Southern: long hood forward, short hood forward? Why?

ModelRailroadForums.com is a free Model Railroad Discussion Forum and photo gallery. We cover all scales and sizes of model railroads. Online since 2002, it's one of the oldest and largest model railroad forums on the web. Whether you're a master model railroader or just getting started, you'll find something of interest here.


R

RexHea

RAIL BENDER
After trying to find a some factual information about this, I wised up and contacted the Southern Railway Historical Association. Although I haven't specific dates, I think you will find it interesting as to the real reason for the bi-directional scheme of short hood or long hood forward.

Copy of text from email:
Most all of the Southern’s road units were bi-directional. In other words, the control stand could be used in either a long hood forward or short hood forward orientation. Most of the time, the long hood was designated the front of the locomotive, but this varied by model. The most common reason mentioned for this configuration is safety, as in the event of a grade crossing accident, the long hood acts as a barrier protecting the crew. However, the main reason from the railroad’s perspective is the cost savings of not having to turn the lead unit to face the front of the train.
 
[runs for cover]As an undercover L&N fan, I always just figured the SRR guys didn't know the right way to run them... [/runs for cover]
anim_peep.gif
 


OK. I still don't get it. If the unit was bidirectional, why did having a high short hood provide any more crew protection than a low short hood? I can't imagine that the relatively small amount of extra sheet metal did anything to protect the crew. On the contrary, not having the forward vision of the low short hood made it more likely that a crew wouldn't see an obstacle in time to stop or take to the ground, as the case may be. Running long hood forward actually increased the danger to the crew because their forward vision was even more limited and they were behind the fuel tanks. In a really serious collision, the fuel tank was likely to split open and ignite and those flames and fumes would be carried back toward the crew. Running short hood first puts the fuel tanks behind the crew.

Having the locomotive control stand bidirectional makes sense in terms of not having to turn the loco. What doesn't make sense is paying extra for all the high short hoods. The Southern and N&W were the only two major railroads to do this, which means they either knew something every other Class 1 in the country didn't or it was just an ingrained practice with no real safety merit. I vote for the latter. :)
 
Jim, to paraphrase the email, the common but inaccurate belief was that it was for safety to run the long hood forward. In actuality, it was to keep from turning the loco, not safety. I wonder why you mostly saw long hood forward on the main, unless it was a crew preference. confused:

I am with you in believing that a long hood forward would be less safe because of the restricted view and heavily relying on the fireman to watch that side. However, I'm not sure if seeing something coming into a crossing earlier would still give you time to stop the train in any way. I would guess the tale got started either by crew members believing the company was watching out for there safety or by MR's who thought it made since to them. Heck who knows where all this stuff starts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rex,
Yes, I agree with idea that long hood forward wasn't really a safety practice. However, I think crews do believe it since I very commonly see NS units running long hood forward. I'd guess that it's 80% of the trains down here.

I still don't get the high short hood. Why did Southern and N&W pay extra for this and one else did? It makes no sense in light of the previous explanation. Why intentionally decrease crew visibility if it doesn't add to safety?

I also agree that seeing a grade crossing accident coming rarely allows the train to stop but it allows the engineer to go into emergency and the crew to get behind collision posts if it's seen early enough. Even a few extra seconds can reduce train speed enough to keep the engine from derailing and killing or injuring the crew. I know of no studies or statistics which prove that the low hood and big windshield helps to reduce crew injuries or deaths but it seems intuitively likely to me. And I still don't understand the high short hood. I've never known railroads to pay for something without a regulatory requirement or perceived need and I haven't seen any reasonable explanation for the extra cost of the short high hood.
 
Jim, I too would like to know that answer. I guess that I should join the historical society to be able to access the information easier. It took a week to get the long/short hood answer.
 
RexHea said:
Jim, to paraphrase the email, the common but inaccurate belief was that it was for safety to run the long hood forward. In actuality, it was to keep from turning the loco, not safety. I wonder why you mostly saw long hood forward on the main, unless it was a crew preference. confused:

I am with you in believing that a long hood forward would be less safe because of the restricted view and heavily relying on the fireman to watch that side. However, I'm not sure if seeing something coming into a crossing earlier would still give you time to stop the train in any way. I would guess the tale got started either by crew members believing the company was watching out for there safety or by MR's who thought it made since to them. Heck who knows where all this stuff starts.
Click to expand...

Rex/Jim :

The safety reason was the one quoted to me by family members, (cousins), who worked for the SRR out of McDonugh, Ga. years ago. One was coach super until Amtrak took over. The other was an engineer on a Macon run.

They were also the ones that told me about the dual/bidirectional control stands in some locos.

As for the "real reason" for the high hoods, we may never know. Could be something as simple as "asthetic continuity" from their early "high hood" ALCOs and GP's. Unless the SRHS has access to board meeting minutes where this was decided, (and they may well have access :D), they may not know. (Yet).
 
RexHea said:
Jim, I too would like to know that answer. I guess that I should join the historical society to be able to access the information easier. It took a week to get the long/short hood answer.
Click to expand...

Rex;

There are/were two Southern historical societies. Are you gonna join both?:):rolleyes:
 


Yeah man...not, not hardly. It's that there is so much information that gets confused or twisted around, I need to start getting some solid research sites.;) :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The way I have always understood the short high hood is that for a unit to be bidirectional unit. In other words to be able to run long hood forward you had to have a high short hood. Even though I have never seen a loco running long hood forward, I always thought this was a really cool thing to do, and that's part of the reason I do model Southern.

Just my $.02
-Smoke
 
The high short hood has nothing to do with it. Traction motors run just as fast and strong in one direction as the other.
 
Smoke, other railroads with low short hoods also have bidirectional control stands so there's nothing I can see that makes a high short hood necessary for bidirectional control. I've seen many UP low short hood GP-20's and 24's running long hood forward on transfer runs when there was no place to turn the engine. I'm actually inclined to believe Carey's speculation that Southern and N&W believed the locomotive looked better with the hood being the same height on both ends. It seems as logical as any other explanation I've heard.
 
RS3's and Long hood forward

The NYC ran the long hood forward because the Rut Milk had so many grade crossing accidents that they felt the crew would be better protected. It ran late at night and only a few grade crossing had lights. There is a F at the head of the long end which stands for Front.

NYC_George
 
Last edited by a moderator:
High short hood

Here is one reason why diesels had high short hoods :-

The long hood of a locomotive is usually about as tall as the cab roof in order to fit the large prime mover and the exhaust equipment. Originally the short hood of the locomotive was the same height, which is referred to as a high-nose or, confusingly, high short hood. This was originally done to avoid union conflicts, as the high nose ensured that two crewmen (one on each side of the cab) were required in order to see both sides of the track.[citation needed] After this issue was resolved, the height of the short hood was reduced to increase visibility, creating a low-nose or low short hood locomotive. Some locomotives that were originally built with a high nose were later modified to have a low nose. Lately it has become common to make the short hood not only lower but also full-width, creating a wider nose which is sometimes referred to as a safety cab.

and here's another reason :-

Road switcher (a.k.a. hood unit) diesel locomotives generally have one short hood and one long hood, with the cab near, but not quite at, one end of the locomotive. While the long hood contains the diesel prime mover and ancillary equipment, the short hood's contents have been more variable with time.

In early road switcher models such as the EMD GP7, the short hood contained the steam generator for heating the cars in passenger service. Radio equipment has also often been housed in the short hood; also a common resident is a lavatory for crew use.

The short hood's primary function is to set the cab back a little from the front of the unit to provide protection for the crew in collisions such as grade crossing accidents. Modern locomotives often include reinforcements, such as a collision post at the front of the short hood, in order to increase this protection.

There have been three major variations in short hood design over the life of the hood unit type on American railroads, which extends from 1949 until the present day. The first road switchers were provided with high short hoods, which were the full height of the locomotive, and gave visibility only through windows at the sides of the front of the cab, in a manner similar to a steam locomotive. The high short hood was good for crew protection, and gave lots of space for equipment. Visibility was better than a steam locomotive's, but still limited; the engineer could not see across the locomotive's nose and had a large blind area there, being unable to see anything reasonably close on the opposite side of the locomotive.

Soon, the low short hood gained prominence. Like the high short hood design, it was narrower than the locomotive, giving good visibility forwards and down, but it was cut off at a level just below the engineer's windows, with extra front windows installed so that the driver had about a 270 degree field of vision, only cut off by the long hood behind him. Apart from a few holdouts like the Southern Railway, the low short hood soon became popular, and eventually the high short hood option was deleted.


Cheers, Simon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.




Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)

Back
Top