Most of us working stiffs out in the field did not use engineers language while going about our daily chores. After 42 years on the railroad, I still look around at the crowd I'm in, before uttering "friction bearings". Thats all I ever heard them called.
Chet French Dixon,IL
--- In STMFC@..., "Mike Brock" <brockm@b...> wrote:
Charlie Vlk says:
Colloquial usage is just as important as correct technical
manufacturer
designations from a historical viewpoint.
Perhaps. IOW, from a historical viewpoint, mistakes, erroneous
conclusions
and misuse of terms is as historical as correct conclusions and
proper use
of terms. OTOH, when one is standing out in -10° weather in
Chicago...as
shown in Ball's Decade of the Trains 1940s...checking wheels, wind
blowing
at 25, one might not worry about using the correct engineering
terminology
but use, instead, terms that he knew his fellow workers understood.
One
MIGHT even use non RR terms or words not found in most dictionaries
but
those which his fellow workers were well acquainted with as well.
Possibly
as it got colder, more of these words were used. There is no doubt
that
engineering and operational environments use, in many fields,
different
terms to describe the same thing. The STMFC is probably more in
tune with
the engineering side, being more driven by design and development
than
use...although both apply. Happily, it's not -10° here so I'm
inclined to
use engineering terms. However, during an op session...now that's a different story.
I have to chuckle about this at times, however. No less than Ralph
Johnson,
Chief Engineer for Baldwin Locomotive Works, refers to non roller
bearings
as "solid bearings" and "friction bearings" on the same page [
185 ] in his
book The Steam Locomotive. Maybe he was assuming that both
