From what I have been able to find, the GNRY R class locomotives produced about 5500 horsepower. Very impressive sight for a young lad in Naples Idaho so many years ago. But the O-8's and the S-1's we're just as impressive. It is unfortunate that these GNRY locomotives got so little coverage in all the years. They were outstanding performers.
Great Video Brendan! The R-2's were built to pull the grades on the Great Nothern's mainline from Minot ND west to Spokane, Washington ....most notably the 2.2% grades in the Skykomish area and the Marias Pass.They had the largest capacity boiler of any articulated built...about 1/3rd larger in both evaporative and superheater heating areas than the iconic UP Big Boy had. The R-2's were a lot more engine than the Y6B's were.
The AE 2-10-10-2 Had boilers nearly 10 ft in diameter. 176,600 lbs of tractive force. Front cylinders 4 ft in diameter. Having said that...the R-2s were nothing to laugh at. Truly one of the strongest steam locomotives ever built. Their boilers definitely look massive .
@@torquetrain8963 The AE's were pretty much relegated to the helper-pusher class. They were limited to about 10 mph max. The 176K tractiive effort was with all four cylinders in the simple mode used for starting...in the compound setting it pencils out to 135K or so. While it wasn't a locomotive suited for running across the plains like the R-2's the Virginian RR found them useful for their needs and ran them until the early 1950's.
@@greatnorthernn-3154 I've always wondered why the Y6B always seems to get more fame than the R-2 . The R-2 was the largest steam locomotive ever built west of the Mississippi. They also were larger, heavier and stronger than the Y6B. I would say the R-2 other than the AE class is the strongest mainline locomotive ever built of any type of propulsion. Steam has more torque than diesel. I know this will bring tremendous argument from many, but its true. I have an o scale model of the R2 , and it's my favorite engine.
@@torquetrain8963 There is nothing wrong with the Y6's...they were a well designed locomotive and performed well for the needs of N&W. They were mostly used for pusher and helper work as the N&W "A" class was a more useful road engine in the freight department. The R-2's have a couple of strikes against it in the publicity dept. First none of them survived the torch. Second it is a very rare thing to come across a film of one in operation. The only source I know of is the 6 minute segment in Pentrex's video on the Great Northern Railway. I know of no others. When big articulated steam is highlighted in other RR videos Great Northern is almost never mentioned. So the problem is that most people really don't know anything about them.
The GN R2 class were very impressive articulated type locomotives and it's a true shame that not one member of this locomotive class was saved from being scrapped & preserved for future public display viewing. I particularly like the 2-8-8-2 engines operated by the GN, Western Pacific and D&RGW as all 3 railroads had interesting examples of this specific articulated design.
I've often thought that the Baldwin Locomotive Works must have pulled out the old 1925 R-1 blueprints when they designed the 2-8-8-4 "Yellowstones" for the DM&IR in the early 40's. Other than the smaller cylinders of 26" x 32" and the addition of a rear trailing truck the DM&IR "Yellowstones" were a very close match in boiler capacity, weight, and tractive effort of the R-1's. Being built in the early 40's they also benefited from roller bearings on the drive axles...something the Great Northern "R" class never had. The "R"'s ran on plain bearings on the drivers and were never upgraded.
