EVERY* Steam Loco Wheel Arrangement (and why) in 20 minutes! | Railroad 101
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- Welcome back to Railroad 101 - the educational series where we look at all things that make up the railroad. This time we're looking at steam locomotive wheel arrangements - what they are, why they are, and probably 99% of the varieties that were in the USA back in the day.
Huge thanks to @DynamoProductions-trains for letting me use their footage, and to @guppybob and @WingsStrings for helping with the script, and to @WingsStrings especially for the great graphics!
Merch: hyce.creator-s...
Join my discord: / discord
Become an ES&D Train Crew Member and get extra perks!
/ @hyce777
Hai Hyce, it's that comment you were looking for!
They did cut all the Duplexes up. Even the B&O's 4-4-4-4 didn't escape the torch.
Also
YOU FORGOT THE S2 6-8-6 DAMMIT
Jk love ya Mark
Great vid as always
Hopefully in the next decade we will have a T1 back, which will be exciting. Where she will run is another question entirely.
If you do some math on the S1, we have a 6-8*-6
the WHAT@@Hyce777
But were are building a new one! Hyce I sent you the images I have of the New T1 5550 under construction, she is 44% complete now
the 6-8-6 was different to the 6-4-4-6 on the pensy.@@Hyce777
The reason why steam engines ( and jackshaft electrics ) got leading trucks is mostly because power in those is delivered in pulses. Because of Newton's third, each pulse will be counteracted by reactive force which causes the locomotive to sway left and right. This is the reason why steam engines do so. The faster the locomotive goes, the more likely it is to derail because of this motion. Leading wheels, as name suggests, lead the locomotive onto curves.
Trailing wheels mostly support fireboxes, but in tank engines - for which the feature is that they can run the same both ways, the 'trailing' wheels become leading wheels when going forward.
Modern locomotives pretty much lost their leading/trailing wheels because electric motors are, in comparison, generating power smoothly.
Great add, my friend! Totally correct.
If the pulses of power being applied to the wheels are what causes swaying/instability, does that mean that geared locomotives are somewhat immune to that? Particularly Heislers, since the power is not only mechanically farther from the wheels, but is also centered in the locomotive and applied to the wheels on both sides at the same time?
Engines without leading trucks were also known as track spreaders without it being there to more gradually introduce the weight of the engine into the curve. Having a trailing wheel at the back meant the pull bar weight pulled down on to a non driving wheel and in the UK the Great Western in the UK used the 4-6-0 to the end whilst the more common Pacifics elsewhere were notorious slippers. The GWR had fine Welsh anthracite so a long narrow grate was fine. They tried out the Mallet articulation in South Africa and it fouled trackside infrastructure so the Garrett was chosen.
Isn't wheel profile something that can be taken into consideration to? Pivoting wheels can be fit more snugly and apply weight more directly downward, hence reducing the spreading affect when compared to the fixed wheels that have a more tapered/conical profile?
Trailing wheels on tank engines can also be needed to support the bunker. The BR Standard Class 2 had both tender and tank engine versions, the tender version were 2-6-0s but the tank engines required trailing wheels to support the bunker, so they had to be built as 2-6-2s.
I think the reason modern locomotives lost their leading/trailing wheels has more to do with moving the all the wheels on to trucks. The Whyte notation is never used for diesel and electric locomotives if they don't have the driving wheels mounted rigidly to the body.
ERROR 4-0-4 SHAY not found
(Sorry dumb joke)
The shay technicly count as 0-4-4-0
@@FunAngelo2005wait 1 3-piston engine powers all the wheels. So it's an 0-X-0. Unless it's an articulated geared locomotive and God have mercy on your soul
Unless it's a 3 truck Shay then it would be a 0-4-4-4-0
It was good I liked it
That 0-3-0 from India was built in Patiala ( a monarch state in colonial India ). This is called Ewing system where a double flanged wheel bears most of the weight of the train and a supporting road wheel maintains the balance. It can take some stupidly sharp turns and it's relatively cheap to build.
Two of these systems were built, 1 was destroyed by flash flooding and the other one ( from Patiala ) still lives in the National Railway Museum in New Delhi and operates occasionally.
