Trains.com

Classic Railroad Quiz (at least 50 years old).

732845 views
7904 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,014 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, April 17, 2024 8:39 AM

Great job in providing all this information, and do please ask the nesxt question, thanks.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,326 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, April 13, 2024 11:08 AM

Norfolk Southern (probably the epitome of the light eight-coupled in the United States, built for maximum horsepower on 25T axle load). Baldwin 1940.

23.5x32, 63", 250#, 49,300TE, 335,400 engine weight.

ATSF 4101 class.  Built 1927, toward the end of the 'drag era' tendency for 2-8-4 design.  Described as "basically good 1922 engines with a 1927 wheel arrangement"; they might be thought of as the same logical extension of a Mike as the original 3751 class was as a 'Heavy Mountain' or the original conception of a 2-10-4 from a Santa Fe type.  Interestingly, these never received the 'beauty treatment' locomotives like T&P 610 got in the Thirties, nor were extensively rebuilt like the 3751 class.

27x32, 63", 220#, 69,200 TE, 396,500 engine weight.

The boilers were designed for 250#, and one example (4115) was 'optimized' for this pressure: 78,685TE -- these were 15" piston valves with 9.5" travel!

 

Illinois Central 7000 class (Lima 1926)

28x30, 63", 240#  76,160TE, 388,000 engine weight.

As you would expect these were track-wreckers even at 40mph, with a nasty habit of suddenly going into full gear at high mass flow.  Apparently engineers could get broken arms from this...

The IC's original 'beauty treatment' for this class was to rebuild them into freight-only Hudsons -- some of the existing diagrams note all the engines so converted (with 'new' driver diameter 73.5", likely the largest size that would 'fit" the existing dimensions.  This plan was stillborn for a number of reasons, and likely the Depression restricted rebuilding of the 2-8-4s in kind until the very late Thirties.  What they were given was a pressure increase to 265#, a change from type E to type A superheater (with a reduction in heat-transfer surface!), a 1" reduction in piston diameter (from 28x30 to 27x30) and some experimentation with different arrangements of circulators and syphons.  The result was a slight increase in nominal TE to 78,194# but with engine weight ballooning to nearly match ATSF at 393,500#.

These engines worked until the end of steam on the IC, but they sure went fast when they went, perhaps the only other thing they did 'fast' aside from winding out the gear...

 

International Great Northern and then Missouri Pacific (BK-63, 1928 and 1930).

28x30, 63", 240#, 76,160TE, 404,000 (1928) 412000 (1930) engine weight.

These were some of the late 'original' type, and were probably among the best-looking of them.  Notable was that the grate area dropped dramatically (100.30 to 87.90), and the firebox direct heating surface shrank from 415' to 357' (383' by 1936 per diagram), yet the engine weight ballooned by several tons, and the combined heating surface went from 7239' to 7744' only about 300' of which reflected longer tubes and none of which involved a combustion chamber.

MoPac sensibly rebuilt these into 4-8-4s (with 75" drivers) in the early war years.  These had cast engine beds with roller bearings, and "practically complete new boilers", and of course corresponding modern driver centers and rods.  These produced better than 2 and a half times the road mileage per month of the original type.

 

C&NW J-4 (1927)

28x30, 63", 240#, 76,160TE, 397,000 engine weight

I think these were one of the 'inspirations' for the MoPac engines (which were also by Alco) -- in turn, these were supposedly inspired by the later B&M 'sports model' engines.  Here again are the 14" valves with limited cutoff that are part of the 'SuperPower' formula.  As far as I know, they ran primarily coal trains during their slow lifetimes, and weren't heavily modified.  We don't need to look far at C&NW power to understand why this was so:  the answer is a simple letter.  H.  The money put into either of the extensive rebuildings the 4-8-4s were given easily outweighs anything short of full rebuilding that the 2-8-4s could provide -- the 1948 rebuilding in particular may rate as the best-evolved of all the big full dual-service 4-8-4 designs.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,549 posts
Posted by Backshop on Friday, April 12, 2024 1:09 PM

Erie S-4 70" 28.5x32 250# 468,800#

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,014 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Friday, April 12, 2024 10:17 AM

THANKS     I suspect the Erie's had the most change, first-to-lsst, and the data for the last would be very important.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,549 posts
Posted by Backshop on Friday, April 12, 2024 9:47 AM

Here's the data that I could glean from Farrell's Berkshire And Texas Types. If there are multiple orders, I just am giving it for the original order.  It will be in class/cylinders/driver/boiler pressure/engine weight order.

