretty sure that an 0-6-0 tank engine would do the trick.
the electrostatic track cleaner is the "etectrack clean" from miniatronics. is is mounted inside a dummy f7 b. it is completely different than what was described above.
Quote from: bob39520 on April 04, 2011, 02:16:16 PM
I'm kinda new and a steam dcc guy. Can I assume that an EMD FT-B w/dcc on board is really a diesel loco w/o the loco shell?
Hi Bob
Helpful hint. Sometimes you might want a quick answer to a question. Below is what I do a lot.
http://www.google.com/search?q=EMD+FT-B+Unit&hl=en
I have built an extensive library of train information the past few years this way. I store the links for future use and to give to others.
You will also find many links within links.
Rich
Quote from: Doneldon on April 04, 2011, 10:42:38 PM
bob-
You can try the 0-6-0.
Just finished trying my 0-6-0. It didn't even budge the CMX tank car. I'll go with with the DCC EMD B Unit as my prime mover. From the input provided, it should work - just look a little funny.
Bob
it should work - just look a little funny.
Bob
It will look unprototypical, too. Railroads cleaned junk and weeds out of their rights-of-way and from between their rails but they weren't known for polishing their track. So don't sweat the appearance. Just say you're railroad is experimenting with a new microscopic diamond coating which will reduce friction and eliminate wear on the railheads.
-- D