Articulated Locomotives (HO Virginian 2-8-8-2)

fitz Jun 10, 2001

  1. Alan

    Alan Staff Member TrainBoard Supporter

    10,795
    438
    127
    Talking of three cylinders and Gresley valve gear, most of the express passenger locomotives on the east coast main line, close to where I live, were Gresley designed machines with just such an arrangement.

    They sounded really smooth climbing up to Stoke summit (where one achieved the world speed record for steam - but going downhill!)

    The only problem with the Gresley conjugated gear was if maintenance was not top-notch, and the numerous pins in the links got worn, the gear would become sloppy, and the centre cylinder valve would over-run, making it work harder than the outside ones, which gave them a syncopated rhythm :D

    I seem to remember that the UP 9000's had the gear rebuilt, so that two sets of Walschearts gear were on one side of the locomotive, and one on the other, with the pumps moved from the front to the side to balance the weight.
     
  2. bnsf4354

    bnsf4354 TrainBoard Member

    285
    0
    19
    Fitz---according to my source (The Steam Locomotive--A Century of North American Classics by Jim Boyd), as of 1944 there were 195 cab forwards in SP service with an additional twelve with the cab in the traditional placement. The 195 were from Baldwin between 1928 and 1944 and the 12 were from Lima in 1939. Other than that I have no other info about the Cab Forwards in SP service. Wonder where they hid the other 100 or if there was something in between those numbers?

    Yes that other photo was of a DMIR--man they looked tough!
     
  3. Gregg Mahlkov

    Gregg Mahlkov Guest

    0
    0
    0
    The key to the missing "cab forwards" lies in your "12 with the cab in the conventional location", as SP had 1000's of locomotives with the "cab in the conventional location". The discussion is about 4-8-8-2's or 2-8-8-4's only, as the 12 AC-9's were indeed conventional, and coal burning, 2-8-8-4's, rather than 4-8-8-2's. BUT, not all SP cab forwards were 4-8-8-2's, some were 2-8-8-2's and some were 4-6-6-2's (which were AM, for Articulated Mogul, not AC, for Articulated Consolidation). I think you will find the "missing' cab forwards were of the other two wheel arrangements. :cool:
     
  4. bnsf4354

    bnsf4354 TrainBoard Member

    285
    0
    19
    That sounds like the right answer! I just checked some things out concerning the cab forwards and indeed found that the other two wheel arrangements appear to make up for the missing numbers. You guys are great!
     
  5. fitz

    fitz TrainBoard Member

    9,605
    2,177
    140
    An old book by Edwin Alexander shows SP's first Mallet, no. 4000, 2-8-8-2, built by Baldwin in 1909 with conventional cab location. He Then has a description of the first cab forward, type AC-1, supposedly built in 1910. The accompanying photo, however, is of a type AC-4, 4-8-8-2, No. 4102. It also states that the first 15 were compounds, converted to single expansion starting in 1927, and that SP had over 200 AC's. My own knowledge of SP steam is limited. As Gregg pointed out they went up to Class AC-9. Lots of locos. [​IMG]
     
  6. bnsf4354

    bnsf4354 TrainBoard Member

    285
    0
    19
    Ok, here are some more for you.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    I just had to put the NW FEF in because it looked soooo good.

    Now I found you all the 2-8-8-8-2s before so I had to follow that up with the 2-10-10-2. That even has a articulated boiler? :eek:

    [ 26 June 2001: Message edited by: bnsf4354 ]
     
  7. 7600EM_1

    7600EM_1 Permanently dispatched

    2,394
    0
    38
    BNSF,
    The 2-10-10-2 was boiler articulation, but was very troublesome to the railroad. It sprung leaks and all kinds of other things for Santa Fe. Anything that went wrong with it it was a good bet it happened at the boiler articulation......I mean I bet it was a monster when it wasn't in the shops being repaired but its size was unreal... The only thing I have against it was the fact of the "Turtle" type tender on it. I just didn't like that for some reason I guess i'm used to my Vanderbuilt B&O tenders and the Square welded tenders..... :D
     
  8. 7600EM_1

    7600EM_1 Permanently dispatched

    2,394
    0
    38
    Well since I know how to post now... Heres 1 of my favorites of all time railroading including model railroading........ :D [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Ok guys the 2 pictures above are of the exact same loco in the exact location.... Isn't the head on picture mean looking??? :D Anyway the first picture is the picture that I look at everytime I get on my computer I set it as wall paper on my desktop..HA! Couldn't have picked a better picture... :D

    [ 26 June 2001: Message edited by: 7600EM_1 ]
     
  9. 7600EM_1

    7600EM_1 Permanently dispatched

    2,394
    0
    38
    Guys, Check this monster out!! Its a B&O EL-3 2-8-8-0, Look at the tender on him.. Kinda strange but, would make a nice loco to model!!! :D

    [​IMG]
     
  10. 7600EM_1

    7600EM_1 Permanently dispatched

    2,394
    0
    38
    Ok guys, I know I shouldn't post this but.. I am.. Its my 4rd favorite loco besides the B&O EM-1 Yellowstones 2-8-8-4's, and the B&O EL-? class, any of the 2-8-8-0's, and the Western Maryland, M-2 Challengers 4-6-6-4's, but Also another Western Maryland classic.. yes you guessed it. The Western Maryland 3 truck Shay #6.... Heres a picture of it in I think it was said to be 1980!


