Ferroequinology Appreciation.

[California Tanker]

This photo on the BBC News website today of the North Yorkshire line during this week's cold snap helped me decide to come out of the closet and advertise my anorakness. All the below are modern photographs of operating locos bar the PA-1.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42705000/jpg/_42705633_northyork_pa416.jpg

A particularly interesting case is that of UP 3985.
http://www.trainweb.org/brettrw/steam/2004/UP398502.jpg

It's the largest operating steam locomotive in the world, and has even been used in revenue freight service on occasion since its restoration in the 1980s. With the recent increases in diesel costs, apparently the oil-burner is proving more viable as an operating locomotive, much to the joy and anticipation of railfans who expect to see it hauling freight more often and excusrion trains less often.

UP has a second 'big-un', this classic Northern.
http://www.uphs.org/Denver%20Photos/GB3.jpg

At the time not to be outdone, SP had its own rival: #4449 may be familiar to Americans as the blue and white steam locomotive at the head of the American Freedom Train back in 1976. It has, of course, since been repainted back in its original Daylight colour scheme, which some argue makes it the most beautiful steam locomotive ever. SP got bought out by UP a few years go, so now UP has all three!
Christmas, 2005.
http://www.brian894x4.com/images/HolidayExpressPhilGilston2a.gif
http://www.brian894x4.com/images/HolidayExpressx003.jpg

(As an aside, there are arguments that the most beautiful diesel ever built was the Alco PA-1 in the AT&SF's Warbonnet scheme. Sadly, none currently exist.)
http://www.toltecimages.com/trains/2258.jpg

Certainly not winning any awards for beauty, but since the A4s hold the steam speed record, who cares, here's the survivor of the class.
http://www.nic.funet.fi/index/railways/United_Kingdom/steam/00047a.jpg

That said, the Brits could build them pretty.
Duchess class:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cumbria/content/images/2006/09/14/duchess_sutherland_01_470x332.jpg

Princess Royal:
http://www.steamtraingalleries.co.uk/image/east_lancashire_rail_022.jpg

Here's the largest preserved Irish one. Name of Merlin.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/85_at_Lisburn_3rd_July_2004.jpg/800px-85_at_Lisburn_3rd_July_2004.jpg

And not to be outdone in the beauty stakes, Canadian Pacific have just restored this Royal Hudson to operating condition.
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b222/siberianmo/Steam%20locos/Hudson06.jpg

Anyone else have any favourites?

NTM

[ceptimus]

Abdul is gonna love this thread! :thumbup:

[Javaman]

I'm just trying to figure out how you can make this thread and not use any of the train smilies!
:train:
:train2:
:untrain:
:trainrek:this one's not really appropriate
:train3:

[wildernesse]

Thomas the train is Irish?!?

[Crumb]

this one's not really appropriate
:hmph:

[Abdul Alhazred]

Abdul is gonna love this thread! :thumbup:

Thanks for the heads up.


... With the recent increases in diesel costs, apparently the oil-burner is proving more viable as an operating locomotive ...



I have questions for California Tanker.

Am I understanding correctly that this is an oil-burning steamer?

What kind of fuel? Bunker C?

[California Tanker]

Thomas the train is Irish?!?

Thomas the Tank Engine. He's English.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/18/Coventry_No._1_%28Thomas%29.jpg/800px-Coventry_No._1_%28Thomas%29.jpg

Not based on any particular class, but a few British railways had made close enough ones.

Here's another British classic: West Country.
http://www.zen71862.zen.co.uk/wallpapers/medium/34027,%20Haye%20Bridge,%2015-10-05.jpg

Also still extant in streamlined version. The Europeans seem to have been much better at preserving their locos.
http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/personal/jon-bowers/02_aug.jpg

Am I understanding correctly that this is an oil-burning steamer?

What kind of fuel? Bunker C?

She was built as a coal-burner, and converted to #5 Oil in 1990.

A lot of the later US large steamers were oil-burners, particularly those on the West Coast. They were a lot less hassle to throw sufficient fuel into the firebox. Most specifically the Cab Forwards, where coal would have been almost impossible.

http://www.toltecimages.com/trains/4294.jpg

NTM

[Abdul Alhazred]

She was built as a coal-burner, and converted to #5 Oil in 1990.

1990 makes sense then.

An oil burner in the UK would not have made sense back in the old days.

[California Tanker]

Umm.. UP3985 is based in Cheyenne, Wyoming. Built in Schenectady, N.Y. The Brits never had anything as large.

NTM

[Abdul Alhazred]

Somehow I got confused by the first caption.

[Dingfod]

I think I read once that the Challenger (UP3985) locomotive could pull more train than four of today's diesel-electric locomotives.

[California Tanker]

Well, that's not necessarily true any more. Its tractive effort can more or less be matched by, say, one of today's SD-70MACs (There was a massive power spurt in D/Es when they converted to AC motors in the early 90s), but Challenger has almost twice as much horsepower. Basically it means it can pull the same total amount, but do it faster.

NTM

[Dingfod]

Faster is right. When Challenger UP3985 visited Salt Lake City a reporter interviewed a retired railroad engineer. He told a story of pulling a train eastward across southern Wyoming. He said when he passed Leroy station, the stationmaster thought he was going a bit too fast so he noted the time and called the Green River stationmaster. They calculated that UP3985 averaged over 100 mph between the two stations, getting the engineer in a bit of trouble (temporarily suspended) because the tracks between there had a speed limit of 80 mph for safety reasons.

That old engineer is the one that said it could pull four times as much as the diesel electrics, I've not looked at the specs. It may have been the case back in his day, back before they converted them to AC.

[Abdul Alhazred]

Four (or more) diesels can be strung together and controlled from the same cab. In effect they become one locomotive.

There are even no-cab diesels for such a purpose.

Also no-cab electrics that run off a diesel.

[Dingfod]

The BNSF railyard here runs remote-controlled locomotives on some 20 or 30 miles of track, some outside of the yard, from Sapulpa and Sand Springs to Broken Arrow.

[California Tanker]

Four (or more) diesels can be strung together and controlled from the same cab. In effect they become one locomotive.

True. But using four (or more) times the fuel, sand, and whatever else. And frankly, they're just not as impressive as a steamer! (Even if they are cheaper and easier than an equivalent weight of steamers)

Of course, you can always cheat and just kitbash.
These DDA-40Xs (UP again) are still the largest diesels ever built, even though they are no longer the most powerful. Basically take two GP-40-2s and splice them together on one frame.
http://www.somewherewest.com/newcajon/Cajon/UP6914Cajon.jpg

There's something about UP, you'd almost think they were from Texas, with all the 'biggest' things. They also had the Big Boys.
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/hotmetal/eastusa/images/usdream.jpg
One of their more unusual classes was the gas-turbine-electric, which was no miniature either.
http://aliennard.free.fr/c&o5001.jpg

That said, the East Coasters produced some monsters too. The Allegheny was the most powerful steam loco ever. Probably still is the most powerful loco ever, period, though I need to check that.
http://www.steamlocomotive.com/bomuseum/co1604-duley.jpg
And for sheer pulling ability, see the Virginian Triplexes
http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/LOCOLOCO/triplex/virgin28884.jpg
100 tons worth of tractive effort from all those driving wheels way back in 1916, compared to about 50 from today's diesel electrics. Unfortunately, the horsepower could not match the pull, which meant that it couldn't keep that haul up at anything much over 5mph.

There are even no-cab diesels for such a purpose.

Called 'B-Units.' Very few are made these days, and those that are are usually conversions off older locomotives. The cost difference between a regular cab loco and a B-unit is small enough that the lack of operational flexibility is not made up for by the slightly reduced cost.

Also no-cab electrics that run off a diesel.

Known as slugs. Usually only found in yards, as their purpose is to increase tractive effort at low speeds: The prime mover in the attached locomotive puts out more power at low speed than the traction motors can use, so they attach basically another four or six traction motors in the slug to draw and utilise the excess power. There are 'road slugs', which are used to get a long train started, but once at speed they are switched off and become dead weight.

NTM

[California Tanker]

They calculated that UP3985 averaged over 100 mph between the two stations, getting the engineer in a bit of trouble (temporarily suspended) because the tracks between there had a speed limit of 80 mph for safety reasons.

It has been noted that the rails have deteriorated to such an extent in Ireland that getting a train from Dublin to Galway was faster a hundred years ago than today.

NTM

[ceptimus]

Have you ever seen a Deltic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_55) diesel electric? Their engines were in the form of a delta with a crank at each corner of the triangle - think three V12s joined at the cylinder heads! And a Deltic had two such engines!

They had excellent performance, but were a maintenance menace.

[Dingfod]

Have you ever seen a Deltic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_55)You mean an engine like this (http://www.craftsmanshipmuseum.com/Tomlinson.htm)?

[California Tanker]

Always thought they were good looking locos, but I have to say, I never knew about the odd internal mechanisms. Very interesting way of doing it. Compound engines like that had been done before, such as with the multi-bank engine of the Sherman tank (Think five Ford V8 truck motors all arranged in a circle around a single crankshaft) but I don't know of any that used three cranks like the Deltics. I do note that they were used in light warships, now I look them up, which makes sense: One crank can be used per screw. Very efficient. I note the Deltics were actually returned to revenue service a couple of years ago for a short period of time.