Great video as always, Hyce ❤
I like how belpaire's B1A was mentioned in the thumbnail but also said it doesn't fit so he won't talk about it. I'm proud of the factory's we had in belgium just because of that.
It's an 0-4-2-2-0
@@datguymiller no, this would mean the unpowered axle is powered, it doesn't fit in that type of wheel arrangement system.
I wonder if parentheses could be worked into the Whyte system to denote unpowered wheels in the midst of powered ones.
@@oriontaylorI've seen people do that, calling it an 0-6(2)-0 but that doesn't tell you *where* the unpowered wheel goes. And you can't split the 6 up because it's about coupled drivers.
@@Hyce777 0-SI(2)X-0
Bob the Locomotive designer: Ahh yes 2-8-8-2 A pinnacle design.
Eric the Locomotive designer *AGGRESIVE SNORTING OF WHITE TALC* YESssssSSS!!!! 2-8-8-8-2 *SNORTS MORE TALC* EXCELLENT!
Hyce: why are you like this?
Eric: *Snorting in the afterlife* Wuh?
More like: ALL THE FUGGING POWER AND DRIVERS WE NEED!!!!!!!!!
And yet it was after the triplex that they learned they needed to stop. I don't know if it's just internet garbage of if they were really proposed, but I've seen designs/blueprints of a quadplex and a quinplex as far as how to arrange the drivers and they didn't look good. The fact the triplex failed means that Hyce got to keep his sanity that much more intact. I mean some of these designs I've seen have drive wheels on the tender (as in they realized the triplex was the most they could get on a chassis and that the only room left on what was technically the locomotive was the tender.)
More like the 2-8-8-8-8-2
Triplex has got absolutely awesome pulling power but its boiler is so small compared to it that it hardly runs 10 mph before losing pressure. Only good for shunting and it's too big to get into spur lines, thus sucks.
For a mainline locomotive you have to get a big firebox and for a shunter you need to be small enough to be flexible. Thus big boy is better for mainline and 0-4-0 0-6-0s are better for shunting.
@@steeljawX more like they learned to stop after the PRR and B&O duplex's stunts
Yooo the ultimate Hyce video of all time. If this doesn’t become Hyce’s most viewed video, I will make very loud cockatoo noises
Exactly my thoughts
Agreed
This.
15k views at only 8hrs in. I say it gonna do well lol
Is doing well but nowhere near most viewed yet. I hope you’re practicing! 😊
"Darkness" from History in the Dark said that the Belgian Type 3 locomotive "clearly throws the Whyte notation completely out the window."
The *BELGIAN QUADRUPLEX LOCOMOTIVE*
I won't say people are wrong for calling a 4-8-0 a Mastodon instead of a Twelve Wheeler, I'll just say there's a reason we call a 2-8-2 a Mikado/Mike and not a Calumet.
Also calling praries friend shaped is so true! My favorite Prarie at the moment is Argent Lumber Co. Number 5! She's not the most powerful but it looks like she could haul 2 cars at the CRRM and make the Onion Stack look good.
I feel you should have mentioned two things
1. There’s only two surviving operating Decopods in the US, Great Western (Strasburg) 90 and Frisco 1630
2. Baldwin’s 4-10-2 that was so overkill that no railroad wanted to keep it
I actually didn't realize that there were only the two decapods left. That's cool. 60000 was... Odd. This was not odd train video. Lol
@@Hyce777 yes 60000 was very odd
@@BaikieRyan The 60000 combined a 350 PSI water tube boiler with 3 cylinders, and a compound at that. The 3-cylinders at the front needed 4 wheels underneath because it was too much to put above a single axle. It was also too much innovation and it was a pain to service the thing, so nobody bought it.
Yes, the 4-10-2's were big and somewhat overkill. But they were also very effective suburban locomotives and actually helped many small towns grow and thrive because they brough main line freight volume that engines like the 2-8-2's couldn't deliver to lines that bigger engines like the cab-forwards, Northerns, or Texas locomotives couldn't run on. High plains and hilly towns like Prescott, AZ and San Luis Obispo, CA benefitted greatly from the 4-10-2's.
You forgot the SP and UP with their Overlanders for the UP and Southern Pacifics for the SP, Both were 4-10-2 classes, even a SP 4-10-2 is left!
Fs in chat for all the geared locos that got cut from the vid.
