railroad books that are inaccurate.BEWARE

[arkansasrailfan]

Look and see where the book was published if in a foreign country don't buy it if it's about american trains, because they can have major flops in them(like calling the 3985 the 1218 or a SD40-2T a SD40-2

[oldline1]

I have over 1300 railroad books and from what I've seen in them there are mistakes made in books written and printed here in the USA. One of the larger publishers frequently has mistakes such as wrong information, captions on the wrong photos and other things that detract from the book and railroad history.

Some of the problem with mistakes in books stems from railfans who "think" they know what they're talking about but actually aren't up to speed on things. You need to research things before writing about them as factual. Now the problem is that these books are getting into the hands of people that will use them as resource material.

Roger

[GP40-2]

Add to that list many parts of Trains.com. There are numerous inaccuracies in the Railroad Reference section. Every single issue of Classic Trains I have seen also is full of historic inaccuracies. Come on, does Classic Trains actually have any editors, or do they just keep reprinting this stuff without even researching the historical, scientific, and engineering accuracy of the facts? Oh well, it seems like most railfans have no interest in real railroading anyway. Kalmbach is just serving it's market; a market that loves to live in a fairytale world of what they think a railroad should be, not what it actually is (or was).

[Lost World]

Beginners should also be wary of purchasing any book on railroading from a major box bookstore (BN, Borders, etc...).  While these books are colorful and full of large prints, they are very inaccurate, vague, and misleading.

[AntonioFP45]

For newbie railfans and modelers I've often recommended the colorful books from Don Ball as creditable books containing good source information.

[J. Edgar]

For newbie railfans and modelers I've often recommended the colorful books from Don Ball as creditable books containing good source information.

 Don Ball Jr.'s book "decade of the Trains the 1940's" is a great reference book, as well as having great pictures, full of great facts and figures about 30's and 40's railroading.....just as anything by Lucas-Beebe is factual

[KansasMike]

For newbie railfans and modelers I've often recommended the colorful books from Don Ball as creditable books containing good source information.

 Don Ball Jr.'s book "decade of the Trains the 1940's" is a great reference book, as well as having great pictures, full of great facts and figures about 30's and 40's railroading.....just as anything by Lucas-Beebe is factual

 

I did notice that Beebe kept refering to Union Pacific challengers as Mallets in the book "The Age of Steam".  Now we all know that a challenger is a simple articulated and not a Mallet. Right??   

[oldline1]

Beebe, while providing us with many enjoyable books with great & rare photos, was  a journalist and more of an artist than a true railroad historian. I'm truly grateful that he and Charles Clegg did record so many steamers and old equipment for us to drool over all these many years. Don Ball, Don Wood, Ian Wilson and many others were not only great photographers but also keenly interested in providing a written historical account of their photos rather than just as entertainment value. Just remember to take everything you read with a grain of salt. Roger

[MOJAX]

How does the book EMD Locomotives by Brian Solomon rate?

[Lost World]

Beebe, while providing us with many enjoyable books with great & rare photos, was  a journalist and more of an artist than a true railroad historian. I'm truly grateful that he and Charles Clegg did record so many steamers and old equipment for us to drool over all these many years. Don Ball, Don Wood, Ian Wilson and many others were not only great photographers but also keenly interested in providing a written historical account of their photos rather than just as entertainment value. Just remember to take everything you read with a grain of salt. Roger

I started out with Don Ball books as well, and echo the above sentiments.  Ball's only fault was that his writing was a bit over the top in certain spots.  Beebe's books are nice, especially for the time they were published in.  Now there was an interesting character--a columnist/gastronome/wine critic who also happened to spend a little time photographing steam locomotives.  Can you imagine the modern food/wine critic at the New York Times spending his leisure time snapping pictures somewhere on the NS mainline?

 I didn't think so...

[J. Edgar]

For newbie railfans and modelers I've often recommended the colorful books from Don Ball as creditable books containing good source information.

 Don Ball Jr.'s book "decade of the Trains the 1940's" is a great reference book, as well as having great pictures, full of great facts and figures about 30's and 40's railroading.....just as anything by Lucas-Beebe is factual

 

I did notice that Beebe kept refering to Union Pacific challengers as Mallets in the book "The Age of Steam".  Now we all know that a challenger is a simple articulated and not a Mallet. Right??   

 werent some of the earliest UP 4-6-6-4's Mallet's known as the "bull moose"'s.....

[KansasMike]

I hadn't heard that name for a 4-6-6-4.

 

[kevikens]

I have found the material put out by the Solomons, both father and son to be superbly accurate, well researched and well written.

[oldline1]

I believe the UP's "Bull Moose" was a 2-8-8-0.

Roger

[MOJAX]

I have found the material put out by the Solomons, both father and son to be superbly accurate, well researched and well written.

Thanks, I just finished Solomon's book GE Locomotives and found it very interesting. Photos are great also. 

[Kurn]

 Beebe,and other rail writers of that era generally called all articulated locomotives "Mallets".Even DPM did on occasion,along with his + sign.Still,Beebes books are wonderful,and no rail library should be without some of them.