    I know its not an articulated loco, but hey its a 3 truck, so.. articulated Shay???? HA! I just had to guys... :D Ok it would post... so i'll come back and retry alittle later.....

    [ 26 June 2001: Message edited by: 7600EM_1 ]
     
  11. 7600EM_1

    7600EM_1 Permanently dispatched

    2,394
    0
    38
    guys,
    Let me know if my pictures are showing up so I know i'm doing the post right..... :D I think that last one I posted ...The WM #6 Shay didn't post.....So time will tell I guess.. :D
     
  12. bnsf4354

    bnsf4354 TrainBoard Member

    285
    0
    19
    Only the shay isn't showing up. Sometimes it doesn't work right because the site is not online or because of the way it has been set up on the webpage. I had that problem in my last post and had to delete the whole picture description. I like that EM1--to bad that pole wanted a cameo.

    Keep 'em coming!
     
  13. watash

    watash Passed away March 7, 2010 TrainBoard Supporter In Memoriam

    4,826
    16
    64
    John, re-check your code for the shay post. Check each character in the string, you may have inadvertantly put a space in, or the wrong letter etc. It has to be exactly correct to work. Keep in mind, always use the shortest name possible, all lower case, and do not use _-+=\#%^*(){}| in the name, they cause trouble. If you have saved the photo as: Name.jpg, then typed: name.jpg in your posting code, it wont work either. Most of the time if you named a photo: em1_7600.jpg, it is the _ that doesn't work, re-name the photo to: em17600.jpg and it will work. It takes time to learn. :D
     
  14. fitz

    fitz TrainBoard Member

    9,605
    2,177
    140
    bnsf, neat shot of the J on the turntable. After the NYC Dreyfus Hudsons, my favorite streamlined steamer, and Home grown by the N&W to boot.
    John, your photos are showing up, except for the Shay as Watash said. Good for you for learning to post. The more pictures the merrier. Too bad that lady had to get right in front of your side view of the EM-1. They are everywhere, aren't they? [​IMG]
     
  15. Alan

    Alan Staff Member TrainBoard Supporter

    10,795
    438
    127
    John, the B & O 675 is BEAUTIFUL!!!!! One of my favourite types [​IMG] Great to see it in colour - even if it is black :D
     
  16. Gregg Mahlkov

    Gregg Mahlkov Guest

    0
    0
    0
    Fitz, back to the cab forwards - Classes AC-1 through AC-3 were 2-8-8-2'S. They went beyond the conventional AC-9's too. There were AC-10, 11, and 12 cab forward 4-8-8-2's. [​IMG] :cool:
     
  17. 7600EM_1

    7600EM_1 Permanently dispatched

    2,394
    0
    38
    Ok guys,
    Here it is again.. The Western Maryland #6 Shay. At its best in 1980...And still at work!!!! :D

    Alan, you like the yellowstones huh??? Makes alot of us... :D I love that preticular loco!!! Specially the B&O's EM-1's!!!!!! But heres that picture of the Shay..... Dangit!!! It won't let me post that picture!!!!!!!!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

    So I went and got another Western Maryland #6 Shay picture...Lets see if it will post this time around...... :D

    [​IMG]

    [ 26 June 2001: Message edited by: 7600EM_1 ]
     
  18. 7600EM_1

    7600EM_1 Permanently dispatched

    2,394
    0
    38
    Their it is..ABOUT TIME!!! Anyway thats a picture from 1950... The loco itself was built in 1945 by Lima.....The last and the biggest of the Shay loco made....... :D Thats my 4th favorite loco, in a class of its own being its not a regular rod loco.... :D Its hugh and what a sight to see run at Cass WV........I had a friend to go to Cass and ride on a train that it pulled up a (Ithink) 9% grade..... He Video'd it for me and I can watch that monsterous thing do its job and succeed!!! :D I have to get one just to have tho for the record of my HO scale collection.. I have 2 Shays at the moment, one brass (I got lucky on what I payed), and a MDC "Roundhouse" 3 truck Shay..... :D

    Did the 2-8-8-0 EL-3 picture come up on screen??? I hope Watash got a good look at the Vanderbuilt tender coupled to that thing!!!!! 3 Trucks on it... I am still trying to think how to make a Rivarossi tender like that.. With 3, two axle, 4 wheel trucks.... It would be an eye catcher for sure on a HO scale running model.... :D

    Also did the 675 EM-1 head on view show up ???? Now thats a monster picture of a HUGH loco from the front...Up close and personal... :D

    [ 27 June 2001: Message edited by: 7600EM_1 ]
     
  19. UnionPacificBigBoy

    UnionPacificBigBoy Profile Locked

    149
    0
    19
    [​IMG]


    Hope this works! If not then I don't know waht will!!
     
  20. UnionPacificBigBoy

    UnionPacificBigBoy Profile Locked

    149
    0
    19
    Ok, it seems that the other photo didn't show. I'll give it another try and if it doesnt work I give up!

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page