วีดีโอ

It's right across the street from Yates Cider Mill. The canal used to run right by the mill.

It's possible. A lot of these earlier steam engines never bothered with condensers, though.

why not? lake water wouldn't be as bad as sea water, but still. on the steam ship i work on the vacum/suction from the condenser also gives 1/3 the engines power

When was that engine made? Is it a historic, or fairly modern, steam ship?

would be a very leaky ship if the bilge pump needed to be on all the time and be powerd by the main engine. you would also need start the main engine if you wanted to pump out blige water in port or have second smaller pump just for that. I will have to ask the engineers if you need the condensors in and out pumps to be on if you are just running the bilge pump for a moderate amount of time

​@Industrial_Revolution SS Bohuslän built in 1914 with a triple expansion steam engine And Färjan 4 built 1920 also triple expansion. No idea when the engine was designed, I know Bohuslän has more tuned up version of a Cargo ship engine

I'm not surprised. Cars are easy. Locomotives are more challenging.

@@Industrial_Revolution Locos are swapped at this location.

@royreynolds108 makes sense.

Gee... I wonder where they got a name like that. I wonder if there's any locomotive names that have funny stories behind them, then they stuck. The closest I know of is the Big Boy.

Put enough water in them and they're an interesting place to take a canoe or kayak. I've been able to do that a couple times.

For Russian trains, yes. Guess there's no way Russia can drive their trains across the Pacific and put them on our rails.

@@Industrial_Revolution 🙂 No such way is necessary when the locs are already/still in the USA. As is/was the case with these locs...

Some people have suggested pulling this one back out of the park, restoring it, and putting it back into service, making it an even better educational tool.

Thanks! I love finding these things, too.

I think there still is, just upriver from the dam. Right in the center of town.

There were two breweries, Carlings, right by the bridge, and the much older Geyer Brothers at the top of the hill north of downtown.

Horrible for fish? I haven't seen it at low water levels, but it's probably pretty impassible. It looks like the concrete is lower coming down the center, so as water levels drop, the channel will get more and more narrow, but I'm sure there's limits to how far it's usable for fish. From a human aesthetics point of view, the rock layout never really compares to natural rapids. I assume you've seen it low?

@@Industrial_Revolution yeah..I used to live nearby. With low water levels all you see is alot of rock…no way fish can get up it.

I guess spawning is more of a spring thing, so low water shouldn't usually be too much of an issue for them.

Yep, I've been up there. The mill there is good, too. Toledo has a lot of impressive metroparks.

I hadn't thought about the option to double-gauge the lines, but you're right. They're too close together for that to work.

@@Industrial_Revolution It is the usual game with Russia: everything is a bit different so it does not fit, like caliber 152mm instead of 155mm.

Thanks for the great info! I've been hoping someone in the UK would see this and tell me they had some still running. If I can I get this channel to at least start breaking even, financially, I need to get over there to film so much stuff. The Industrial Revolution happened everywhere, but stationary steam and railroads were definitely born there, and you're right, there's still a lot left.

There was definitely good money in coal for quite a while. It started dropping around WWII and has has ben falling ever since, mostly due to economic reasons. Did he come over due to mining? I know a lot of people came from the UK for that since they were more experienced, both in coal and in hard rock mining in the UP for both copper and iron.

Glad you enjoyed it. Once you know what you're looking for, there's pieces of canals and railroads everywhere. When I was shooting the Clinton & Kalamazoo Canal video, I asked someone in Canal Park, located at the end of Canal Road, if they knew anything about when the last remains of the wooden canal locks had been taken out (within the last 20 years or so) and they didn't even know there was a canal there. I haven't spent much time off-trail in Cuyahoga Valley National Park, but I have heard there's some nice waterfalls there. Need to get down there when the deerflies aren't trying to carry me away. Probably headed back to Tinkers Creek this fall.

@@Industrial_Revolution Next time in the area feel free to contact me and my kid and I can show ya off trail spots

Thanks!

Know if any of them are still around?

Suppose they didn't let you take it out for a test drive, either?

