NYC was notoroious for keeping a couple of light (e.g. relatively early) locomotives around on lines with track or bridge restrictions well into dieselization, as a matter of comparative necessity. The problem you have is that C&O was notorious for heavy axle loadings on its power, so your 'acquired' 2-8-0 might be decidedly false economy "in the real world".
The likeliest thing is going to be one of the NYC Pacifics that were put out to pasture when the Limas and Baldwins came for commuter service north and west of NYC in the '50s. Those may have been reasonably well-maintained compared to other forms of light power. IIRC the ones on the Putnam division were K-11s or similar; I don't remember what mix the West Shore used...
The Canadians built modern 4-6-0s into the 1930s (there is a good example at NH&I in pieces!) but this is neither a small engine nor particularly inexpensive to run (it would have many of the expensive mod cons starting to be 'no longer manufactured' in the '50s). It might be great if Rapido got off their duffs and produced a few classes of these, as advertised... but they may be out of the price range when they arrive. Incidentally I believe the last 4-4-0 built new in the United States came in 1928, and it was thoroughly modern in design and construction for a light-service engine...
The secret weapon is found over on SP, which achieved astounding and somewhat-unexpected results from an elderly (I believe 81"-drivered!) Atlantic which was retrofitted with a Delta trailing truck with a booster. This could start any train a 4-6-0 could, then go on to achieve any speed the trackwork would take without particularly stressing it either vertically or laterally at lower speeds, or in fine Golsdorf fashion achieving particularly high machinery speeds requiring better lubrication. If you have the Don Ball and "Frimbo" book on the 40's ('Decade of the Trains') you can read about one eye-opening performance this produced...
... the problem being that the age of the 4-4-2, splendid as it was on NYC, was also very short, as Pacifics became a better solution in less than a decade, and Alco in particular with Cole et al. produced very successful and classic Pacifics*. (And what that started, the USRA essentially finished.) So unless you get someone else's Atlantic, and PRR's surviving E6s would be essentially as heavy in rail loading per axle and top-heavy as any Pacific for this service, you're left with the above.
Bowser made a fine early 4-6-2 (IIRC it was billed as a K-11?) and that would be a fine starting place for a model. (Of course I'd be tempted to add that if you put a Delta trailer in place of the composite on that locomotive, with a booster, it would do all the work of your 2-8-0 and then some... with one class. )
*Note how carefully I leave the K-28 out of this discussion in this context -- consider it what it is relative to the E6 design for why...)
I have done research on the prototype for the railroad it was going to be. Americans scrapped 1934. 2-8-0 torched between 1949-52. 4-6-0 up until 1951/52. 4-6-2 continue until the end 1953/54.
This is a pure steam layout with no diesels. If I was going flesh it out more it would have S1, NW2, FT, and E7s.
I believe it would be a well maintained branch. Since I have a 7 inch grinder bridge for a river or road underneath. As for grades I'm not really sure maybe a small hill but nothing you will see.
The passenger cars will be 4 heavyweight cars 1 RPO/Baggage 3 coaches decorated in Pullman green and One or two in medium grey to hide their railroad from Japanese/German attackers.
Amtrak America, 1971-Present.
Sometimes the condition of the branchline (the track itself, a particular bridge, the curves) dictates the power. The Wabash had some trackage over a weak old bridge that kept some pretty antique 2-6-0s on the roster well into the early diesel era. The Milwaukee Road kept some 2-6-2s on their roster into the 1950s because of the light trackage on some branchlines. Even in the diesel age, the Milwaukee Road had a branch where the only engine light enough was the EMD SW1 switcher, but they needed more power than that (600 hp) so they got some SW1 with M.U. capability. The main concern was axle load.
Similarly the passenger service on some branch lines made the choice of locomotive more or less academic. There was no need to think of high driver 4-6-2 or 4-6-0 because there was no use for speed anyway. Some lowly freight locomotives got equipped with steam heat lines as a result.
Dave Nelson
Backshop The NYC (CASO) used a couple of Tenwheelers until the mid 1950's in southwestern Ontario.
The NYC (CASO) used a couple of Tenwheelers until the mid 1950's in southwestern Ontario.