Here is some information about the DM&IR Baldwin Yellowstones, paraphrased from the November 1980 issue of Trains magazine that will provide some clarity. It comes from an article written by Frank A. King, the noted DM&IR historian, about the progression of Missabe's articulated steam locomotives. The DM&IR selected the Western Pacific M-137-151 class articulateds built by Baldwin in 1938 as the basic pattern for its 1941 Baldwin M3 and M4 class 2-8-8-4's. Robert A. Le Massena's "Articulated Steam Locomotives of North America" (Sundance Publications, 1979) has the details but the main differences between the WP 2-8-8-2 and the DM&IR 2-8-8-4 are the length of the combustion chamber (1 foot longer on the M3), the tube/flue arrangement (27x2.25" and 75x5.5 inches [WP] vs. 82x2.25 and 245x3.75 inches [Missabe]). That is a whopping 25 percent more superheating surface and 6 percent more combined heating surface over the WP engine. The WP boiler operated at 235 psi while the M3 was rated for 240 psi. The boiler on the Missabe engine was far superior to the WP Yellowstone it was patterned after. Also, unlike the WP engine, the Missabe's Yellowstone had roller bearings throughout the engine as well as integrally cast cylinders and frames. The Missabe Yellowstones had a 67 feet 2 inch wheelbase vs. the 61 feet 5 inch length of the WP engine. The Missabe was impressed with the new pedestal tenders of the Union Pacific Big Boys, just then being introduced, and worked with Baldwin to come up with a similar tender to the ALCo locomotives. This new tender design allowed a 3,000 gallon increase over the conventional tender the Missabe was originally considering to 25,000 gallons. The first Missabe Yellowstones, class M3, cost $246,570 each, an astronomical sum for an articulated steamer in those days but Missabe ate the cost to get a locomotive that would have an immediate impact on traffic movement and that's exactly what they got. The later M4 Yellowstones were heavier than the M3's as the exotic weight-saving metals used on the M3 were no longer available. The Missabe locomotives broke in under full tonnage and no alterations or modifications were ever required. They were released to the regular pool after only three supervised trips. The Missabe Yellowstones were rated at 140,000 lbs. tractive effort (engine only) which put it at #4 on the list of most powerful articulateds. In comparison, the massive Northern Pacific Z-5 Yellowstone built by ALCo was rated at 139,900 lbs. (engine and booster) or just 100 lbs. less than Missabe's. The NP's choice of fuel, lignite, came from an online source and was responsible for the enormous size of the Z-5's boiler.
@@douglasskaalrud6865 Thanks for the interesting information and a plug for the book. I'll have to check it out. Here is a video of the last ore train pulled by the Yellowstones for the DM&IR. ua-cam.com/video/mIvrNHpsjaU/v-deo.html
Great video! I think the next video you should have should be on GN's O-8 Mikes. They were literally Berkshires on mikado frames, and they could out power Berkshires. Trains magazine writer Norman F. Priebe called them " the world's greatest mikado".
I had came acrouse a UA-cam video about the history of the Shay locomotives and found out that there is a 4 tuck Shay which is a class D which I didn't know about the 4 different classes of Shays Brendan
@@brendanstrains9725 I must have mist it during the video that day. the 4 truck Shay must be very rare because I haven't heard about it before at any tourist railroads
Nice video. Just a FYI, tractive effort is only a measure of static pull. Starting tractive effort is a measure of static pull at 0 mph. It is not a measure of power, hence why it is only measured in pounds. Power always has a factor of time involved and is not the same as tractive effort.
Did GN have any USRA 2 6 6 2 mallets? I normally run GN in N scale but my locos have historical prototypes. I bought this n scale Spectrum undec 2-6-6-2 but if I mark it Great Northern I probably won't be historically correct.
basically It is. each episode talks about the history of a steam locomotive class on the Great Northern. I've seen no videos of people talking about most of these GN steam locomotives.
From what I have been able to find, the GNRY R class locomotives produced about 5500 horsepower. Very impressive sight for a young lad in Naples Idaho so many years ago. But the O-8's and the S-1's we're just as impressive. It is unfortunate that these GNRY locomotives got so little coverage in all the years. They were outstanding performers.
Thank you so much for the big 2882 steam engine explanation. I am very much taken with Big Steam (ie-the Big Boy, the Allegheny & others).
Great Video Brendan! The R-2's were built to pull the grades on the Great Nothern's mainline from Minot ND west to Spokane, Washington ....most notably the 2.2% grades in the Skykomish area and the Marias Pass.They had the largest capacity boiler of any articulated built...about 1/3rd larger in both evaporative and superheater heating areas than the iconic UP Big Boy had. The R-2's were a lot more engine than the Y6B's were.