I haven't heard what they're putting in up there, but the way that dam was removed is definitely NOT the ideal method of dam removal. Rock ramps are a great way to make a dam fish-friendly and, as far as I can tell, nearly failure-proof. Another good solution that fully maintains the reservoir above is something like they did at Argo Dam in Ann Arbor, in cases where the concrete part is, itself, still solid.

What I heard about Brunel's train was that, although it was far better by nearly every measure, the extra costs were just too much to take. It cost twice as much to build railbeds and the extra width meant a bridge or tunnel that would hold two tracks before would now only hold one, more than doubling those costs. In the end, money won.

The actual gauge was 7 ft 1/4 inch.

The first big oil rush was in Ohio. Not really where you'd expect these things, is it?

Sounds like part of the Miami & Erie Canal?

​. You're partially right. The Miami-Erie Canal ran from Toledo to Cincinnati. Those locks near Columbus were part of the Ohio-Erie Canal. 🤔😉

@JayYoung-ro3vu yep, you're right. Straight south of Toledo, but both canals headed pretty far west from their northern ends. Looking at the canal map, it's odd no one ever made an east-west connector from Columbus, although I suppose you're already so close to the Ohio River from there it's probably not worth it.

You know, it's weird. I've got plenty of sources claiming full driver replacement while others are claiming just tires. I'm wondering if some went one way and others went the other, especially since it looks like there were a few, different locomotive manufacturers making Russian Decapods, but not necessarily all at the same time. Maybe one did tires and another did drivers? Something that'll take more digging.

@@Industrial_Revolution the age of steam has the mid-continent railway museum’s #401 it has center blind drivers ( flangeless tires ) on it and the tires are wider then the wheels

I've never made it to the Age of Steam, but I've wanted to get there for quite a while.

@@robertdoench6237 Blind (flangeless) driver tires are always wider than the wheels so they will stay on the rails through the sharper curves with the long solid wheelbase.

@@royreynolds108 yes I know this but the flanged tires where wider then the cast wheel by several inches

That one was Baldwin, but it looks like a few, different companies may have built them, according to Wikipedia. I've never heard mention of any frame changes needed. Next time I find one, I'll be trying to get a camera around behind the wheels to answer that question, as well as the new wheel vs just new tire question that many people have also asked.

Definitely a lot running there. Might have more running in Britain than in the States.

@@Industrial_Revolution - according to American visitors I've spoken to when working on preserved British railways, there are way more steam trains *running* over here than in the whole of the US. If you look at this list, it's tragic how the great majority are just static exhibits: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_preserved_locomotives_in_the_United_States

@jackx4311 Happen to know if any of the British ones are still using water troughs/track pans? I know they were very common there at one point.

Thanks! The algorithm appreciates the comment :) I'm glad you're finding it interesting, too!

Have you seen my canal lock video? th-cam.com/video/IrdzYxckVcI/w-d-xo.html

Glad you liked it! I've definitely run into some new channels that way, myself.

In some areas, maybe. Mostly, no. A fully-loaded canal boat doesn't have much clearance in some of the more shallow areas of canals, so going deeper often isn't an option. If you're running empty, it'd be possible. In the case of this, particular boat, they do have a combination of things. They intentionally raised the canal level, and removed all the ballast and seats from the boat, just to get it to float high enough they could launch it into the canal. Just after I shot the video, they started reloading ballast by pumping water into the bottom, and also reloaded the benches onto the boat, all while letting water out of the canal to get it back to normal levels. All of that takes a while, and when I walked by 3 or 4 hours later, it still wouldn't quite fit under the bridge, but it was much closer.

They were US-built specifically for export to Russia. Most never made it there.

Well, it wasn't an issue for the non-drivers, since they're mounted on bogies, anyway, which are mounted on center pins. For drivers, going wider would have required moving all the pistons steam lines, reversing gear, etc, outward. Easier than moving inward, but still not trivial. To move in, I don't know if they had to change anything on the frame or not. Remember that these were made in the US, where they were used to working with standard gauge at that point, so the frames may have been built for it and may not have needed much alteration. At the museum, they told me they only changed the wheels, so I wonder if the original, 5' gauge wheels had spacers or extra-wide hubs to cover that extra 1 3/4". Next time I see one, I'll try to get a camera around behind the wheels, if I can.

