Black smoke vs white smoke

[Bill Baker]

Didn't now whether to post this on the general threads or HO.  Since more people respond to HO I'll ask my question here.

One of my grandsons and I watch "Trains and Locomotives" on TV and the other day they had a program where a 2-8-0 Consolidation was belching out black smoke in one scene and a few moments later the same engine was throwing out white smoke.  My grandson asked me what was the engine crew doing different that made the smoke black one time and white the next.  Well, I've never thought about that and I told him I didn't know, but I know some good friends that do.  So would someone be kind enough to help me on this question?

Thanks, Bill

[Trainman203]

The white "smoke" is mostly condensing steam, more visible in colder weather.

The black smoke can mean that a few shovelfuls of coal have just been been put in the fire box, if a coal burner.  If an oil burner, it can mean that the firman is sanding the flues to clean them out.

On both coal burners and oil burners, black smoke can also mean that the fireman doesn't  know what he is doing. That used to be cause for dismissal on railroads that pinched every penny.  Fireman would also get docked pay for every time that management witnessed the pop valves letting go.

During the depression, firemen would sometimes throw a scoop of coal down to a kid who'd take it home to keep the house warm.  If caught , the fireman would be instantly dismissed.

[rogertra]

Trainman is correct.

Though lots of black smoke is popular with photographers,  on flat terrain and as described by Trainman, excessive black smoke is a sign of poor firing.

Cheers


Roger T.

[brokenrail]

The fireman would be fired if it constantly belched out black smoke.Looking for that gray smoke that means they are running efficient and will use less coal.If coal fired.
Johnny

[Len]

During the depression, firemen would sometimes throw a scoop of coal down to a kid who'd take it home to keep the house warm.  If caught , the fireman would be instantly dismissed.

Not just during the depression, also during the slump a couple of years after WW-II. I was one of those kids, living in Missouri at the time, and the fireman would sometimes "accidentally" kick some coal off the tender while taking on water. We were grateful.

Len

[electrical whiz kid]

We used to walk the tracks and pick up that coal.  I am not sure just how much difference a 7 0r 8 year-old boy made, but the old man never squawked.  Some of the trains screamed through Quincy station, and just past, toward Braintree, there was a slight dip in the right (south-facing) rail, causing the train to lurch slightly, causing coal to slip off of the tender pile.  Oh, the memories...  I tell my grandson sometimes, and he just can't understand...

RIch C.

[rogertra]

The fireman would be fired if it constantly belched out black smoke.Looking for that gray smoke that means they are running efficient and will use less coal.If coal fired.
Johnny

Exactly.  A light grey haze is a perfect fire, at least for a coal fired engine.  That's what I was taught.

Can't comment on oil fired engines as we never had any.


Cheers


Roger T.

[electrical whiz kid]

Roger;
What fuel did the Canadian railroads burn mostly?  I had thought it was a good deal of lignite, but no anthracite.
Rich C.

[rogertra]

Roger;
What fuel did the Canadian railroads burn mostly?  I had thought it was a good deal of lignite, but no anthracite.
Rich C.

Coal in the east, mainly oil out west but coal on Vancouver Island.  Not sure what coal.

However, I learnt to fire in the UK.  All coal.

Cheers


Roger T.

[WoundedBear]

Most of Canada's coal production comes from just 4 provinces, with the majority being out west. Lignite, historically, has mainly been found only in a few mines in Saskatchewan. Bituminous and sub-bituminous coals are Canada's most common types. Anthracite, to this day, was never a big part of our total coal production.

Based on this and a few facts gleaned from some books I have around on Canadian Railways, I would say bituminous was the most common type of coal used on our railways, until oil took over.

Sid

[Trainman203]

With an oil burner, heat waves are a perfect fire.

[rogertra]

Most of Canada's coal production comes from just 4 provinces, with the majority being out west. Lignite, historically, has mainly been found only in a few mines in Saskatchewan. Bituminous and sub-bituminous coals are Canada's most common types. Anthracite, to this day, was never a big part of our total coal production.

Based on this and a few facts gleaned from some books I have around on Canadian Railways, I would say bituminous was the most common type of coal used on our railways, until oil took over.

Sid

Sid.

Thanks for the info.

Interestingly, the CPR at least around Montreal seemed to use a lot of coal from mines served by the B&O.  Photos taken in steam days show a fair number of B&O hoppers in and around engine terminals in Quebec.  Photos of trains coming and going via the QC to and from the USA also show a fair number of B&O hoppers.  Guess it was more economical than  shipping coal from the Maritime provinces.  Hence, my GER is served only by B&O hoppers via the USA connection at Wells River VT. 

Cheers

Roger T.

[ebtnut]

Locomotive fuel was dictated almost entirely by cost and availability.  Coal dominated the east and mid-west becuase it was readily available.  The "anthracite" roads (LV, DL&W, RDG, etc.) burned what was immediately handy to them until the supply began to be depleted in the 1930's and beyond.  The big oil booms in the west resulted in that fuel becoming dominant.  It was mostly what many referred to as "Bunker C", and it was essentially the dregs of the refining process.  It would burn, but it had to be atomized.  It was so thick that many roads installed heating coils in the tenders to keep the oil warm enough in cold weather to flow to the firebox.  To illustrate what a difference availability makes - the SP was famous for it's cab-forward articulateds, which all burned oil.  Except for the AC-9 class, which were intended for service in the Arizona - New Mexico area where local coal was available.  So this class were built as cab-rear locos to burn the local coal.  Another factor - some big cities began passing smoke abatement ordinances which affected the railroads.  Some converted engines from coal to cleaner-burning oil in response. 

[electrical whiz kid]

Sort of a little off centre, but the New Haven, a coal-burner, was subjected to the mandates of the New York City coal-abatement 0rdinances of the 1900's.  That having been done, the New Haven had really started to push electrification on the "west end", from New Haven to GCT in The City.  A big coal-consumer was the power plant at Cos Cob, Ct.  I do not know how much coal was chewed up per month, but I would bet it was plenty.  In one of my books, there is a photo of a big EF-3 roaring past that power plant-a photo of New Haven's greatness all by itself.
East and north of New Haven, as well as on the Maybrook line, coal was the bad boy.  The big coal dock at North Cedar Hill still stands-silent sentinel to bygone days.  And it was BIG!!  Wished I'd been around here 70 or so years ago.

Rich C.

[electrical whiz kid]

Addendum...
The subject of "black smoke" reminds me of yet another photo of a bit 2-10-2 'Santa Fe' type locomotive sitting at the north end of the Middletown, Ct. yard, just totally causing it's own version of a total eclipse-and that smoke was BLACK!  Bet the union BA and the management sat up banging heads long after 6PM on that one...

RIch C.