What locomotive?


A

Ash Pit

Well-Known Member
Across the top of this page, with the words ModelRailroadForums.com bumping up against it, is a photo of an unusual locomotive and I'm interested in finding out what locomotive this was. because the photo is cut short on the right side of the photo, I can't tell if the second set of drivers is a 6 coupled or an 8 coupled engine. The cylinders being at the back of the engine is what confuses me. Otherwise I would have just figured it was a 4-8-8-4 Big boy! Just wondering?
 
Several roads used the 2-8-8-4 configuration also commonly called the 'Yellowstone'. The Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range among them, but others as well, and one variation holds the tractive effort record for N. American steam. It is the Great Northern's R-2.

The SP just built 'em backwards. They're the first 'tunnel motors'. The SP had long tunnels, and those magnificent articulateds (the SP referred to them as 'Malleys'), burned a lot of fuel trudging through those tunnels. Lots of smoke, endangering the crews. By placing the stack rearward, cab forward, the crew could be sure of both better ventilation AND better vision. Win-win.

Note that the real spelling of 'Malley' is Mallet, after a Frenchman who designed and built the first dual-expansion steam locomotives. The Big Boy, Challenger, Yellowstone, Virginian/Allegheny, and Cab Forwards were not technically Mallets because the boiler supplied simple steam to all cylinders. A true Mallet uses simple steam once, in the rear cylinders usually, and then the expanded and cooler steam is ducted forward to the massive front 'low pressure' cylinders. Examples of those would be the Norfolk & Western's famous Y series. That road's Class A 2-6-6-4 is articulated, but it's like the Yellowstone and Cab Forward; simple steam in all four cylinders.

Yet another note: the Y6's had valves that allowed full steam to all four cylinders at startup, but them crafty engineers also added a 'booster' valve that allowed injection of simple steam into the front cylinders when the train was up in speed if it were needed.
 
1606756790685.png
 
Looks like 4002, the flat-faced Mallet was a true compound. Just look at the difference in size of the front and rear cylinders. OTOH, 4272 and 4294 appear to be "simple" expansion. How could they all get fuel from the tender to the firebox? Easy, they were all oil-burners. ;) Some folks said the cab-forwards were run backwards. The SP replied, "Nonsense! We built 'em to run the way they did!"
 
Interesting how people assume if I asked a question about a loco where much of the identifying details are somewhat obscured, that they assume I know nothing about the type. Being a Northern Pacific Modeler, the Yellowstone 2-8-8-4 is completely familier to me. The Cab Forward 4-8-8-2 is running backwards in comparison to the Yellowstone. For the most part I take those who feel they need to fill me in on every detail as attempting to show their wonderful and complete knowledge on the subject: Selector!
 
OK I have looked at the mentioned photo of the heading for the Forum until I am blue in the face.
Yet, I have not been able to see past the 4 wheel leading/trailing truck in the photo?
I have not been able to see a "first or second" set of drivers at all?
Is my confuser broken?
 
Sirfoldalot said:
OK I have looked at the mentioned photo of the heading for the Forum until I am blue in the face.
Yet, I have not been able to see past the 4 wheel leading/trailing truck in the photo?
I have not been able to see a "first or second" set of drivers at all?
Is my confuser broken?
Click to expand...
Are you on a phone by any chance?
 
Ash Pit said:
Interesting how people assume if I asked a question about a loco where much of the identifying details are somewhat obscured, that they assume I know nothing about the type. Being a Northern Pacific Modeler, the Yellowstone 2-8-8-4 is completely familier to me. The Cab Forward 4-8-8-2 is running backwards in comparison to the Yellowstone. For the most part I take those who feel they need to fill me in on every detail as attempting to show their wonderful and complete knowledge on the subject: Selector!
Click to expand...
Your details indicate you are a new member. We aren't sure if new means to the subject, only to the forum, or new to the prototype in question. So, it seems 'beneficent' to supply a 'new' person with a comprehensive answer, taking the time to flesh out several important details as a sign of good will.

[Edit- added later] You could have simply said, in reply, "Thanks, it turns out I'm quite familiar with the prototype. I just couldn't make out which one I was seeing." Or, simply, "Thanks." I have found that fleshing out a reply with some additional details and information, especially a little history, serves to spark interest in onlookers or people who seem new to the hobby. It's a sign of good grace, and as I stated earlier, of 'good will'. I didn't sense any good will in your churlish assessment of my kindness to you.
 
Last edited:
Ash Pit said:
Interesting how people assume if I asked a question about a loco where much of the identifying details are somewhat obscured, that they assume I know nothing about the type. Being a Northern Pacific Modeler, the Yellowstone 2-8-8-4 is completely familier to me. The Cab Forward 4-8-8-2 is running backwards in comparison to the Yellowstone. For the most part I take those who feel they need to fill me in on every detail as attempting to show their wonderful and complete knowledge on the subject: Selector!
Click to expand...

The picture at the top of the page is of a Choo-Choo Train.
 
Ash Pit said:
Interesting how people assume if I asked a question about a loco where much of the identifying details are somewhat obscured, that they assume I know nothing about the type. Being a Northern Pacific Modeler, the Yellowstone 2-8-8-4 is completely familier to me. The Cab Forward 4-8-8-2 is running backwards in comparison to the Yellowstone. For the most part I take those who feel they need to fill me in on every detail as attempting to show their wonderful and complete knowledge on the subject: Selector!
Click to expand...
Sometimes, when a reply is made with details, it is for the benefit, not only of the person who brought up the subject, but for others on the forum who may not be familiar with the details of the subject. No attempt was made to denigrate you or diminish your knowledge on the subject, which obviously is superior. It is true that compared to the Yellowstone, the cab-forwards are running backwards. But the SP made the statement years ago. Ref.: either a Treasury of Railroad Folklore" or an article in a trains magazine I read long ago.
Stay well and safe! Happy Holidays!
 
trailrider said:
Sometimes, when a reply is made with details, it is for the benefit, not only of the person who brought up the subject, but for others on the forum who may not be familiar with the details of the subject. No attempt was made to denigrate you or diminish your knowledge on the subject, which obviously is superior. It is true that compared to the Yellowstone, the cab-forwards are running backwards. But the SP made the statement years ago. Ref.: either a Treasury of Railroad Folklore" or an article in a trains magazine I read long ago.
Stay well and safe! Happy Holidays!
Click to expand...
I have long adopted the habit of, when a question has been asked regarding a subject that I have knowledge about, of supplying a fullsome explanation, especially where an inquirer admits to no knowledge of it and has formed that question as indicating they would like full information. To then seem offended by that helpfullness, I would suggest others may in future be reluctant to engage the questioner.
 
The assumption that people new to a particular Forum, are new people to the hobby, might be a mistake! Why assume anything about the people who congregate here; or, at other Forums?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top