@@Industrial_Revolution cheers, it would be interesting to know. Logic would dictate that if they were originally intended for 5’ gauge then the frames would have been spaced further apart on the original design. Changing that spacing would be simple, as the frame stretchers could have been made smaller. However, it would have been an expensive modification to change the cylinder block casting, assuming it was a single piece casting.

Well the cylinders didn't move in this case. Next time I see one of these, I'm going to try to get a camera around behind the wheels.

When I went to look for this video, youtube reminded me that I'd already seen it :) There's been a lot of questions about regauging, so I'll probably do a video about that after I've done more research on it.

More recently, I've heard Europeans commenting that it also prevents them from invading other countries that weren't part of USSR.

Back then, the bottom of that dam was as far as they could go upstream. Now, they can keep going. They do stock the river now, including some at Frankemuth. Not sure if they stock upriver of there or not.

It's gone through a lot of things in the last, what, 50 years it's been there? I remember when they opened it, and the whole thing was a working grist mill, with flour and other "grist mill like-stuff" sold on part of the first floor. Then they took over the whole first floor for a gift shop, then a coffee shop. I was up there again a few weeks ago and they're a huge, new building next to it, and attached, for the new place. Zender's owns it, so they don't really have to immediately make money off it. The mill may have been better off moved out to Grandpa Tiny's Farm (a small, living history farm a few miles away, just outside of town).

If you've ever seen wheels being transported, wheels and axles tend to be a single component, even today. Fortunately, those are pretty trivial to swap, and you're only looking at 1.75" on each side or, worst case, just replace the whole bogie assembly. Not a big deal, since those would attach the same everywhere. The drivers were the challenge, since they have to connect to all the running gear located JUST outside the wheels. In the states, 50 years earlier, after the civil war, a lot of locomotives had to be regauged to make them wider, to get up to standard gauge, which is much easier, since you could just add spacers to move things out a bit, but you can't really grind down 1.75" of frame at every connection point to move things in. There's been a lot of questions on this, and I'm not an expert at regauging, but it sounds like it'd be a good topic for a video if I can find info on it. I suspect there's probably enough info on the post-civil war regauging to work with. I'll add that to my topic list.

@@Industrial_Revolution Many railroads in the South up to the end of the War Between the States were gauged 5 to 6 feet; so regauging would have been making the tracks narrower not wider. An interesting tidbit: the GENERAL and the TEXAS from The Great Locomotive Chase fame are still in existence and are still to the gauge of the Western & Atlantic RR gauge of 4 ft 9 inches. The W&A was and is still owned by the State of Georgia(. It was leased to the L&N and now the CSX Corp.

@@royreynolds108 I think I'm going to do a regauging video about the post-Civil War era. Need to do a bunch of research before I can do that one. The Decapod is certainly not the first time regauging has ever happened, and there's various ways to do it.

Actually, if no one had told me about it the first time I was at the museum, I'd have never noticed. A couple people here in the comments have mentioned who cares, though. Some lines used raised frogs on the outside of switches, etc, and these would cause problems for those extra-wide wheels when they ram into them. Otherwise, you just have to pay attention to it when you change the tires out, which should be a big deal.

That would seem easier, wouldn't it? I've never heard a reason for it, but as a guess, running a long, relatively thin rod at 90 degrees to the direction of torque, with all the power directed through that rod, would be more likely to bend and/or break. Someone else here in the comments may know for sure.

For nearly everything, yes. The one place that it's more complex is the drivers on steam locomotives. You want the connecting rods right up against the drivers, rather than running longer pins to connect them, and moving the rods, pistons, etc, all in is not so easy.

After the US Civil War, railroads and locomotive works got good at changing railroad gauge.

Since there were so many being produced, I assume there was some dual-gauge (at least) track laid to a port, where they could be loaded onto ships. There were others produced at 5' gauge, too, like the Panama Canal mules, which were built in the US and shipped to Panama. Russia did build some beasts of steam locomotives. They just added more drivers to distribute the weight better. More non-articulated drivers does limit your curves more, but lets you save money on the tracks. Biggest I found is the AA20, a 4-14-4 locomotive, although only a couple were built.