Completely understand why you had to, especially since Shay also couldn't put down the whiskey 😂
wait... aren't shays just 0-4-4-0s?
Or 0-4-4-4-0's. Remember there were 2 truck and 3 truck Shays, then you have the post-patent expiration Shays called the Willamette which were superheated Shay - Types
@@IAmAnonymyz Shay also made the 0-4-4-4-4-0's. A 4 truck engine that could pull the world
@@jameschase11 ah! The Western Maryland! hadnt seen THAT one until I looked it up. Bet that thing had ALL the Torque lol
the T1 trust is in the process of building a brand new T1, the PRR madness will roll again!!
In Czechia and Slovakia (formerly Czechoslovakia) we have a lovely system for creating the class of the loco based on the wheel arangement (although it cares only about live axles), max speed, axle loading called Kryšpín's system and it also contains a system for classing the tenders based on amount of water and coal it can haul (even though that's not translated to the English Wiki page). I think it's quite interesting system that tells you a lot about the Loco purely based on the class it is.
You forgot this: the Santa Fe railroad actually adored the 2-6-2 prairies, they really really loved 2-6-2s, in fact they have 15 surviving 2-6-2s today
I'm not sure how true this is, but I've been told that with Whyte notation, the suffix "t" specifically denotes the locomotive having side tanks, with other types of tanks having their own suffixes, such as saddle tanks being st, well tanks being wt, crane tanks being ct, rear/back tanks being rt, etc.
I've likewise seen st used for saddle tanks, this does track true with what I've read as well.
Whyte didn't address tank locomotives. The T, ST, WT are later affectations.
@@theimaginationstation1899 That makes sense
PT is also commonly used to denote pannier tanks.
@@oriontaylor And C is often used for camelbacks.
Always makes me happy to see the triplex get a mention/shoutout. It’s the “what if we took the idea even further just to see what it does” kind of energy that I thrive on.
The bit with the AA20 was true class. In Soviet Russia derailments find you!.
Learning how leading wheels function as an extra truck that moves the locomotive's pivot forwards and greatly improves stability was very cool!
I was pretty excited about this video, and it was just as great as I’d hoped! Great video, Mark! Also, fun facts about wheel arrangements on the Illinois Central for anyone interested: The IC had Santa Fe’s that they called “Centrals” as well as having the only Hudson ever built for specifically freight. Lastly, the ICRR never upgraded to the northern types, but had some of the largest mountain types built on fast long distance freight.
18:46 they took it away from US ones but slept on Belgium; mad lads made a quadruplex over ther
@Hyce: you of all damn people should know that separating railroaders from their alcohol is a really damn dangerous and downright suicidal task. Some people be like: "Don't tread on me." Railroaders be like: "don't touch my booze."
My father worked UP and sometime in the 90s, either the Big Boy or the Challenger was coming through Poplar Bluff Mo. under its own steam. Dont know where it was going or where it had come from.
I was about 10 years old and dad had been working for UP for over a decade by the 90s and worked out of Poplar Bluff.
So he took me up to the see the Steam Engine and it was special. With dad working for UP we got to go up in the cab while it was stopped on the line and had a great tour of the engine inside and out.
Never ever forget that experience, the latter to the cab from a ten yearold's perspective was a mighty exciting climb.
I respectfully request you take the time to discuss all "cursed" wheel arrangements you could find in the future when you get around to it, after seeing that weird example from Belgium I now wanna learn more about the wacky and weird classifications I've never seen or heard of before lol
Chicago Great Western: hello we'd like to haul the entire contents of our Olwein Iowa yard to Chicago in one train. We'd like use 10 or 12 F units but those aren't available yet what have you got?
Locomotive salesman slaps side of Texas class.
Loved the descriptions under the wheel arrangements but the triplex almost made me blow a mouthful of peach edition Red Bull through my nose.
Do you mean Oelwein? Iowa's German influence made spelling the names of some of our towns HELL.
