UP Steam Locomotives

Yes.

Rusty

YES!

A quick internet search will bring you lots of results.

Good Luck

Matt,

The vast majority of the UP steam locomotives were coal burners, i.e. the big power such as 4000s, 3900s, and 9000s (4-12-2).

What about the smaller ones, like Mikados.  I have an MTH Premier Mikado and it's got a coal tender.  I was just wondering if that's prototypical. 

Yes.

Rusty

Thanks for the replies everyone.  You're right, 8TA355SR,I probably should've had gotten on the internet earlier.  I found these two pics of UP Mikes.  The MK-1 Mike is an oil burner.  The light Mike appears to be a coal burner.  Matt

Oh yes...coal.  

For what it is worth, I wasn't try to sound like a smart @ss.  Sorry if it came across like that.

The MTH "light Mikado" is a pretty close match to the U.P. USRA mikados. Whats' missing is the number indicator boards and the fat "Higgins" stack on most engines. They even got the engine numbers correct.  

Wow, look at the snout on this one! Is this due to the steam superheater fittings that extended the smoke box forward?

J Daddy,

That looong smokebox is usually due to the loco being a lignite burner.  Needs lots more room and/or netting to cut down on sparks.

ChipR

The UP used oil when sparks started fires and when a coal strike would have cut off fuel for the 800-series FEF-1, -2 and 3.

Most UP steamers used coal, I believe. They were converted to oil only by necessity.

Sort of. The UP converted their 4-8-4s and SOME 4-6-6-4s to oil burning for PASSENGER SERVICE. Thus, that kept the cinders/soot out of the air conditioning/ventilation systems in the newer streamlined passenger equipment, during high speed operations. 

Steam locomotive fuel was a big logistical problem for railroads. As examples, the Burlington, C&NW and Milwaukee Road had access to ample sources of good bituminous coal in Illinois. But these roads had limited access to good quality coal west of the Missouri river. With the discovery of large quantities of oil around Casper, WY, they shifted their western locomotives to oil burning. Same was the case up in Canada; big oil reserves in Alberta caused CP and CN western locomotives to be fueled with oil. The take-away is that railroads did not want to haul non-revenue producing locomotive fuel long distances, hence tried to burn the fuel closest to their immediate operations.

       Union Pacific at first glance poses a bit of a paradox. The UP was quite close to Wyoming oil reserves, yet Big Boys continued to be fueled by coal through the last runs in July 1959. Believe the explanation for this is that the UP had coal mines in WY. Now, the paradox: the last Challengers to run were oil fueled, as well as the 800's which pulled fast freights across Nebraska as late as the Fall of 1958. Did the UP benefit from a surge in availability of inexpensive oil?    Could someone shed light on this seeming paradox?

Mark,

Please see my explanation, above about PASSENGER 4-8-4s and 4-6-6-4s. The ONLY oil burning 4-6-6-4s that remained in freight service thru 1958/1959 were generally FORMER passenger assignment locomotives.

All 45 of the 800 series 4-8-4s were converted to oil fuel in 1946, to prevent interruptions to passenger service owing to a series of strikes by John L. Lewis's Miners Union.

The second reason was to extend their range of operations to the West Coast.

There were no coaling facilities west of Milford, UT on the line to Los Angeles, or west of Huntington, OR on the line to Portland and Seattle.

Prior to this time, oil burning Mountains and small (Fetters) Challengers held down those assignments.

Shortly after the 800s were converted (And painted in the Greyhound livery)  

10 of the heavy Challengers, 3975-3984, were converted to oil and renumbered 3708-3717. They were also painted in the Greyhound scheme at Portland's Albina Shops. They were initially used west of Huntington on passenger runs, but after being bumped by diesels (and repainted black) some found their way west of Milford to Los Angeles in freight service.

Those 10 oil burning Challengers finished out their lives as helpers on the Wasatch while the 800s wound up in general freight service, still as oil burners.

Did UP have coal-fired engines?

You've heard of UP 119, right?

What is that thing on top of the oil burner's smoke stack?

I believe "that thing" on top of the "il Burner's" stack is a clamshell stack blast diverter, IIRC they were used in tunnels to avoid damage to the tunnel lining. Hopefully Hot Water or someone else can correct me if I am wrong, or (Hopefully) add to that if I am right.

 As far as the one being an OIL BURNER, it looks to me like there are "Bunker Boards" on the fuel prtion of the tender. Bunker boards were used to pile coal higher in the tender, increasing coal capacity. Not all Vanderbilt tenders were for oil fired locomotives, they were used for coal fired locomotives as well.

Doug

I think that the 2170 is an oil burner because I don't see any ash pans on the firebox.

As for UP coal burners, all of the 4-12-2's were always coal burners, as well the Big Boys (except for the short lived oil fired experiment with 4005).

Stuart

perusing the Feb 29th, 1948, UP employee timetable, the following observations can be made:

1.  Across the Nebraska Division, between Council Bluffs/Omaha and Cheyenne, the division points had both oil and coal facilities.  The branch lines used coal only.

2.  Across the Wyoming Division, between Cheyenne/Denver and Cheyenne/Green River, the major division points had oil and coal.  The branch lines seem to use coal only.

3.  Across the California Division, Salt Lake City had coal and oil, all other points between SLC and Los Angeles had oil only.

4.  The Utah Division, between Green River/Ogden/Salt Lake City/Pocatello had coal and oil.  Again, the branches seem to have coal only.

5.  The Northwest divisions were oil only.

ChipR

Just a quick note from the pacific northwest. La Grande had a coaling tower that was torn down in the forties and Albina had a Ogle coaling tower but I do not know when it was torn down. A lot of the locomotives working out of here had smoke hoods because of the tunnel leave Albina yard {Northbound} is on a grade. 

Both La Grande and Albina were oil only by Feb 1948.

ChipR

Chip, is that the reprinted Employee TT book from the UPHS?

I just ordered a copy and was more than a bit surprised to be charged $12.01 S&H on a $10 softcover book.

I know the US Postal Service is a mismanaged, overpriced joke, but that seems rather excessive.

Don't forget the cost of the packaging/envelope to ship it in, i.e. the "handling" charge, which is over and above the postage.

Nick,

Yes, from the reprinted '48 employee timetable.  I wore my first one out and had to order a second one.

ChipR

Yes. Here are several photos from UP's own historical collection, used with their permission.

http://donstrack.smugmug.com/U...P-Steam-Locomotives/

Don Strack

You say the oil conversion of 4005 was short-lived?

I assume that's because it didn't work very well.

IIRC they're planning on making 4014 an oil burner... Why? Maybe they think they can make it work with newer technology?

Matt,

The 4005 was converted to oil so it could run on the LA&SL leg of the UP, which was oil only (see my posting above on fuel).  After the experiment, 4005 was converted back to coal and sent back to where it belonged.

ChipR 

Was the bunker c conversion unique to 4005 or did all steam engines run on it then? Seems like they would have had to heat the oil for the other engines and all so maybe half the problem was the use of that particular fuel oil..