Leo,
I suspect that the use of wood footboards is a carryover from steam days. Many steam switching locomotives had wood footboards. (Keep in mind that a lot of pilots were also wood in earlier steam days.) The wood foot boards were, most likely, oak for strength and were likely rough sawn. As you note, they were inexpensive and could be made and applied in almost any maintenance facility. I am sure that footboards were frequently damaged because of their location. Straightening out or replacing steel footboards was more difficult and expensive and may have required more elaborating tools. As for being slippery, actually wood isn't the worst surface. Wet steel is far more slippery even with some tread surfaces. Knowing how frugal the Q was, wood was the product that made the most sense.
Bill Barber Gravois Mills, MO Thu Dec 1, 2011 6:57 pm (PST)
Been looking at a lot of switch engine photos of late while working on
something. Does anyone have anything on why Q switch engine footboards were
made of wood rather than some form of slip resistant steel even well into the
50s ?
The obvious answer is wood was cheaper to replace than steel and footboards
got bent up a lot. The flip side of that is that (take it from someone
whos spent time on the foot boards) there's nothing slippery than a peice of
wet wood. Remember we're talking about a time period when it was not only
permissable but expected that one would use the footboards to expedite the
work.
Leo Phillipp
__._,_.___
![]()
__,_._,___
|