There was one order of locomotives with no leading truck, but a trailing truck. The Union Railroad 0-10-2 A result of turntable restrictions. Had a tender booster too (which tender or trailing truck boosters didn't fit the Wyhte notation ether)
When you have great educational items to talk about 15 min or 22 min eh we wouldn't have even noticed or did I care. Was very knowledgeable and fun to hear. You had me hooked from the beginning. Great job Hyce
The Whyte system is 124 years old, I did some quick math for that. Quick stupid fact, the P&R (Philadelphia & Reading) had 0-12-0's with tenders for pusher service that I believe were turned into 2-10-0's (don't quote me). Another fun thing about the 6-8-6 (the ONLY one that BLW(Baldwin Locomotive Works) made) was supposed to be a 4-8-4 but was turned into a 6-8-6 because of the heavy metals used to make the flipping thing
Cries in 4-2-4 C.P. Huntington my beloved. Seriously though, awesome video as always
This is a tank locomotive. And since they were for shunting only 2 driving wheels ain't good. 2-4-2s or 0-6-0s are better.
13:33 close! They are pronounced "Berk-Shy-Er" and "Ka-Nah-Wah"
I've always pronounced it as Berk-Shur and Can-awh
Hyce the T1 trust as I understand is bringing back a 4-4-4-4 with the replica that they are building of the Pennsylvania T1.
Another cool nugget of CPR steam history is they had the only articulated locomotives in Canada. 6 locomotives built in 3 different classes of a 0-6-6-0 wheel arrangement were tried in the rockies to handle the steep grades. the locomotives were built by Angus with their cylinders towards the middle of the loco, so the forward set would be running in reverse relative to the back one. Eventually, better road power and track realignment made these engines obsolete. They ended up being rebuilt as straight 2-10-0 switchers for transfer service.
For those not in the know, a transfer run in a big city like Montreal in the 30-40's they had smaller yards like Hochelaga near the port where basically whole trains would be filled with goods coming from ships or and other yard near the industrial district. That whole train would be pulled back to the main yard at Saint-Luc to be broken up and dispatched to various trains going different places. Conversely, you could get various grain car lots from various trains assembled into one consist heading for the port. None of these moves required speed, so a loco with lots of traction fit the bill!!
This is the reason you might see 0-10-4 or other weird wheel arrangements like that... They might just be the by-product of an old road locomotive being demoted to switching duties and the rebuild job ditched the lead truck.
The 0-6-6-0 in semi-officaly called the Angus.
0:30 The Alls
I probably said this before but Belgium Quadraplex was so powerful it would sometimes break couplers on the freight cars.
I was sorta hoping to see a Garrett mention in this list. Felt a little sad to see those ones missed
They were mentioned! But you should understand what I said and why...
The 2-8-4 was also the “Big Emma” on the L&N.
We gonn' talk about 0-16-0?
I appreciated the inclusions of EBT #11 (Prairie) and #16 (Mikado).
Just a note that the Triplexes that got produced all made BUCKETS of tractive effort. I mean over 50k tons of tractive effort. But they were also limited to 10 to as little as 3 MPH. Pathetically pitifully slow. The Shay would beat it in a drag race light engine on flat ground. But they were unstoppable bank engines.
I remember quite a while ago, I saw a magazine article about somebody who made an 0-2-0T engine for his model railroad.
How can it balance itself with only one axle?
8:25 - How does a 4 leading-wheel arrangement “inform” the frame about torque? I’m trying to wrap my head around it. Does this mean it transmits flex forces to the frame and can make the frame flex (ie “articulation via bending / flexing)?
Remember that there is a bit of tolerance in the gauge (both in the rails themselves and the spacing of the flanges ... and that's before we consider wear, curves, etc.).
A pony truck will help keep the front of the frame centered (and in turn, the drivers) on tangent tracks; and will likewise help pull the frame into curves.
Because the frame of the front truck is linked to the first set of driving wheels (with sideways movement) and has a virtual pivot point behind the first axle
@@ivovanzon164 I think you just described a Krauss-Helmholtz bogie which is found on locos with a 2-x-x (e.g. 2-6-4) wheel arrangement.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krauss-Helmholtz_bogie
A 4-wheel bogie at the front (e.g. on a 4-6-0) is usually a separate 4-wheel truck with no connection to the driving wheels. It transmits side load to the loco frame by various arrangements of springs or links hence helping to 'guide' the loco into curves.