NTM

[Abdul Alhazred]

Four (or more) diesels can be strung together and controlled from the same cab. In effect they become one locomotive.

True. But using four (or more) times the fuel, sand, and whatever else.

...

Not so. It's not the burning of fuel directly, but the available electricity for traction and weight of the locomotive.

You actually come out ahead with a very heavy train.


That said, steamers definitely have the aesthetic advantage, at least for mainline service. :yup:

[Dingfod]

Speaking of trains, check out this rather elaborate model train setup in Hamburg, Germany. (http://archibase.net/archinews/14281.html)

[Abdul Alhazred]

Here's some way cool BIG railroad stuff that isn't locomotives. (http://www.garlic.com/~tomd/?) :D

[California Tanker]

Speaking of trains, check out this rather elaborate model train setup in Hamburg, Germany. (http://archibase.net/archinews/14281.html)

Heh.

Possibly the greatest model railroad ever was John Allen's Gorre and Daphetid. (Pronounced Gorey and Defeated). Unfortunately destroyed by fire in the 1980s if I recall. However, photos of it still exist, such as here.
http://www.gdlines.com/GD_Galleries/The_Slides/index.html

The equivalent today is George Sellios's Franklin and South Manchester
http://www.horailroad.com/fsm/fsmlayout.html
http://www.horailroad.com/fsm/fsm1.jpg

Some people just have too much time on their hands.

NTM

NTM

[Shake]

I'm just pleased with myself that I managed to figure out this thread title before clicking on it to confirm.

My alma mater (http://www.rpi.edu) has an extensive model train layout (http://railroad.union.rpi.edu/) where I worked as part of my work study for a couple of years. It's not quite as elaborate as what CT posted, but they do a nice job.

My oldest got really into Thomas for a while. We've got a table, lots of track, and many of the engines and cars.

[California Tanker]

Well worth a look are the works of O. Winston Link.

http://www.singergallery.com/assets/managed/photos/ACF22B.jpg

He specialised in night action shots of steam locomotives, may have been the best at the business. What I find really great is that unlike most railroad photographers, the trains are the backdrop, not the subject. Kindof symbolising how much trains are in our lives, even though we don't always notice them.

http://www.edelmangallery.com/link2.jpg

http://www.carolinaarts.com/owlink3-999.jpeg

http://www.singergallery.com/assets/managed/photos/ACF23A.jpg

http://paralemdozero.blogs.sapo.pt/arquivo/O%20Winston%20Link.jpg

http://www.singergallery.com/assets/managed/photos/ACF219.jpg

http://www.soulcatcherstudio.com/images/link_show/Swimming_Pool.jpg

NTM

[Dingfod]

There used to be a Mo-Pac railroad line through the small Kansas town I'm originally from. The railroad pulled out in the early 1970s, the tracks are gone now as well. However, I remember when steam trains ran through the town delivering freight. I remember the hearing the the steam whistle of that once-a-day train late at night, blowing for a road crossing a half mile down from Grandad Bob's old Victorian boarding house of a home. That had to have been in early 1960s.

I loved trains so much when I was a child of three or four, I drew one in pencil all the way across the wall of one upstairs bedroom in the old farmhouse we lived in, smoke coming out of the stack billowing back the length of the train. The caboose was even quite detailed, according to my mother, who said the drawing was so good they never had the heart to erase it. For all I know, it's still on that wall upstairs there. The house was never officially occupied after we lived there and is now just barely standing. About 10 years ago, I was in that house, but climbing the stairs looked a risky venture; I just knew I would be swimming in the rainwater filled cellar at any minute.

[California Tanker]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11668535/

ABOARD TRAIN V150, France - A French train with a 25,000-horsepower engine and special wheels broke the world speed record Tuesday for conventional rail trains, reaching 357.2 mph as it zipped through the countryside to the applause of spectators.

Roaring like a jet plane, with sparks flying overhead and kicking up a long trail of dust, the black-and-chrome V150 with three double-decker cars surpassed the record of 320.2 mph set in 1990 by another French train.

http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/070403/070403_train_hmed_5a.hmedium.jpg

NTM

[California Tanker]

Whoa.. I just saw the video footage on CNN. Watch for the clip taken from a bridge above the tracks. The train goes from 'way over there' to 'under the bridge' to 'a long way gone' in about two seconds, faster than the camera can pan. BBC website makes the comparison that it's about as fast as the max speed of a Spitfire.

NTM