The R2s were truly amazing engines with strength sad that none of these brutes made it out.
The AE 2-10-10-2 Had boilers nearly 10 ft in diameter. 176,600 lbs of tractive force. Front cylinders 4 ft in diameter. Having said that...the R-2s were nothing to laugh at. Truly one of the strongest steam locomotives ever built. Their boilers definitely look massive .
@@torquetrain8963 The AE's were pretty much relegated to the helper-pusher class. They were limited to about 10 mph max. The 176K tractiive effort was with all four cylinders in the simple mode used for starting...in the compound setting it pencils out to 135K or so. While it wasn't a locomotive suited for running across the plains like the R-2's the Virginian RR found them useful for their needs and ran them until the early 1950's.
@@greatnorthernn-3154 I've always wondered why the Y6B always seems to get more fame than the R-2 . The R-2 was the largest steam locomotive ever built west of the Mississippi. They also were larger, heavier and stronger than the Y6B. I would say the R-2 other than the AE class is the strongest mainline locomotive ever built of any type of propulsion. Steam has more torque than diesel. I know this will bring tremendous argument from many, but its true. I have an o scale model of the R2 , and it's my favorite engine.
@@torquetrain8963 There is nothing wrong with the Y6's...they were a well designed locomotive and performed well for the needs of N&W. They were mostly used for pusher and helper work as the N&W "A" class was a more useful road engine in the freight department.
The R-2's have a couple of strikes against it in the publicity dept. First none of them survived the torch. Second it is a very rare thing to come across a film of one in operation. The only source I know of is the 6 minute segment in Pentrex's video on the Great Northern Railway. I know of no others. When big articulated steam is highlighted in other RR videos Great Northern is almost never mentioned. So the problem is that most people really don't know anything about them.
Awesome history on the gn R1 and 2! They were monsters for sure!
They were it would have been cool if one of was preserved we don’t have any GN articulateds left.
I must say with that much boiler pressure I am surprised that none of these engines ever exploded
They did have less boiler pressure then most of the other articulated.
@@brendanstrains9725 oh i see
The GN R2 class were very impressive articulated type locomotives and it's a true shame that not one member of this locomotive class was saved from being scrapped & preserved for future public display viewing. I particularly like the 2-8-8-2 engines operated by the GN, Western Pacific and D&RGW as all 3 railroads had interesting examples of this specific articulated design.
We did have a couple in 1962 but after that all of them were gone.
I've often thought that the Baldwin Locomotive Works must have pulled out the old 1925 R-1 blueprints when they designed the 2-8-8-4 "Yellowstones" for the DM&IR in the early 40's. Other than the smaller cylinders of 26" x 32" and the addition of a rear trailing truck the DM&IR "Yellowstones" were a very close match in boiler capacity, weight, and tractive effort of the R-1's. Being built in the early 40's they also benefited from roller bearings on the drive axles...something the Great Northern "R" class never had. The "R"'s ran on plain bearings on the drivers and were never upgraded.