@@Industrial_RevolutionIndeed, although as far as I know, only a single AA-20 was built, and it was a failure.

@Lucius_Chiaraviglio I think I read they planned four, but only built two. I can't imagine it handled curves very well.

@@Industrial_Revolution Wikipedia says just 1 was built. And it had terrible trouble with curves and switches. Although I wonder if it would have worked on the Union Pacific (assuming you could re-gauge it to Standard Gauge, which may be a bad assumption)? The Union Pacific's 9000 class 4-12-2 locomotives had fairly long and successful careers on the flatland parts of their track.

@Lucius_Chiaraviglio There's a lot more complexity than people realize when it comes to driver size, number, articulated or not, etc. I'll be making a video or two on this. The thing I don't know is why they didn't put blind (flangeless) drivers in the center to better handle curves

Well, considering the new Bolshevik government surrendered to the Germans, the Allied Powers were a bit annoyed with them. And what critical infrastructure did the US destroy? Was building hundreds of locomotives and thousands of trucks for the Soviets during WWII part of that plan to destroy their infrastructure?

Actually it was not the U. S. who did not wish to make delivery. The Russian credit line was exhausted by removal of support of the U. K. and France, and would not be extended unless the Soviets continued the fight on the Eastern front.

@@brucereynolds7009 I also seem to remember reading that the Bolshevik government refused to pay the debts of the Imperial government.

@SynchroScore wouldn't surprise me.

Must coming straight from the new book by Medinskiy.

Na, just be sure to get a deposit up front if there's a revolution coming.

It's been pointed out recently that it also prevents Russia from taking their trains into out countries to invade.

It is a fact that at the countries that border Russia, if you travel by train, and wish to continue by train in Russia, you get out of the "host" country train, walk across the border and get into a Russian train. And yes, done for defensive purposes to prevent invasion.

@davidrubin8228 not sure, outside Europe, how many international passenger lines run. In the states, you want to take a train from Chicago to Toronto, you take a train to Detroit, cross the border by bus, then get on a Canadian train to Toronto. Freights can cross, but not passenger trains.

The 5-ft gauge is an American design. At the time the railway between St. Petersburg and Moscow was designed and built, there was no gauge standardization anyway. You can't even say that a rail network existed in Europe.

@xandervk2371 5' was in the US and UK before that. The Tsar, upon recommendation of a committee established it as the Russian standard in 1843. No idea how long it took them to re-gauge all their lines.

Thanks!

I'm hoping someone knows how common those frogs were. You're the first to mention just machining down the wheels a bit to deal with it, though. Now that you mention it, you're right. You should be able to easily take off that extra 1 3/4" of width from the outside up a bit. How tall are the problem frogs? Just an inch or so? I don't think I've ever seen one.

@@Industrial_Revolution Self-guarding frogs are still very prevalent on industrial and yard tracks where speeds of less than 15 mph are used. The risers for the wings or ridges that make them self-guarding are about 1 1/2 inches higher than the running surface and are slightly wider than the normal wheel width on standard gauge. I don't think there is enough metal to remove to make the tires narrow enough to traverse a self-guarded frog and leave enough to clamp onto the wheel center if there would be any left at all. These locos had a lower axle loading than most 2-8-2s but because of the extra driving wheelset, they were more powerful. That meant they were well-suited to branch lines and railroads with light rail in the track as long as they could negotiate the curves. This was not long after the Panama Canal had been finished and a number of the construction locos from there were brought back and regauged in the same manner. The Panama Railroad and the construction railroads for the canal were 5-foot gauge. Most of the construction locos were 2-6-0s. The Panama Railroad was standard-gauged not long after the KCS got the concession to operate it just a few years ago.

@royreynolds108 funny you mention the Panama Canal. I have a video coming up on one of the original mules in a few weeks. That amount of metal is the same reason to question only the tires being replaced. That's 1 3/4" overhang on the inside with some pretty thin metal.