Great Northern steam locomotives that went to Portland,Oregon includes 2-8-2,2-10-2,4-6-2,4-8-2,4-8-4,and Mallets(they also go via SP&S to Portland,too)
My suggestion is to contact the GNRHS about your question. I am not familiar with GN steam as I came off the NP as of the 1970 merger.
The track between Seattle King Street to Vancouver, WA was NP, but the GN and UP also operated on that track and the SPS owned the track between Vancouver, WA and Portland, Oregon.
Ed Burns
Retired NP-BN, etc, clerk from Northtown (Minneapolis).
A proposed streamlining of the GN 4-8-4 designed by Baldwin (1939):
Note the smokebox cover was not streamlined. A mediocre streamlining design IMO.
Source: rrmuseumpa.org
Jones 3D Modeling Club https://www.youtube.com/Jones3DModelingClub
Jones1945 A proposed streamlining of the GN 4-8-4 designed by Baldwin (1939): Note the smokebox cover was not streamlined. A mediocre streamlining design IMO. Source: rrmuseumpa.org
It appears to read "Northern Pacific" to me...
Obviously following the SP GS-2 of 1937.
Peter
This is strictly speaking not streamlining but 'streamstyling' (or as some people say, semi-streamlining) -- many people don't acknowledge a formal difference, but I do.
In all probability that smokebox front could easily be made as 'streamlined'-looking as the Canadian Pacific engines, with little more impact on shop servicing; in fact, such a cover would facilitate adoption of one of those Frankenstein's-monster-appearing 'Selkirk front end' smokebox fronts a la Niagara, which for all their industrial awfulness provided immediate advantage for a number of high-utilization maintenance operations, while retaining the smooth 'moderne' appearance the public was supposed to respect.
I didn't think too much of the little 'shiny areas' left unscribbled to show the putative gleam. Not exactly Otto Kuhler grade thinking. I suspect this is a relatively quick 'concept sketch' to show one degree of streamlining; somewhere, there are others in a set that include more radical nose treatment, etc. and the rough difference in price, weight, and distribution associated with each. This might include something like the CP/D&H recessed headlight (in appropriate flameproof can inside the box!) which could be inserted into a cone-shaped door comparatively easily (just like the GS-3, perhaps??) with a baffle or plate at the rear to keep cinders and excessive gas heat out... L&N did this on the cheap, and I suspect Baldwin could do no less.
I see a potential problem in that the top of the boiler appears to be 'handwaved' rather than carefully streamlined for smoke-lifting effect. That's a lot of money, shiny cleading arrangements, and complex-curve skyline casing for what might well turn out to be little to no practical effect, or even deflection of gas or steam into the line of view or even, as with the T1, the cab ventilators.
How many GN Northerns and Mountains went to Portland OR.
M636C It appears to read "Northern Pacific" to me... Obviously following the SP GS-2 of 1937. Peter
Thanks a lot for pointing it out, Peter. A careless mistake was made when I read the keyword "Portland" and "Northern." I double-checked https://rrmuseumpa.org; it is a drawing of a proposed semi-streamlined "Northern" of the Northern Pacific instead of the Great Northern, as you can see on the tender in the drawing. A good chance for me to review things of two railroads that I am not familiar with. Great Northern's 4-8-4, Class S-1 and S-2 had a much different appearance compared to Northern Pacific's Class A. It was a drawing from 1939, so you are probably right that the "styling" was inspired by SP's GS-2 and proposed for NP's A-3, not sure if it is also related to the 1939 World Fair or just a trendy thing that NP also wanted to try. I think NP's A-3 looked good enough without unnecessary streamlining; their A-4 looked even better:
Overmod This is strictly speaking not streamlining but 'streamstyling' (or as some people say, semi-streamlining) -- many people don't acknowledge a formal difference, but I do. In all probability that smokebox front could easily be made as 'streamlined'-looking as the Canadian Pacific engines, with little more impact on shop servicing; in fact, such a cover would facilitate adoption of one of those Frankenstein's-monster-appearing 'Selkirk front end' smokebox fronts a la Niagara, which for all their industrial awfulness provided immediate advantage for a number of high-utilization maintenance operations, while retaining the smooth 'moderne' appearance the public was supposed to respect......