B&A A-1a 28x30 63" 240# 389,000#

Erie S-1 28.5x32 70" 225# 443,000#

B&M T-1a 28x30 63" 240# 393,000#

NKP S 25x34 69" 245# 428,900#

PM N 26x34 69" 245# 436,500#

L&N M-1 25x32 69" 265# 447,200#

C&O K-4 26x34 69" 245# 460,000#

P&LE A-2a 26x32 63" 230# 426,000#

DT&I n/a 25x30 63" 260# 411,500#

If you want any more railroads, just let me know.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,014 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Friday, April 12, 2024 4:37 AM

Still hoping some reader will post the 2-8-4s data.  At least the B&A's.B&M's and AMC (Nickle Plater, C&O, PM), but adding tyhe P&LE and Erie if possible, and also the L&N.

 

Maybe I'll have better luck asking for the on the TRAINS Steam & Preservation Forum?

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,977 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, April 11, 2024 1:43 PM

Overmod
rcdrye
L&N Big Emmas.

 

Ding!

 

4-8-4s for a railroad with turntables just a smidge too short.

And were those tenders snazzy!

 

I was trying to remember why I knew that.  Strange the details that get parked in your head.

I'll post something else later today or early tomorrow.

 

 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,326 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, April 11, 2024 10:37 AM

rcdrye
L&N Big Emmas.

Ding!

4-8-4s for a railroad with turntables just a smidge too short.

And were those tenders snazzy!

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,014 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, April 11, 2024 7:31 AM

Please, please, someone post thec2-8-4 data!

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,977 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, April 11, 2024 6:55 AM

L&N Big Emmas.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,326 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, April 11, 2024 3:48 AM

Tenders!

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,549 posts
Posted by Backshop on Wednesday, April 10, 2024 8:55 PM

He thought that I answered the question about the B&M Berkshires, but it was you, Overmod.  You're up!

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,326 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, April 10, 2024 10:07 AM

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?

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,549 posts
Posted by Backshop on Wednesday, April 10, 2024 7:43 AM

It's actually Overmod's turn.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,014 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, April 10, 2024 1:48 AM

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?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,549 posts
Posted by Backshop on Tuesday, April 9, 2024 5:22 PM

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.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,326 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, April 9, 2024 12:13 PM

.

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...)

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,326 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, April 9, 2024 7:31 AM

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...

 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,014 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, April 9, 2024 2:17 AM

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.

 

 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,326 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, April 8, 2024 9:25 AM

Mr. Klepper is up.  He had the wheel arrangement and the subsidiaries.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,549 posts
Posted by Backshop on Sunday, April 7, 2024 5:41 PM

rcdrye

I think Backshop is up on this thread.  I owe one for the other one.

 

No, I asked the last question.  It's Dave's turn.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,977 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Sunday, April 7, 2024 6:53 AM

I think Backshop is up on this thread.  I owe one for the other one.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,014 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, April 7, 2024 1:22 AM

RC, do you wish to ask the next question, or should I.  Your answer was also correct in every respect.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,479 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, April 5, 2024 10:10 AM

rcdrye

P&LE was never fully integrated, even in the Penn Central years, and ended up independent during the Conrail takeover.

 
P&LE was absorbed into CSX in 1993.
The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,326 posts
Posted by Overmod on Friday, April 5, 2024 5:21 AM

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...)

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,977 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, April 4, 2024 9:48 AM

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.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,549 posts
Posted by Backshop on Thursday, April 4, 2024 8:57 AM

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?

 

Were they leased, rented or owned?

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,977 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, April 4, 2024 7:59 AM

Indy is on the Big Four (CCC&St.L.), a major NYC subsidiary.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,326 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, April 4, 2024 5:00 AM

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.

SUBSCRIBER & MEMBER LOGIN

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

FREE NEWSLETTER SIGNUP

Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter