He thought that I answered the question about the B&M Berkshires, but it was you, Overmod. You're up!
Mr. Klepper said you were up, Backshop...
... while you're thinking of a good one, here's a quickie: sticking again with 2-8-4s, what class has the most of their tenders remaining in preservation?
It's actually Overmod's turn.
1. Backstop gave the correct answer with the B&M' Berks with the unusual front vecause of the Coffin heater.
2. The AMC Birks surely were based on the Erie's.
3. I've understood the P&LE's to be a sop to Alco, as well as Keifer.
4. Before Backstop asks the next question, or with it, can someone do the legwork and post data?
'
This has been an enjoyable conversation. While others' favorite steam locomotives are Northerns, Mountains, Hudsons, Challengers and Big Boys, I've always liked the Berkshires and "double Berkshires", the Yellowstones.
.
I see the site is 'cutting didoes' again, multiple-posting without warning, delaying typing by up to fifteen seconds, and randomly losing the cursor location (perhaps we should start calling it the 'curser' again as we do so much of that trying to post now...)
B&M, with that wonderful shrouded Coffin feedwater heater and headlight underneath -- Loving Reaper on wheels...
You can't really invoke the AMC Berks without mentioning their most significant predecessors, the first true high-speed Berkshires. (The A-1 was really just an improved 8000, and didn't truly take advantage of the higher horsepower inherent in Super-Power -- more interesting, the same was true of some of the early 4-8-4s, like the design the ATSF actually called 'Heavy Mountains'.)
The first real 2-8-4s as we know them were on the Erie, and they were really just as amazing as the AMC engines.
The A2as were badly misunderstood -- I personally believe they were a 'sop' to Kiefer, to let him litter one last batch of kittens. The only problem was that they were forced on the P&LE, which had just become aware of how very effective even first-generation diesels were for their operations.
They are a misunderstood design -- people think that with 63" spoked drivers they were as regrettably slow and heavy as the 'original' 2-8-4s with that driver diameter. They would be wrong -- for example, there is video of them working in Indianapolis during their 'resurrection' that shows a remarkable capability for acceleration... even in reverse gear.
The real thing that killed them was dead storage in the Pittsburgh area. Like so much other wonder power of the 1940s they were built with advanced alloys and light-as-possible construction, and they rotted away as quickly as MP54s and GG1s when not fully attended...
Staying with 2-8-4s:
The originals were the Boston and Albany's (New York Central System).
Afgter their sucsess, a different railroad received some with nearly duplicate specifications, but had a difference in one feature that made a radical differenced in appearance.
Provide the essential facts:
Name the second railroad.
Driver diameter, boiler pressure, weight-on-drivers, and other information you wish to provide,
The difference in the feature that made a big difference in appearance.
As a bonus, main characteristics of the highest 2-8-4 development, C&O, NKP, W&LE, and of the last and lighter 2-8-4s for the P&LE when part of the NYC System.
Mr. Klepper is up. He had the wheel arrangement and the subsidiaries.
rcdrye I think Backshop is up on this thread. I owe one for the other one.
I think Backshop is up on this thread. I owe one for the other one.
RC, do you wish to ask the next question, or should I. Your answer was also correct in every respect.
rcdrye P&LE was never fully integrated, even in the Penn Central years, and ended up independent during the Conrail takeover.
P&LE was never fully integrated, even in the Penn Central years, and ended up independent during the Conrail takeover.
An interesting note about TH&B: while their passenger power famously cam from NYC (the Hudsons), its two 2-8-4s most certainly didn't. As I recall, these were touted as being large, modern Canadian construction at the time they were built. (Although IIRC there was some business about C&NW drawings having to be rushed up to MLW to get the locomotives built in time...)
I suppose they were technically leased. The A-2a's were retired by the P&LE. The NYC system moved stuff around as needed, expecially towards the end of steam. CCC&StL retained its corporate existence until the PC merger, but it was operationally integrated much earlier, maybe 1930 or so. Michigan Central and Boston & Albany had some independence until about 1960. P&LE was never fully integrated, even in the Penn Central years, and ended up independent during the Conrail takeover.
Overmod But according to Polarowitz some of the A2a locomotives (A-2-A on P&LE) were resurrected to work in the Indianapolis area (where they performed surprisingly well but were so debilitated from improper storage that they couldn't be kept running). Is Indianapolis on a NYC subsidiary?
But according to Polarowitz some of the A2a locomotives (A-2-A on P&LE) were resurrected to work in the Indianapolis area (where they performed surprisingly well but were so debilitated from improper storage that they couldn't be kept running). Is Indianapolis on a NYC subsidiary?
Indy is on the Big Four (CCC&St.L.), a major NYC subsidiary.
But according to Polarowitz some of the A2a locomotives (A-2-A on P&LE) were resurrected to work in the Indianapolis area (where they performed surprisingly well but were so debilitated from improper storage that they couldn't be kept running). Is Indianapolis on a NYC subsidiary? if so, that would make four.
Dave, you were correct. I was thinking of the P&LE, TH&B and B&A.
NYC Subsidiary Pittsburgh & bLake Erie baught the lightest and most modern Birkshires. Not certain if you count Toronto Hamilton & Buffalo as a NYC Sysytem subsidiary, since it was half-owned by CP, but I think they had a few. In any case MC should qualify.
I'll be glad to give the next question bto RC, since he did give a full correct asnswer first, even if different than that you had when asking the question.
Well, the New York Central had no Birkshires, but three of their subsidiaries probably had them, onr the Boston and Albany, and one the last domrstic steam built by ALCO and the lightest of the 2-8-4s, but the exact names of the two subsidiaries escapes me, but i'll olookfor that information.
Possibly because the B&A's went to the Michigan Central when the B&A had very early dieselization, that may also be one of the three.
Overmod This just came up in a different context. The Railroad is PRR, the wheel arrangement is 4-8-4, and the N&W (of course!), the LV (some with 77" drivers), and the Wabash were three subsidiaries that had them.
This just came up in a different context.
The Railroad is PRR, the wheel arrangement is 4-8-4, and the N&W (of course!), the LV (some with 77" drivers), and the Wabash were three subsidiaries that had them.
This major American railroad had no 20th century had no locomotives of a certain wheel arrangement but three of their partially/wholly owned subsidiaries did. Who were the railroads and what was the wheel arrangement?
That's what I had.
You're up!
The first 21 GP39's had AC alternators (C&O-20 and ASAB-1) while the last two for Kennecott Copper had DC generators.
The Q2s were apparently all built with them, and I can find no indication that any rebuilding removed them. Dave Stephenson (feltonhill) said he had gone through every picture he could find and saw none that didn't have the piping to the booster present. The
daveklepperDid the last two of the PRR's 2-10-4s, copied from the C&O design, lack trailing-truck boosters that the earlier examples had?
But by 'turbocharged' I mean a production (not experimental) diesel engine.
Did the last two of the PRR's 2-10-4s, copied from the C&O design, lack trailing-truck boosters that the earlier examples had?
The last two examples of this class of turbocharged locomotive had a counterintuitive and unusual mechanical difference from the others. What was the class, and the difference?
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