In all probability that smokebox front could easily be made as 'streamlined'-looking as the Canadian Pacific engines, with little more impact on shop servicing; in fact, such a cover would facilitate adoption of one of those Frankenstein's-monster-appearing 'Selkirk front end' smokebox fronts a la Niagara, which for all their industrial awfulness provided immediate advantage for a number of high-utilization maintenance operations, while retaining the smooth 'moderne' appearance the public was supposed to respect......
Frankenstein's-monster-appearing! I believe It was not easy to handle those steam engine with a wide boiler and smokebox when a designer was trying to streamlining them, CP's Selkirk or even the Royal Hudson were two examples (they looks fine), another one is the PRR K5, as we discussed on other platform. The K5 was much more powerful than K4s, and the weight of the streamline shrouding probably could have slightly improved their T.E, but it wouldn't look good given that the 3768 was considered plumpy.
L&N's streamlined 4-6-2 used to power the South Wind had a mediocre styling but still not as worse as this one:
I guess AB&C changed the smokebox nose with something that didn't look like a lampshade.
Jones1945Frankenstein's-monster-appearing! I believe It was not easy to handle those steam engine with a wide boiler and smokebox when a designer was trying to streamlining them
Here's an example for your collection of the front that went with a Selkirk, on one of my favorite things:
https://www.steamlocomotive.com/whyte/2-8-4/USA/photos/NYC-9401Color-A-2-002a.jpg
Suitable for framing ... and hoo boy, did it get framed!
Advantage of the conical smokebox door is that it can be essentially a 'bolt-on' for a flat door/perched headlight setup, and my general disgruntlement with the 'fat' appearance of the GS3 as built would likely be solved if the larger NP headlight had been incorporated in the 'look' ... and indeed it's that look that's being invoked.
I think the L&N Pacific was a homebuild, so the shop economized a bit on their conical door fabrication cost. Suspect it is relatively thin material fitted around the existing light rather than a Whole New Cast Door, as there certainly wouldn't be ash and smoke running up inside around an insulated and sealed 'can' for the light (and all the cost and service fun that would imply!)
Personally, I don't know why such a piece couldn't be spun even in those days, or even postformed after being welded as a cone. But it's added cost and specialized equipment and supplies...
Overmod Here's an example for your collection of the front that went with a Selkirk, on one of my favorite things: https://www.steamlocomotive.com/whyte/2-8-4/USA/photos/NYC-9401Color-A-2-002a.jpg
NYC's 2-8-4 were some stately engines, but the "tiny" smokebox door always reminds me of a cat smiling face. It is a good thing though. I think NYC and PRR's engines looked much better without the smoke lifter. A Mohawk:
Overmod Suitable for framing ... and hoo boy, did it get framed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHhXZjUCB1c
Jones1945https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHhXZjUCB1c
Ye GODS look at the suspension characteristics and lack of damping on that Lincoln! And we all thought that was perfectly normal in the Seventies!
It did get better, later. But I had to put truck-rate springs and very much more capable damping in mine before it behaved right...
Overmod Jones1945 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHhXZjUCB1c Ye GODS look at the suspension characteristics and lack of damping on that Lincoln! And we all thought that was perfectly normal in the Seventies! It did get better, later. But I had to put truck-rate springs and very much more capable damping in mine before it behaved right...
Jones1945 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHhXZjUCB1c
I saw almost all fancy American car bouncing like that in old Hollywood movies. Yes, around the 1970s. It actually added some dramatic effect to the film though bouncing like this every time you stopped the car at a red light might lead to gastrointestinal disease or other bloody accidents due to inappropriate activities in the car.
Lincoln? Somebody say Lincoln? And bouncing cars?
Time for another musical interlude...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R7l7nDuj1o
But that's not a Lincoln, just a Lincoln motor. The suspension was still largely Model A...
See here: "I thought it was a flame by the way it was a'comin..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ub9nQ0YVCg
and the sequels ... of which that was one.
wanswheel, I think, found the link to the original car. But there were more. In fact, I'm glad to see that the idea has continued...
I think of the flathead V-12 as being the N&W class A or Allegheny of the automotive world ... one and a half eights with better inherent balance.
