Kind of Shop. APPENDIX A. Showing the relative area of Railway shops for Locomotive Department. The first column gives the percentages in comparison with the erecting shops which is taken at unity (100); and the second column the percentage of the total roofed area devoted to locomotive purposes. *Starred items give area of combined shop for Car as well as Locomotive department. APPENDIX B. Showing the relative area of Railway shop for Car Department. The first column gives the percentages in comparison with the combined area of both Passenger and Freight erecting shops, which is taken as unity (100), and the second column, the percentage of the total roofed Indianapolis Chicago Houston Waterville Panhandle Ry. C. & N. W. Ry. H. & T. C. Ry. Maine, C. Ry, Passenger Coach erecting. Freight Car erecting...... 20 100 20 Paint per both..... 56 24 Machine (iron). Machine (wood & saw mill) Locom. shops used. 38 16 Percentage of erecting shops. Percentage of Percentage of erecting shops. Percentage of Percentage of erecting shops, Percentage of Percentage of erecting shops. Percentage of Percentage of erecting shops. Percentage of used. 13 34 *12% 41 16 31 32 10 29 81 12 41 6 5 2 1 *Includes Cabinet shop. Includes Locomotive paint shop. DISCUSSION. One point of the paper on workshops particularly draws attention, Mr. F. Brown. "How long does it take to repair an engine?" The author states as an average common in America that heavy repairs occupy 90 days, medium repairs 60 days, light and specific 30 days. The speaker must take entire exception to such an average. If the author, in using the word America," means that part of this continent called the "United States," the speaker cannot challenge the statement; but so far as Canada is concerned, in his experience, the figures are incorrect. In any properly designed and organized divisional repair shop, the limit of time for a heavy repair should be 60 days, it being understood that the author, in speaking of heavy repairs, does not include engines "rebuilt." A medium repair occupies about 30 days at the very outside, and light and specific repairs from 7 to 14 days. In main shops of a large Railway Company with proper supervision, the length of time occupied in these different classes of repairs should be very much reduced. A heavy repair should occupy a maximum of 42 days, a medium repair 21 days, and light and specific from 3 to 14 days. Under these circumstances the author's figures for comparative area of erecting shops would be entirely wrong, and careful attention given to the outfit of the machine shop must considerably reduce the necessary area of the erecting shop. To show what can be done in well organized shops, a couple of instances may be given. In June, 1886, an order was given to the Canadian Pacific Railway shops, Montreal, to build some Consolidation engines, which were an entirely new class; a complete set of working drawings had to be made, all quantities got out, materials imported and otherwise prepared, and the first engine was on the road exactly 90 days after receipt of the order. Later on, in June, 1887, the same shops received an order to build some 17′′ x 24′′ road engines, for which all materials had to be procured, some of them imported, and the first engine on the order was on its trial trip 77 days after receipt of that order. These statements are merely advanced to prove what can be done and what is done in Canada, and are not puffing advertisements such as were published lately in an American Railway Paper, stating that in the Altoona shops on the Pennsylvania Railway, a locomotive was "erected" inside of 17 hours. Illustrations of this performance were distributed freely, and the reci Mr. Wallis. pients were asked to place this absurd assertion in a conspicuous place. Practical men know this performance to be utter nonsense, so far as "erecting" in the true sense of the word is concerned. The speaker also desires to ask the author to explain why he calculates on four or five per cent. of his motive power being in the yard, "waiting to come into the erecting shop for general repairs." If the shop is properly designed, where is the necessity for any engine to be kept waiting for repairs? This provision is one which it seems difficult to account for, and it calls for explanation. He was glad to note that the author expressed preference for the "longitudinal" type of running shed, and fully endorsed his remarks in reference thereto. On the Grand Trunk Railway, there were but two exceptions to the circular type of shed or round house commonly so called, both referred to in the paper. The one at Montreal contained five tracks, and accommodated twentyfive engines, while that at Lindsay had four tracks and was designed for twenty engines. The larger of the two with its approaches, iron turntable standing outside, water service pipes, steam warming arrangements, sand house and tool store, cost about $50,000.00 or at the rate of $2,000.00 per nominal engine accommodated. The sheds were built in some degree as an experiment, but from his experience elsewhere with similar ones he had little doubt when he designed them of their being successfully worked. The round house with some advantages had one serious defect. If built of wood with the usual felt and gravel roof, so common in Canada, it was unusually liable to take fire, and he knew of an instance when nine locomotives were burnt almost beyond recognition, it having been impossible to extricate them from the' shed whose exit was controlled by a central turntable. The same defect was also forcibly apparent in case of accidents which occasionally happened to turntables, and he was sure that many Railway officers could recall instances of annoying delays resulting from this cause, which could not have occurred with "longitudinal" sheds and outside turntables. It would also be readily understood that while a round house could only accommodate the specific number of engines for which it was designed, a long shed constructed with the same length of standing room could house a percentage beyond that number, varying with the length of the engines and the number of parallel tracks within it. In severe weather this was an important consideration, and when tank engines formed part of the equipment, additional accommodation of twenty per cent., or say one engine per track, might be obtained. The difficulty mentioned by the author in the arrangement of the engines for prompt despatch did not exist, or at any rate was not felt in practical operation. He thought it likely that the author's estimated cost of $1,000.00 per pit for round house did not include water service pipes, and arrangements for warming and turning engines; but, setting aside the question of first cost, the only advantages which he had been able to discover for that type of shed were those of better light and more convenient location. Skylights were not satisfactory because they were difficult to keep clean, and subjected the roof to unnecessary chances of decay, and it was clear that the distribution of light from side windows was better in a circular shed. As to location, angles or corners were often formed in large yards by the leads of the sidings from the main line, and these corners made convenient sites for square or circular houses, when otherwise the adoption of the long shed might be attended with loss of ground space. In regard to repair shops, he noticed how widely different, on different railways, was the division of the total floor space among the various shops. The tendency seemed to be towards unduly large erecting shops, and this might explain the rather high average given for engines under repairs. The average for the year 1388, for all classes of repairs on the Grand Trunk Ry., was 35 days, but he was sure that this could be still further decreased with the aid of a liberal expenditure in the direction of the machine shop. The division of time as between engines under heavy, medium and light repairs, was somewhat different from his experience, but as the character of the repairs might vary widely in various shops, it was difficult to establish an exact comparison. He thought that 130 days, 12 days and 3 days, was more nearly the average under the heads mentioned, when the heavy repairs constituted for the most part an almost entire reconstruction, and included a new boiler, and perhaps new cylinders, with time allowance necessary for painting and to allow for the delay caused by waiting for materials, a large quantity of which it was not usual to keep in stock. Heavy repairs such as he had indicated would enable an engine to endure three years work, with perhaps an intermediate medium repair, |
