The Illinois Railroad Museum in Union IL has, or at least had, a Y3 2-8-8-2. Over the years modifications and improvements to the older 2-8-8-2s gave them a reasonably uniform appearance although there are many ways in which it does not looks like a Y6b. My understanding is that the museum was contacted and the engine was inspected before the Class A was rebuilt for operation. I suspect they decided, as the above posts indicate, that for passenger excursions it simply would not have had the speed needed -- nor is it an engine you want to push to the maximum of its speed range if you want to be at all kind to your track.
Another concern of course is that several eras of track construction have followed the end of the steam era and trying to turn these huge engines has proved to be an increasing challenge. A weekend ago in Duluth the Milwaukee Road 261 4-8-4 had to leave town ahead of its train because in the past it had derailed more than once on the wye they had used in prior years for turning the engine so it needed to go further to a different wye. It is also a very slow process to wye that engine in Sturtevant WI where it has turned after some dinner excursions from Milwaukee and back. And I have seen both the UP 4-8-4 and 4-6-6-4 tiptoe through the wye at Butler Yard in Milwaukee. Those various wyes pose no issues for even large diesels.
Dave Nelson
Geared Steam Many engines are under cover, many are not. They are continually trying to raise funds to cover the entire collection. The problem is they are so close together its difficult to get "great" pics, but that's the price we have to pay to keep those beauties out of the weather.
Many engines are under cover, many are not. They are continually trying to raise funds to cover the entire collection. The problem is they are so close together its difficult to get "great" pics, but that's the price we have to pay to keep those beauties out of the weather.
Yeah, from the times I've been there, the museum has a lot of stuff in the open or too much stuff under the sheds. At least they managed to get most of the important locos under cover (2156, SP 4460, SLSF 4501, I think the NYC Mohawk?). I think the only important locos still outside are the General Pershing Zephyr and UP 4006. I'm headed there sometime this summer; so I can correct some of the things I'm wrong on.
Your welcome Firelock
Like Steamtown, the Horseshoe Loop, and the California RR Museum, It is a "must see" for any railfan, I have many more pics on my blog link, and I didn't capture everything they had. (GG-1, trolleys. 4-4-0's, etc)
I love this shot of the Y6A, imagine the power being funneled through this piping?
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."-Albert Einstein
http://gearedsteam.blogspot.com/
Thanks for posting ths shots Geared Steam! Looks like it's mostly under cover and well maintained. who knows, maybe someday....
St Louis Y6A
Museum pics here
The Y6b's tractive effort is often taken out of context in what it was really capable of in operation.
The high tractive effort quoted in books was only at starting when all four cylinders received live steam. The Y6b was then quickly switched to compound mode where maximum tractive effort was somewhere around 120,000 lbs. Peak horsepower for this locomotive was around 20-25 mph, and fell as speed increased from there.
The Y was often paired with the Class A in mountainous sections. On flatter terrain, the Y would be removed, and the A would continue on with the train.
The Y would not be a good choice for an excursion train, unless you would spend most of your time in the 20-30 mph range.
The Y Class was a great locomotive when used within its design parameters, which was moving tonnage at relatively slow speeds. Outside that parameter, there were better choices of locomotives.
My signature says it all.
Cannonball
Y6bs evergreen in my mind
Paul of Covington I may not remember correctly, but didn't N&W go back and upgrade their older Y's to be equivalent to the newest models?
I may not remember correctly, but didn't N&W go back and upgrade their older Y's to be equivalent to the newest models?
They did, and the 2156 (the Y6a in St. Louis) received a Y6b-sized firebox.
friend611I can only be curious on how the Y6b would have managed modern coal trains; with up to 166,000 pounds tractive effort I am certain that it would have handled a 150-car loaded coal train quite easily.
Probably run it at low speed with comparative ease, but not run it anywhere near the speeds these trains reach. TE falls off dramatically at higher speed. I think, and have said, that you could get around this limitation in part, by technical means, but there might still be problems with pulling the whole consist from the front that DPU solves relatively effortlessly. I have done the water-rate issue to death, so will not recapitulate here.
A Y6 is a perfect fantasy fan-trip engine: the problem is that in order to recover even a slight percentage of the megabucks involved in restoring and running/maintaining, you need to run more than a couple of excursions. On a scale that justifies the larger operating cost for a big locomotive, with paying customers to fill the larger consists. On a railroad built to handle a locomotive that size, but not averse to having a 30mph engine tie up higher-speed traffic. When a MUCH better fantrip engine is already in a fairly good state for restoration... two of them, in fact, one of which is in process of evaluation for restoration.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
That's right. the Museum of Transportation DOES have a Y6! I forgot. Good on you Mr. Eagle for reminding us. An A, not a B, but so what?
Does the St. Louis Museum of Transportation Y6a not count?
I really would love to see NYC Niagaras and Hudsons (Dreyfuss shroud preferable) about. And as a Mopac fan, a 2200 class 4-8-4 or something similar like a Rio Grande M-64 or Milwaukee Road S2 would be awesome.
I think there's very little doubt a Y6b would have handled todays coal trains with little difficulty. The operating cost would have been another matter.
As an excursion locomotive? Uh, I don't know. Maybe every once in a while as a treat for everyone, but remember they weren't built for speed. They were probably OK for up to 45 MPH or a little more, but more than that and I thing it would have been pushing things a bit.
On the other hand, steam freaks DO want the ride to last!
Other locomotives I wish were saved, well there's the Jersey Central's "Blue Comet" Pacifics, the Erie's K-1 Pacifics (very elegant engines!), a Pennsy T-1, maybe even the S-1, I could go on and on.
This thread mostly focuses on steam that we wish had been saved, my choice being the N&W Y6b being that it was the most modern compound articulated locomotive. A Y6b, if restored, (though I'm certain such a restoration would be very expensive) would be not only an excellent excursion locomotive, but maybe worth testing on freight trains. I can only be curious on how the Y6b would have managed modern coal trains, with up to 166,000 pounds tractive effort I am certain that it would have handled a 150-car loaded coal train quite easily.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.