I also think with trailer wheels on the front and back will help balance for acelration or BRAKEING the front or back will flop forward or backwards to the ground
Regarding the 2-10-0's, the British Rail Standard 9F class were one of very few British locomotives to ever have 10 driven wheels (the only other design with 10 powered wheels was "Big Bertha", a unique locomotive whose solitary purpose in life was pushing trains up Lickey Incline, a long 1-in-37 gradient near Bromsgrove).
To get around the rigidity problems, there were no flanges on the centre driving wheels. Funnily enough, despite being designed for hauling freight, they were also exceptionally good at hauling expresses. They are regarded in the British trainspotting community as one of the best BR locomotives.
Also, for 4-6-2's, extremely common in British service. Flying Scotsman, Mallard, and Tornado all use this layout.
The weirdest steam locomotive I saw is a 2-2-2 OKa1-1 tank engine, which stands preserved at railroad museum in Warsaw, Poland. It's truly a weird looking one, with just one driving axle. These were manufactured for Latvian railways by Krupp as economical power for local trains and after the war two examples made their way to Poland, with the one bearing road number 1 being the only surviving example to date. The only use for this silly-looking tank engine was a non-revenue shuttle service for railroad workers between both ends of the Łazy marshalling yard until 1969. It's a miracle that this oddity wasn't immediately discarded after the war due to being such a unusual piece of equipment.
I know it's barely possible, but I wish I could see this "tonk engine" under its own power someday :D
Some of these arrangments feel like they were generated by the same kind of AI that puts too many fingers on hands 😂
I was kinda hoping to see some singles in the video like the 2-2-0, 0-2-2, 4-2-0 and 6-2-0 Cramptons, 2-2-2, 4-2-2, 2-2-4, and 4-2-4 as they're some of my favorites (fan of early railroads)
What an excellent outline survey. The story in Europe was slightly different.
18:21 Forget where I read this, but it was either NP, WP, or GN (one of the ones in the Northwest) that actually considered building 4-8-8-4s after UP got the Big Boys.
This helped everything make way more sense. I feel way more informed.
Great video. As a Brit can you explain why the Pennsylvania railroad needed such large locomotives. I can understand why out west needed them, but Pennsylvania seems quite normal.
13:43 Beauuutiful Machine 😑👌*Edit* 16:12 Now those Pennsylvania ones were knarleyyy 🤘 LOVE to see *those* in HO Model RR
Very informative video! Not only did I learn about all these wheel configurations, but I also learned that some of the designers who made some of these probably had too much to drink….
You cannot talk about the Allegheny locomotive and metnion a class action labor lawsuit without explanation. It needs a video!
I think you should have mentioned the F suffix for fireless locomotives and the that the virginian had locomotives with two sets of ten coupled drive wheels that worked well. Also, Baltic refers specifically to the 4-6-4T in english rr jargon. Good video : )
the British have/had some really weird locos too, case in point, the Beyer-Garratt 2-8-0+0-8-2, plus, it's also a narrow gauge engine too!
Honestly, I think the Beyer Garratt is one of our maddest designs, and it's one of my favourites. But it's interesting to note that while they were used across much of the empire to general success, especially in Africa and Australia, they didn't really take off in Britain itself.
oh, nice. I've been waiting very excitedly for a wheel and why.
Fun fact: the Canadian Pacific 4-4-4 F2-a Jubilee set the Canadian steam speed record of 112 mph. Uncommon wheel arrangement but they were fast, even faster than their own Hudsons which topped out around 100
13:32 Yeah, fwiw Kanawha is pronounced with accent on the second syllable (kə-NAW-ə) by people from where I've been in and around St Albans.
The need to balance weight distribution, operational costs, and maintenance costs led to many "interesting" development choices for steam locomotives and probably led to many of their designers finding comfort and inspiration in a bottle. Though with the Santa Fe they probably drank too much original formula Coca-Cola.
2-6-6-6s were awesome locomotives. As I recall, they had the highest per-axle torque of any steam locomotives built. If LIMA had built a 2-8-8-6 with the same torque per axle it would have been the most powerful locomotive ever built.
The Santa Fe definitely marched to the beat of their own drum. Those 3000 class 2-10-10-2s even had flexible boilers! Flexible. Boilers. 😞
However, the Virginian's Class AE 2-10-10-2s were power monsters that did their job quite well.
Interesting side note: The Sierra Railroad of California bought their 2-8-0 #28 the same time that the Yosemite Valley Railroad bought their 2-6-0 #29 in 1921. The #28 had 127,000 lbs. on the drivers and the #27 had 117,000 lbs. on the drivers, and their Tractive Effort was just about the same as well. The Sierra was built with too light of rail to support all that weight on just 6 drivers so they had to get an engine with 8 drivers.
11:28 Interestingly enough, here in Indonesia's main railway museum in Ambarawa, They currently have two Esslingen 0-4-2RT for excursions and several more in static display like an 0-6-2 and 0-4-4-2T. Looking at old records, while not common, there were quite a few of them, and of that lot a fair number ar listed as rack locomotives.
9:23
In Queensland Railway, Australia; we have handful of 4-8-0 locomtoives in 1900s to 1920s as the 4-8-0 are common freight locomotives
5:09 - the translation from Russian is “Big Chungus”, you’re welcome
as the corner graphics person on this I am so fucking glad that someone got that
Baldwin: hmm yes let’s make a 4-10-2 that is not only a compound, but also has a water-tube firebox for extra measures.
I find the 4-10-2 wheel arrangement as a whole quite hilarious in that it was a 10 coupled locomotive designed to have stability at speed. Nobody had a consistent names for them either (Southern Pacific named them after themselves, Union Pacific called them Overlanders, they were named Reid ten wheelers by South Africa).
Hello Hyce...you missed one wheel arrangement that for a (very) short period of time was the contender for the term "American Standard"...the 4-2-0. Known as "one-armed billys" for the single driver and being apparemtly originated at the Norris locomotive works, run by William Norris, it was the predessesor to the 4-4-0 by adding a lead truck to a 0-4-0 by deleting the front set of drivers (I think they MAY have gotten the idea from how they modified the "John Bull" to run on the Camben and Amboy, but I'm not certain of this)...THEN someone had the brain wave to add a second set of drivers, thus came the 4-4-0. ALSO..Baldwin (and a few others) made "flexible beam" 0-6-0's and 0-8-0's as road freight power in the 1840 to 1860 period..the front 2 drivers pivoted laterally whith spherical bearings on the affected side rods to allow the pivoting movement. ONE DOES SURIVE...at the B&O museum, the 0-8-0 "Memmnon" also known as the "old war horse"..thought you'd like to know!...and the video was GREAT BTW!!
For some reason the Norris 4-2-0's acquired a reputation for hill climbing. Personally I would have thought the worst possible wheel arrangement for that. However it was against that background that the engineer of the Birmingham & Gloucester in England, in 1840, incorporated the Lickey Bank (2 miles at 1 in 37) in his main line and ordered Norris engines to work it. I don't know how successful they were at the time but it's been a headache operationally ever since. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lickey_Incline
Over the years a number of 'bankers' or pushers were specially built to handle the incline, mostly 0-6-0 tanks in multiple, then in 1919 the Midland Railway built an 0-10-0 which became known as the 'Lickey banker' for pushing duties.
Didn't that pusher get the nickname "Big Emma"?
As soon as you went straight to the 4-8-8-4 i was screaming at the screen asking where the cab forwards were!!
Nonetheless, a fantastic video on wheel arrangements.
They're just backwards 2-8-8-4's :P
Well, sort of. Except that the 4-wheel truck acts as a leading truck as far as keeping it on the track.
@@Hyce777 What about the 4-6-6-2’s?
the PRR when NYC foamers complain about why there is a T1 new build but not a Niagara:
One question remains (although that's no longer steam locomotive territory) : Why did we eventually go away from unpowered wheels? Obviously the firebox was no longer an issue and articulation is easier to do with diesel or electric, but early models like the Alco DL-109 (a A1A-A1A under AAC) or the Swiss Ae 8/14 (a (1A)A1A(A1)+(1A)A1A(A1) under UIC) still had unpowered wheels. But somehow modern locomotives are almost exclusively all wheel drive
If I recall correctly there was also a proposed design for a quadraplex.
13:05 The NYC Mohawk Is With Smoke Deflectors
Alan Fisher explains perfectly well why these locomotives got so big.
You know, for what it's worth, I seem to remember hearing somewhere that the 4-4-4 was also called the Adriatic, although I'm guessing these were quite rare. My rule of thumb about wheel arrangements generally is that if there aren't any model versions of it, it probably wasn't very common, and I have never seen a 4-4-4 anywhere.
Is there anything better than whiskey and watching a good Hyce video? I think not.
10:00
I love the fact that one of the names given for the 4-10-0 is “a bad idea”. Peek comedy!
People in WV say "Kanawha" as "Kuh-now-uh". Given the native background/ origin, I would argue the actual would be "Kah-nah-wah" with hard stops on each syllable.
The WV folks I know trained me to say "Keh-nah".
@@ChrisCaramia These are the same folks that pronounce 'hurricane' as 'her-uh-kin' lmao
Bolshoy chungus ...absolutely lost it 😂😂😂
I'm happy I get to say I've been pulled by the Strasbourg decapod before
Was good. I have been waiting for this video forever. I get so confused with names of wheel arrangments so thank you.
You left out the 4-2-0, the most common US engine of the 1830s.and the engine for which Jervis invented the 4-wheel lead truck. This was Baldwin's and Norris's bread and butter until they adopted the 4-4-0. (Baldwin had the flexible beam engines in between, but Whyte doesn't work for those oddballs.) Also, Baldwin managed to sell a short-lived triplex to (IIRC0 Virginian. Western Maryland had the largest cylindered Mallets in the 2-10-10-2 format. All of these were used as pushers because they had too much tractive effort for early Janney and MCB couplers.
The 2-10-10-2 mallets were Virginian, not Western Maryland, but yeah. I mentioned in another comment that you could comfortably fit Montezuma's driver sets inside their front cylinders.
over half of the designs where there were more than one set of drivers were most likely drawn on a napkin a little over 6 beers in.
Balshoy Chungus! LOLLLLLLLLLLL
That was funny. Not sure if anyone noticed that or not, but well done.
Thank you for showing my favorite 2-6-0 class 😀
Fun fact The 2-10-4 texas type depicted in the video santafe 5000 also know as the "madam queen" resides in my home town, amarillo Texas
Dynamo productions really carried the background clips here lol
They're wonderful folks over there. Been friends with a few of those guys for a decade plus and when they offered free use of their footage for educational stuff I didn't turn it down! Lol
I didn't know there was an 0-3-0, but I do know there was a 2-10-10-10-2 just... Why. I love geared locomotives like the Heisler and Shays
there were actually quite a lot of very succesfull 2-10 locomotives in europe, for example the german class 52
You forgot the Erie L-1 (0-8-8-0 camelback) and i think that general wheel arrangement
In the spirit of 'There was something in the video that I know and want to tell everyone about it.'
The Garrett that was shown was a New Zealand Railways G class of 1928. Some very interesting engines that didn't work very well, they where some of the few Garretts with 6 cylinders - apparently there was some LNER involvement there - the coal bunker was attached to the back of the cab rather than the rear engine unit like is normal for a Garrett. In service the engines had a habit of breaking drawbars, hitting platforms with the cylinders, and the cab was a sauna going through tunnels because of the steam piping through the cab to the rear engine. The problems of these engines lead to the K class 4-8-4 locos and the follow on Ka and Kb classes. The 3 Garretts where rebuilt into 6 more conventional locomotives with 3 cylinders each, these continued service until 1956 when the unions barred them from use, they then sat around for a few years before being scrapped in the early 60s.
It was just a case of 'too big too soon'. I think the NZR, after years of struggling to get enough power to fit their tight loading gauge, just overdid it in the specifications. The Class G's were just too big and powerful, they could haul trains that were too long for the crossing loops, too powerful for the wagon drawgear, and as a result of their size used too much coal for the limited size of trains that could fit on the line. It's a shame because a more modest-sized Garratt would have been ideal for New Zealand's steep winding lines.
Love my shay all wheel drive. Wont win no speed record but makes up for it by putting all her strenght into all wheels
I think now that youve done steam engine wheel arrangements now its time to do Diesel electric locomotive classifications because that can be confusing at times as well.
I think that's a good call.
@@Hyce777 I look forward to seeing it on your channel.
I loved this! This video was awesome!!!
on weird things, in france we had some 031 - 130 articulated tank engines.
the look great tho
Interesting how much geography informs locomotive design, too.
The European designs were to the best of my knowledge on average a bit smaller and usually stayed at three powered axles, excepting a few express train (>80 mph)or heavy duty freight haulers. Those were already restricted to only part of the network as much of the terrain was hilly, and/or densely urbanized, necessitating a smaller minimum turning radius
Poor old Skookum, 2-4-42
Also, 2-4-0s were referred to as "Porters" (HK Porter built the grand majority of them)
Porter referred to its 2-4-0's simply as light passenger locomotives, or by their classification B-2-T (four coupled wheels, two leading wheels, tender). "Porter" and "Bowker" as names for the wheel arrangement are foamer-isms.
While the 2-4-0 was quickly replaced with the 4-4-0 in America it was more common in Europe during the 19th century, mainly because early railroads in the US were laid in a very simple manner directly on the soil they needed a truck for better guidance. In Europe the early railways were already built on a ballasted track bed giving a far better ride for a 2-4-0 to be sufficient, when speeds exceeded 55mph the leading trucks did also take off in Europe.
Early European 2-4-0s by the way were fixed frame locomotives, the leading axle was part of the rigid wheel base but did reduce the side to side sway of a locomotive because it was in front of the cylinders. later the 2-6-0, 2-6-2, 4-6-0, 4-6-2, 2-8-0 and 2-8-2 would become the most common types in Europe. Northern tender locomotives were rare, Spain did have a class, France and Germany had prototype classes of a single or few locomotives, the tank engine type 4-8-4 was a bit more used, I know that France, Spain, Czech republic, the Netherlands and Ireland possessed tank locomotives of this wheel arrangement.
Perhaps I missed it but I don't think you mentioned 2-10-10-2 locomotives. Thanks for the great videos!
Hi from France !
Why the 2-6-2 is refered as "the French shaped locomotive" ? It is strange because this wheel arrangement was never used in France. There were lots of 2-4-2 in the second half of XIXth century, a few 4-4-0 around 1900, then Atlanics quickly followed by Pacifics just before the 1910's that became the most common type for passenger trains. I believe Italy had some 2-6-2 but not France.
Timestamps because i couldn't find any
0:00 Intro
0:24 Whyte Notation
1:30 Tank vs Tender
1:52 Articulateds
2:20 Chaos from France and Belgium
2:32 Start
2:44 0-2-0
2:55 0-3-0
3:06 0-4-0
3:30 0-6-0
3:47 0-8-0
3:49 0-10-0
3:52 0-12-0
4:44 Common ones
5:05 4-14-4
5:14 Leading and Trailing Wheels
6:20 Funny Dance
6:34 2-4-0
6:45 2-6-0
7:08 2-8-0
7:50 2-10-0
8:42 4-4-0
9:05 4-6-0
9:24 4-8-0
9:34 4-10-0
11:31 2-4-2
11:42 2-6-2
11:59 2-8-2
12:27 2-10-2
12:41 4-4-2
12:49 4-6-2
13:00 4-8-2
13:08 4-10-2
13:15 4-12-2
13:26 2-6-4
13:30 2-8-4
13:50 2-10-4
13:59 4-4-4
14:05 4-6-4
14:18 4-6-6
14:29 4-8-4 (the best)
15:13 Articulateds Again and Duplex
16:12 4-4-4-4
16:18 6-4-4-6
16:23 4-4-6-4
16:29 4-6-4-4
16:49 0-6-6-0
17:04 2-6-6-0
17:20 2-6-6-2
17:28 2-6-6-4
17:34 2-6-6-6
17:42 4-6-6-4
17:54 2-8-8-0
17:59 2-8-8-2
18:06 2-8-8-4
18:15 4-8-8-4
18:31 2-10-10-2
18:36 2-8-8-8-2 and 2-8-8-8-4
19:25 outro
If you really like this video might I recommend a channel called American Steam Legacy, who has (at current) a 7 part series on wheel arrangement
13:26 AW&AL 1592 (fictional train) has that arrangement.
What is the feasibility of doing a video explaining the diesel locomotive wheel arrangement system? In all my years I've never understood that one
You forgot the 0-8-8-0 camelback, angus type i believe
13:28 Why does Lionel want to know my location? I got that 2-6-4 engine, tender, two cars and caboose for Christmas 1951.