I doubt that there is a Model A in the video unless the stripped down car began life as one. Every Model A that I saw or rode in had few pronounced curves in the body and had visors above the windshields. and the radiator caps and gas caps (right in front of the windshields) were quite visible.
Johnny
I'll tell you what man, no-ones ever going to write songs like that about a Pious, whoops, excuse me, Prius.
And I'm sure Johnny would tell us there's a lot of people still in mourning over the demise of the Model A!
DeggestyI doubt that there is a Model A in the video unless the stripped down car began life as one.
Johnny, we discussed the historical car (and the history of the Hot Rod race songs 'in order'), in a thread a few months ago. Here's a later video that appears to show it:
Frankly, in my opinion it's a shame to 'over-restore' it like that, even if there's a long and respectable tradition of perfected craftsmanship in parts of the rod world.
Model As (and Bs with flatheads) were frequent subjects for hot-rodding 'conversion' as they were dirt cheap (in fact, often abandoned as 'worth too little to scrap') when young kids started to want to 'roll their own'.
One thing was to transplant in a more powerful engine, and then carefully tinker with it ... and proudly show off your work and your priorities by leaving the hood off. Who cares if it's 'streamlined' -- there's no substitute for cubic inches, as the rodding maxim had it.
Relatively big jump again in the early Fifties as high-powered OHV V-8s (which were short enough to fit in a Model A chassis relatively easily) began to become readily available. The whole '32 Vicky/"T-bucket body thang became established as a hot-rodding trope, much as the '57 Chevy has.
But the point of the original song was a bit like the Nash Rambler in that other song, where the idea that a 'rocked' Ford racing a Mercury would be passed as if standing still by ... an obviously much less capable chassis ... adds irony and more than a little hyperbole.
Second gear, my foot!
Flintlock76I'll tell you what man, no-ones ever going to write songs like that about a Pious, whoops, excuse me, Prius.
If Johnny Bond can write a song about hypersonic hot-rod racing, then I can make one about... postmodern equivalents to it. There are, in fact, two tracks this could take, one for 'ricers' and one for ... postmodern 'green' transport.
(Of course the whole thing gets less funny when you realize what you'd get with a hot-rod race between two Teslas in Ludicrous++ mode, considerably faster than anything with a passenger seat and pistons... and arguably a hybrid version with that level of performance is easily developed, see the Fisker Karma.)
Hold my beer...
Overmod Deggesty I doubt that there is a Model A in the video unless the stripped down car began life as one. Johnny, we discussed the historical car (and the history of the Hot Rod race songs 'in order'), in a thread a few months ago. Here's a later video that appears to show it: Frankly, in my opinion it's a shame to 'over-restore' it like that, even if there's a long and respectable tradition of perfected craftsmanship in parts of the rod world. Model As (and Bs with flatheads) were frequent subjects for hot-rodding 'conversion' as they were dirt cheap (in fact, often abandoned as 'worth too little to scrap') when young kids started to want to 'roll their own'. One thing was to transplant in a more powerful engine, and then carefully tinker with it ... and proudly show off your work and your priorities by leaving the hood off. Who cares if it's 'streamlined' -- there's no substitute for cubic inches, as the rodding maxim had it. Relatively big jump again in the early Fifties as high-powered OHV V-8s (which were short enough to fit in a Model A chassis relatively easily) began to become readily available. The whole '32 Vicky/"T-bucket body thang became established as a hot-rodding trope, much as the '57 Chevy has. But the point of the original song was a bit like the Nash Rambler in that other song, where the idea that a 'rocked' Ford racing a Mercury would be passed as if standing still by ... an obviously much less capable chassis ... adds irony and more than a little hyperbole. Second gear, my foot!
Deggesty I doubt that there is a Model A in the video unless the stripped down car began life as one.
Wow! So there really IS a "Hot Rod Lincoln," and there it is! Cool! Oh so cool!
Mod-man, like yourself I'm not a fan of over-restorations either, but I do make exceptions on occasion, and the "HRL" would have to be one of them. Besides, it's not too far over the top. Looks good, very good indeed!
That's a lucky guy who could afford to buy it. Must be nice to have money...
Very interesting discussion indeed, I think I found a new topic that I am really interested in. Why there wasn't anything like this in the railroading world? Was there a billionaire (yes, a billionaire was wealthy enough in the "good old days") or a group of people who hot rodded a retired steam engine in a private railroad? The most wonderful case that I could consider it as a hot rodding in the railroading world was the transformation of C&O F-19 to the C&O L-1 and NYC's Dreyfuss engines. I see the PRR S1 was a hot rodded version of Baldwin's T1s, which was built in advance for the World Fair (I believe this theory), but all these engines were not intentionally modified for FUN and private use.
Jones1945Was there a billionaire (yes, a billionaire was wealthy enough in the "good old days") or a group of people who hot rodded a retired steam engine in a private railroad?
None ... and if you think about it, anyone with the necessary wealth would just go ahead, spend a fraction of the amount necessary to do that and just buy control of a whole real railroad, and arrange locomotives for it. Many fewer problems that way.
Consider also the decreasing rate of acceleration, and the essential nature of near-perfect line and surface, as you get up to high speeds. Maybe a Texas oilman could arrange for 100 miles of near-flat land for this ... or build roughly parallel to the rocket-sled track out West ... but there are far more fun things to use the money on.
The most wonderful case that I could consider it as a hot rodding in the [steam] railroading world was the transformation of C&O F-19 to the C&O L-1 and NYC's Dreyfuss engines.
490 is still one of the more significant industrial assets in this country, for that reason.
The Dreyfuss engines are essentially 'production' versions of a more significant project: the hot-rodding of a J1 first into the Commodore Vanderbilt and then a test bed for roller-bearing lightweight rods.
I see the PRR S1 was a hot rodded version of Baldwin's T1s, which was built in advance for the World Fair (I believe this theory) ... [/quote]
By most measures the T1 was a rodded (and at least nominally improved) version of the S1: it had the high-speed mods and inherent attention to lightening that were appropriate for a true high-speed engine. Very few of its 'competitors', including any of the Hudsons, were really in that league; you'll notice as notable an authority as Kiefer adopted the same principle for his high-speed railroad in the mid-Forties, instead of 'another Hudson design'.
Of course I qualify the above statement because the best example of hot-rodding on a railroad wasn't involved with steam ... or, more than circumstantially, with diesel either. It was M497
(Be sure to watch the video and read the linked references at the end)
Overmod ......Of course I qualify the above statement because the best example of hot-rodding on a railroad wasn't involved with steam ... or, more than circumstantially, with diesel either. It was M497 (Be sure to watch the video and read the linked references at the end)......
......Of course I qualify the above statement because the best example of hot-rodding on a railroad wasn't involved with steam ... or, more than circumstantially, with diesel either. It was M497
(Be sure to watch the video and read the linked references at the end)......
How could I forget the Black Beetle! The nose of it should have been kept like that after they removed the jet engines. : ( -->
Btw:
Source: Public online archive of the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania
While you are bringing up the various things that would become the Metroliners ("Railroading's answer to the DC-6", "Speeding America into the Fifties") you should also look at the nose involved in the 'follow-on' high-speed version of the SPV-2000.
I still think it is highly regrettable that the explicit 125mph version of these cars were not sold; much of the ultimate reason for their 'failure' involved the use of the APU to keep the traction power of the main engines available for acceleration to high speed.
I don't much care for the 'final' version of the nose as marketed -- but there sure were possibilities!
Overmod While you are bringing up the various things that would become the Metroliners ("Railroading's answer to the DC-6", "Speeding America into the Fifties") you should also look at the nose involved in the 'follow-on' high-speed version of the SPV-2000. I still think it is highly regrettable that the explicit 125mph version of these cars were not sold; much of the ultimate reason for their 'failure' involved the use of the APU to keep the traction power of the main engines available for acceleration to high speed. I don't much care for the 'final' version of the nose as marketed -- but there sure were possibilities!
The nose reminds me of the movie "The Big Bus". It definitely looked futuristic 40 years ago...... 40 years! Time flies!
From: http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1614381
This thread may have set a record for the quickest derailment...
It only took until the second reply and never looked back.
Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!
Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter