sgriggsWithout doing a small research project involving skimming many books on UP motive power history, I would say that the railroad upgraded their physical plant at some point in the early- to mid-1930s. Rail or bridge ratings must have been a limiting factor up to this point.
Makes perfect sense. Thanks!
sgriggs All of the UP locomotive types I checked on Steamlocomotive.com up to the 1936 CSA-1 Challengers had axle loadings under 60,000 lbs. This included the UP 4-12-2, the predecessor 4-10-2 3-cylinders, the 7000 class 4-8-2's, and the 2-8-8-0 'Bull Moose' compound articulateds. It wasn't until the CSA-1 Challengers in 1936 that allowable axle loadings were increased to 66,000 lbs or so. The 800 class 4-8-4's, debuting one year later, also had axle loadings around 67,000 lbs. Without doing a small research project involving skimming many books on UP motive power history, I would say that the railroad upgraded their physical plant at some point in the early- to mid-1930s. Rail or bridge ratings must have been a limiting factor up to this point.
All of the UP locomotive types I checked on Steamlocomotive.com up to the 1936 CSA-1 Challengers had axle loadings under 60,000 lbs. This included the UP 4-12-2, the predecessor 4-10-2 3-cylinders, the 7000 class 4-8-2's, and the 2-8-8-0 'Bull Moose' compound articulateds. It wasn't until the CSA-1 Challengers in 1936 that allowable axle loadings were increased to 66,000 lbs or so. The 800 class 4-8-4's, debuting one year later, also had axle loadings around 67,000 lbs.
Without doing a small research project involving skimming many books on UP motive power history, I would say that the railroad upgraded their physical plant at some point in the early- to mid-1930s. Rail or bridge ratings must have been a limiting factor up to this point.
Sounds quite plausible.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.