[Lost World]

 Beebe,and other rail writers of that era generally called all articulated locomotives "Mallets".Even DPM did on occasion,along with his + sign.Still,Beebes books are wonderful,and no rail library should be without some of them.

There's nothing more annoying than that damnable + sign.  I never noticed DPM use it, but if he did it's probably because he was of English descent.  They're the ones who initiated that nonsense in describing the wheel arrangements of beyer-garrats (spelling?).

[Anonymous]

I have to disagree with Lost World.  I think the + sign, indicating a hinged or entirely separate engine as in the the Beyer-Garrats, clearly sets them apart from the rigid multiple engined locomotives like the Pennsylvania's T1 and T2.  Even the large electrics and diesels can benefit from the the plus sign when the trucks have non-motored axles.

An accurate description of the physical properties of a locomotive should be the logical objective.

Art

[feltonhill]

Yep, a group of UP 2-8-8-0's had the name Bull Moose and looked the part.

PRR had three classes of duplex locos - S1 (6-4-4-6), T1/T1a (4-4-4-4), and Q2 (4-4-6-4). No T2's.

[Lost World]

I have to disagree with Lost World.  I think the + sign, indicating a hinged or entirely separate engine as in the the Beyer-Garrats, clearly sets them apart from the rigid multiple engined locomotives like the Pennsylvania's T1 and T2.  Even the large electrics and diesels can benefit from the the plus sign when the trucks have non-motored axles.

An accurate description of the physical properties of a locomotive should be the logical objective.

Art

Your point is well taken.  I'll agree to disagree!

[Anonymous]

feltonhill is right concerning the T2; PRR didn't have one.  I was thinking there were two versions of the T but it was the Q series that had the cylinders of the rear engine next to the fire box (Q1) which proved unsatisfactory so the second one (Q2) had the cylinders of the rear engine in the normal position, ahead of the drivers, both having the 4-4-6-4 wheel arrangement.

And I heartily agree with Lost World  that there's nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree!

Art

 

[espeefoamer]

While Beebe's books are full of great photographs, his history is to be taken with a grain of salt.

Also the Morning Sun series of color photo books are sometimes not too accurate.

[arkansasrailfan]

One book I'll add is about tourist railroads, and in it the author says that Casey Jones drove the Cannonball Express, he's using a song as a source. I don't think that the IC every had a train like that.

[Anonymous]

What I have read of the Casey Jones wreck indicates that the IC train was called the "Cannonball Express."  The M&StL also had a "Cannonball Express" in the early era.  I wonder if there were others who used that name as well.

Wasn't the plus sign part of a more refined version of the Whyte classification system that used additional symbols to make finer distinctions in wheel arrangements?  I recall that DPM insisted that it was the proper system, but apparently he could not convice most others. 

[Texas Chief]

"Mallet" was the name of the frenchman who invented the articulated steam engine. Therefore, any articulated engine, irregardless of it's wheel arrangement, can be called a "Mallet"!

Dick

Texas Chief

[Anonymous]

 Beebe,and other rail writers of that era generally called all articulated locomotives "Mallets".Even DPM did on occasion,along with his + sign.Still,Beebes books are wonderful,and no rail library should be without some of them.

There are about 4 of his books on the shelf here in town at the college library.

[rogruth]

The Q1 was a 4-6-4-4,the Q2 was 4-4-6-4.

Only one Q1 was built in 1942 #6130.

Twenty  six Q2's were built beginning in 1944 #'s6131,6175-6199. 

Q1 scrapped 1952.

Q2 6131,the prototype, scrapped 1952.

6175-6185 scrapped 1953.

6186-6199 scrapped 1955. 

 

 

[feltonhill]

Anatole Mallet invented the 4-cylinder articulated compound locomotive.  Therefore you need to have all those adjectives to use the term Mallet correctly.  A 4-cylinder simple articulated doesn't really fit the description of a Mallet.

[daveklepper]

The above posting is correct.   The N&W Y's are Mallets, but the A's are simple articulateds.  Challengers, Big Boys, Yellowstones, Allegainies, are also simple articulateds and NOT Mallets! 

[AltonFan]

There's nothing more annoying than that damnable + sign.  I never noticed DPM use it, but if he did it's probably because he was of English descent.  They're the ones who initiated that nonsense in describing the wheel arrangements of beyer-garrats (spelling?).

I don't think DPM's ethnic background (he was Scottish, BTW) had anything to do with the + in articulated wheel arrangements.  IIRC, Morgan was persuaded to do this by Robert LaMessena, an authority on articulated locomotives.  I don't recall why LaMessena insisted on this practice, but he uses it in his own books.

FWIW, diesel builder's plates for a B-B type diesel sometimes have the Whyte Classification 0-4-0+0-4-0.

I remember an old-timer at my local hobby shop once warning me that Lucius Beebe's books have to be used with caution, and told of an instance where the caption described a scene as being one year, but an automobile in the picture was clearly from a later year.