Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Compound Mallet Question
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
Old Timer <br /> <br />Another thing people often forget in comparing these locos is the difference between eastern & western coal. One reason for those big boilers and 4 wheel training trucks on western engines was to support the jumbo fireboxes needed to burn the stuff. The BTU output was lower, it burned slower and cooler, and with too much draft it would get sucked out of the stack. A U.P Allegheny would need an 8 wheel training truck, an even bigger boiler, and they'd have to bore out the tunnels. It's interesting to speculate what a Yellowstone could have done on eastern coal, but the reality was both U.P. amd N.P. owned their own coal mines and that's what the locos were designed to burn. Besides the Yellowstone and first series Challengers had built-up frames, no roller bearings and the running gear wouldn't take higher speeds. <br /> <br />The later Challengers and Big Boys did have running gear set up and balanced for higher speeds and there are quite a few anecdotal stories of Big Boys going 80 and Northerns hitting 130 on tangents downgrade with a tailwind [:)] It's more likely the running gear was done that way to reduce wear and tear at more typical speeds of 60 & 100 respectively. <br /> <br />The compounds U.P. borrowed were N&W USRA 2-8-8-2's. They quickly ended up in MOW service. The C&O simple 2-8-8-2's fared only slightly better. The compound 2-8-8-0's were U.P.s own, plus the Harriman roads had plenty of experience with the S.P. compound mallets, which were all simpled. Also St Paul to Livingston on the N.P. is 1006 miles, the only service stops were for coal & water. <br /> <br />My point is that N&W wasn't the only road with 'smart' steam people. As mentioned, U.P. owned their own coal mines so there was plenty of motivation to experiment and I think you'll find they did quite a bit including the coal turbines. They didn't build their own in-house but were always heavily involved with the designs. If such a compound would have been the answer to their prayers, they would have considered it. Another factor that killed steam on the western roads was bad water, particularly on the far western districts. Those were the first to get diesels, so the roads found out first hand what they could do. But don't get me wrong - I love steam, Big Boys, Challengers, Alleghenys, Y6bs, Niagras, right down to lowly 280's and yard goats. It's just that I suspect the steam departments at many Class I roads were a whole lot smarter than many steam buffs give them credit for.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy