Anomalies of Whyte's (Wheel Arrangement) System

[michaelstevens]

[8D]
Thanks IRONROOSTER for posting "http://www.spikesys.com/Trains/loco_cls.html" in response to another member's question on the subject.
[:)]
It served to remind me of anomalies with the system, which have bothered me since I was a trainspotter, as follows;

Diesels and Electrics (e.g. A1A - A1A, 1Co-Co1, B-B etc.) are self contained and carry their own fuel (diesels anyway).

Garratts (e.g. 4-6-4 + 4-6-4) and Tank engines (e.g. 0-6-0T, 2-6-4T etc.) are also self contained and carry both their own fuel and water.

Yet all of those "Mountains", "Big Boys", "Alleghenies", "Pacifics" etc. require a tender (to carry their fuel and water), which is not designated by the Whyte system.

Now that I think about it, I recall that back when I was a trainspotter; we (and BR) did used to add the term "tender engine", to avoid confusion.

Comments anyone [?]

[Anonymous]

The "T" at the end of a steam locomotive wheel arrangement (0-6-0T) indicates it is a Tank locomotive. If the "T" is not present, it is a locomotive with a tender.
This only applies to Steam Locomotives since the locomotive is "permanantly" connected to the same tender with a drawbar.

For diesels and electrics, the Whyte system does not mean much to me. I mostly go by their model designation GP40, GG1, SD40-2, etc.

Some years ago, Trains Magazine decided to start using the "+" when using a Whyte system designation for steam locomotives. I don't think it went over too well, as we're back to using 4-6-6-4 instead of 4-6+6-4 or 2C+C2 for a Challenger. My preference is for not using the "+" (4-6-6-4) as that is what I am used to seeing.

Dale B.

[BR60103]

The Whyte system works when everyone is really familiar with the locos being described. When there are oddities, the system does fall apart a bit. I don't think it was really intended to differentiate between articulated and solid frame divided drives (PRR's 6-4-4-6 or whatever).
The LNER had a streamlined Hudson (apparently) but it was a 4-6-2-2 because the trailing wheels were 2 separate trucks.
And a number of people do add a "T" to the end of a Beyer Garratt.

[AltonFan]

But a Garratt has a truly unusual wheel arrangement, e.g. 4-8-4+4-8-4. No tender locomotive I can think of has such a wheel arrangement, hence the "T" designation is superfluous.

OTOH, one finds 4-6-4T and 4-6-6T engines that are not Hudsons or Baltics or "Super Power" but are actually 4-6-0s with the tender supported by a trailing truck. Duplex drive locomotives such as those used by the Pennsylvania and Baltimore and Ohio are also designated 2-6-4-4 or 4-4-4-4, without any indication that they are duplexes rather than conventional locomotives.

It is good to remember that the Whyte system was developed before the heyday of articulation, "Super Power", or Beyer-Garratts.

Interestingly enough, on their builder's plates, some diesel electric locomotives have the designation 0-4-0+0-4-0 for four wheel truck units.