This is the steam locomotive I'd like to see on the rails again.

Ed, I knew you would have selected a N&W locomotive.

The N&W had so many fine units to choose from.

The N&W is lucky to have you as one of her ambassadors. 

Allow me to challenge you to pick your favorite non-N&W engine that you would like to see on the rails again.

Thanks for the kind words, Bryan . . .

The non-N&W locomotive I'd like most to see would be a Seaboard R-2 2-6-6-4.

A few decades ago I worked with some folks who had fired and run them, and for designers to put together a locomotive that would do what those engines would do within the limits of a 55,000 pound axle load limit was not something that I think Alco nor Lima could have done.  But Baldwin did.

I pick the R-2 over the R-1 for esthetic reasons; they had the Walschaerts valve gear which I always thought was "prettier" than Baker, although I know that operationally, mechanically and maintenance-wise,  Baker was better.

BTW - I'd rather see PRR E6 460 than the 1361 although the K4 would be a real treat.  Thirty-five years ago I would have liked to fire the 460 for a few miles, just to see what it was like.

EdKing

Timken's 4 Aces

As long as we're ressurecting the dead:

Rusty

Any Lima built SuperPower Locomotive would be just fine, (Build #8673 September 1944 is a fine example), but I would love to see the C&O H-8.

Larry

If you read huddlestons book you will also find out the c&o sued lima for lying about the weight on drivers.  This engine just did not do what it was supposed to.  What would the weight on drivers do if they ran the engines at 60 mph.  Tear up the track.  The 2-10-4 was the superior engine for c&o in the LONG run.  How one of them to run?

According to what I've read, there was no track damage problem with the 2-6-6-6s at that particular speed; it's just that the general weight was far too much.  They seem to have been pretty well counterbalanced.

I haven't seen all the particulars about the lawsuit, but saying Lima flat lied about their weight seems a little extreme.  If you read Hrsimaki and Huddleston closely, you'll note that C&O's mechanical folks visited the drawing boards often during the design process, and often asked that certain parts be "beefed up".  Side and main rods were mentioned.  Therefore, it seems to me that Lima had a rebuttal, at least in part, for the suit.  Maybe that was taken into account in the settlement - I don't know.

Of course, the prime mover in this suit was the engineer's union, which felt cheated out of a lot of weight-on-drivers pay, and they were probably right.  They filed claims for all the trips engine crews had made, which amounted evidently to a considerable sum of money, which C&O tried to recoup from Lima.  I've forgotten just what it was that tipped the unions off, but it's in there somewhere.

And it's obvious that the C&O 2-10-4s (and maybe their KCS sisters as well) were actually Lima's finest locomotives.

EdKing

AFAIK, nobody ever out axle weighted the C&O H8. I'm guessing that this was an insurance policy over the fact that she's a six coupled design, and hence more likely to bust loose on the same TE as an eight coupled machine.  If Chessie had upped the boiler pressure and run these big girls in flatter country by policy, they'd have done much better, cost wise.  In the real world, N&W laughs all the way to the bank!

Dr. Huddleston died believing that the boiler pressure of the H8 could be raised to 300 pounds from its designed 260.

A Lima calculating engineer named James Cunningham retired to St. Louis, where he was interviewed by a friend of mine named Ray Curl, who had been Chief Draftsman for the C&EI at Danville, Ill. and who had moved to St. Louis after the MoP took the C&EI over.

Curl asked Cunningham the question directly:  "Was the H8 designed so that its pressure could be raised from 260 to 300 pounds?"

Cunningham replied "absolutely not." 

Dr, Huddleston believed that it was possible because the H8's boiler plates were thicker than those of the N&W A (this was in part a lot of the weight difference between the two locomotives).  But he made no mention of firebox sheets, flue sheets, staybolting or any other item subjected to full boiler pressure. 

Yes, the 3985 may not be the equal of the 1238. However, the people who own

the 3985 have a steam program, and the money, but not the desire to restore her

to the rails. A dad blasted shame, IMO. There are a lot of steam locomotives I'd like

to see restored, and running, such as the C&O 614. Heck, for that matter, build a new NYC Hudson, one of the most handsome steam locos ever built. But that's just dreaming.

This isn't dreaming! Come on UP, do the right thing..restore 3985 to operation once more.

E

To the other poster with the Burlington 4-8-4, these were beautiful engines and I think Sunset has a number of them. I think also the C&O Greenbrier has a place as well.

Larry...this is tooo easy, as Lima Build #8673 is in my backyard.

If you see me at the Open House, come over and say HI!

Picture courteous of Matt Robison from MetroScenes.com