If your train originates at a city on the mainline and runs a distance on the main it may require a beefier engine like a 4-6-2 to maintain mainline speeds. PRR used 4-4-2and 4-6-0 engines in Michigan in addition to 4-6-2s
Your own layout should also be considered. For example, if you intend to pull four 60' coaches, a 4-4-0 might have a tough time pulling that load if you have some grades. And I suppose you are not considering heavyweight equipment... That would look funny with a 4-4-0. I would argue that a small branchline would probably have two passenger cars per route, with maybe a few freight cars from time to time. In that scenario, a 4-4-0 or a 4-6-0 would work. I've seen pictures of that in Canada as late as the 50's... A Pacific would be an overkill. But hey, it's your railroad. And moguls did do passenger service, but earlier in the 19th century if memory serves.
Simon
Dont forget very early diesels were relagated to light shortline service because the railroads did not trust the new tech to be reliable enough for mainline service
So a box cab or whitcomb 65t or emc sw1 could be spotted there
how well maintained is the branch? That effects what steam is sent down the line? Bridge wieght limits as well. Even though a pacific could be used, two ten wheelers might have to be used because of gauge and bridge loadings limits
shane
A pessimist sees a dark tunnel
An optimist sees the light at the end of the tunnel
A realist sees a frieght train
An engineer sees three idiots standing on the tracks stairing blankly in space
There are always exceptions of course - which was why which mainline Class 1 this is a branch of is kind of important - you can reasearch that class 1 and see when they disposed of certain older locos of the type you might want to run - and since you are doing a fictional branchline, then you can easily say instead of scrapping 15 old Pacifics, they scrapped 14 and one was sent to the branchline.
For a different perspective, Reading buiilt their G3 Pacifics new in 1948, and within a few years they were relegated to duty on the shared Pennsylvania-Reading Seashore Lines. The bigger railroads, with bigger and heavier passenger trains to haul, outgrew the Pacific for mainline trains much earlier.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
angelob6660Yeah I was questioning the idea with the pacific, since I knew the Mountain, Northerns were main line service.
It's a matter of time frame. A 4-6-2 bought new in 1913 would be used on the railroads top passenger trains, replacing older 4-6-0 or 4-4-2 engines.
By the early 1930's larger engines like Mountains and Northerns would be used on the top trains, engines strong enough to pull the heavyweight steel cars that had replaced the older, lighter wood cars. The Pacific would be moved down to pulling other mainline trains like less glamourous passenger trains, or mail and express trains.
By the early 1950's, the railroad's top passenger trains would be using diesels, and the 4-8-2 and 4-8-4 engines would be handling lesser mainline trains, so the Pacific might be used on branchline passenger trains, or even the occasional freight train, in it's last years before retirement.
It will be a fictional branch line off a Class I railroad. The original idea was based on NYC, reusing the same equipment within that timeframe. That I have.
The other idea was to use 0-6-0 switch tender engine as a yard goat.
Yeah I was questioning the idea with the pacific, since I knew the Mountain, Northerns were main line service.
I'd go with a 4-6-0, like the Bachmann "high driver" engine, although if it's a lightly built branchline a 'modern' 4-4-0 would work. In 1946 many railroads were still primarily using steam on mainline trains - often while on a waiting list to get new diesels - so a 4-6-2 would probably still be on mainline passenger trains. A 2-6-0 Mogul would be unlikely as a passenger engine, even on a branch, but anything is possible.
Are you modeling a fictional short line, or a fictional branch of some major Class 1 railroad? It matters... A 4-4-0 is probably obsolete for all but the mose backwoodsy of backwoods branches (and then they probably wouldn't have that Consol for freights), and a Pacific would be too fancy for all but the higher traffic branches of a bigger railroad.
ON a branch, using a baggage/RPO combine makes sense, there's unlikely to be enough mail traffic to warrant a full RPO.
I'm having a difficult time choosing steam locomotives for my fictional branch line after the war 1946. I could push it back to the early 40s.
I acquire a (Bachmann) Chesapeake and Ohio 2-8-0 for the local freight but having problems with a passenger train. I thought of modern American, Pacific, Mogul or maybe a ten wheeler. The train was going to be short Baggage-RPO and 3 coaches. I couldn't decide a plain baggage or rpo so to save confusion just go with combination.