Union Elevated 0-4-4 "Forney" Locomotives in the USA

Class 57 (Locobase 16178)

Data from "The Compound Locomotive of the Rhode Island Locomotive Works, Providence, RI", Report of the Committee on Science and the Arts, [No 1610], 30 January 1892, Journal of the Franklin Institut, Volume 133, Supplement (May 1892), pp. 1 et seq. Works numbers were 1890-1904, 1906-1916 in 1888; 1917-1929, 2005 in 1889.

One of hundreds Matthias Forney tanks designed for rapid acceleration over short distance, this design was similar to most of the elevated engines. It featured a straight boiler over the two driving axles and Belpaire firebox dropped behind the rear driving axle and in front of the bogie truck under the tank. The steam dome was unusually tall and thin, but the stack was still taller.

The 58, which was wrecked at Hudson and Myrtle Avenues in November 1888, was rebuilt by Rhode Island as a two-cylinder compound to test C H Batchellor's intercepting valve; See Locobase 15372. Trials held in October-November 1890 against the 62 claimed a signficant advantage for the compound. One visible difference, according to the FI report, was that while the compound burned fires with a light draft regardless of train load, three- or four-car trains behind the locomotive demanded a sharp blast and heavy fires to make enough steam.

See Locobase 5423 for a more general discussion.

Class 58 (Locobase 15372)

Data from "The Compound Locomotive of the Rhode Island Locomotive Works, Providence, RI", Report of the Committee on Science and the Arts, [No 1610], 30 January 1892, Journal of the Franklin Institute, Volume 133, Supplement (May 1892), pp. 1 et seq.

Although the FI report doesn't say so, this was the first of at least two conversions from the simple-expansion Forneys delivered by Rhode Island to the UE line in 1888-1889 (Locobase 16178). It use a cross-compound setup and an intercepting valve designed by C H Batchellor of the RIW.

The full report is too long even to digest here, but Locobase offers some key differences. According to the report on trials held in October 1890, the compound burned its anthracite coal fires with a light draft on all trains. "Steam was made very easily, the door being on the latch frequently, even with heavy trains, and especially so on light trains." Although the 58 consumed broken lump coal very economically during the trials, the report suggested that pea coal would burn equally well and be cheaper in the bargain.

Its compounding ratio came in below 2:1, which proved to be too low. The 63, described in Locobase 16129, adopted larger dimensions and a more typical compound ratio.

See Locobase 5423 for a more general discussion.

Class 63 (Locobase 16179)

Data from "A Compound Elevated Locomotive", Railroad and Engineering Journal, Vol 66, No 1 (January 1892), p. 16.

Although the R&EJ report doesn't say so, this locomotive may have been a second conversion of the simple-expansion Forneys delivered by Rhode Island in 1888-1889 (Locobase 16178). The first conversion appears in Locobase 15372. In adition to an increase in cylinder volume and weight, the compounding ratio rose to a more typical 2.56.

The firebox heating surface area wasn't given; tube heating surface area calculates to 420 sq ft (39 sq m). Both the grate area and the boiler pressure are estimated.

See Locobase 5423 for a more general discussion.