Very interesting
Here is some information about the DM&IR Baldwin Yellowstones, paraphrased from the November 1980 issue of Trains magazine that will provide some clarity. It comes from an article written by Frank A. King, the noted DM&IR historian, about the progression of Missabe's articulated steam locomotives. The DM&IR selected the Western Pacific M-137-151 class articulateds built by Baldwin in 1938 as the basic pattern for its 1941 Baldwin M3 and M4 class 2-8-8-4's. Robert A. Le Massena's "Articulated Steam Locomotives of North America" (Sundance Publications, 1979) has the details but the main differences between the WP 2-8-8-2 and the DM&IR 2-8-8-4 are the length of the combustion chamber (1 foot longer on the M3), the tube/flue arrangement (27x2.25" and 75x5.5 inches [WP] vs. 82x2.25 and 245x3.75 inches [Missabe]). That is a whopping 25 percent more superheating surface and 6 percent more combined heating surface over the WP engine. The WP boiler operated at 235 psi while the M3 was rated for 240 psi. The boiler on the Missabe engine was far superior to the WP Yellowstone it was patterned after. Also, unlike the WP engine, the Missabe's Yellowstone had roller bearings throughout the engine as well as integrally cast cylinders and frames. The Missabe Yellowstones had a 67 feet 2 inch wheelbase vs. the 61 feet 5 inch length of the WP engine. The Missabe was impressed with the new pedestal tenders of the Union Pacific Big Boys, just then being introduced, and worked with Baldwin to come up with a similar tender to the ALCo locomotives. This new tender design allowed a 3,000 gallon increase over the conventional tender the Missabe was originally considering to 25,000 gallons. The first Missabe Yellowstones, class M3, cost $246,570 each, an astronomical sum for an articulated steamer in those days but Missabe ate the cost to get a locomotive that would have an immediate impact on traffic movement and that's exactly what they got. The later M4 Yellowstones were heavier than the M3's as the exotic weight-saving metals used on the M3 were no longer available. The Missabe locomotives broke in under full tonnage and no alterations or modifications were ever required. They were released to the regular pool after only three supervised trips. The Missabe Yellowstones were rated at 140,000 lbs. tractive effort (engine only) which put it at #4 on the list of most powerful articulateds. In comparison, the massive Northern Pacific Z-5 Yellowstone built by ALCo was rated at 139,900 lbs. (engine and booster) or just 100 lbs. less than Missabe's. The NP's choice of fuel, lignite, came from an online source and was responsible for the enormous size of the Z-5's boiler.
@@douglasskaalrud6865 Thanks for the interesting information and a plug for the book. I'll have to check it out. Here is a video of the last ore train pulled by the Yellowstones for the DM&IR.
ua-cam.com/video/mIvrNHpsjaU/v-deo.html
Great video! I think the next video you should have should be on GN's O-8 Mikes. They were literally Berkshires on mikado frames, and they could out power Berkshires. Trains magazine writer Norman F. Priebe called them " the world's greatest mikado".
Your right on that for the O8s it's sad that one was not preserved. I might do them next we will see.
Fantastic Brendan!!! I really liked the history behind it!! Your layout is looking great and the trains is outstanding. Awesome man.
Thanks!!!
when is episode 8 coming out
Episode 8 is currently in the works script is done. But i have two other videos coming first before episode 8 comes out.
I had came acrouse a UA-cam video about the history of the Shay locomotives and found out that there is a 4 tuck Shay which is a class D which I didn't know about the 4 different classes of Shays Brendan
I did mention the 4 truck shay in the shay history.
@@brendanstrains9725 I must have mist it during the video that day. the 4 truck Shay must be very rare because I haven't heard about it before at any tourist railroads
I like the Mallets alot. We have a Chesapeake and Ohio for our Layout. Nice Video. Matt
Thanks!
Awesome Work, The GN Was An Awesome Railroad
Thanks!
I'm interested when you cover the R-1 2-6-8-0s. Those oddballs deserve more attention
The m class 2-6-8-0s will be talked about in a later episode
Awesome
Thanks!
I would hace Like it it atleast some R1's and R2's were preserved
It would have been cool if at least one made it out.
Yeah Like how come we have a GN S2 left but we don't have any GN R's left
Nice video. Just a FYI, tractive effort is only a measure of static pull. Starting tractive effort is a measure of static pull at 0 mph. It is not a measure of power, hence why it is only measured in pounds. Power always has a factor of time involved and is not the same as tractive effort.
Love the history!
can you do one of the frisco railroad
I have AN idea for episode 2. Ask UA-camrs Alpha the gs4 and Andrew raila bammers to be your helpers
We will see
they are called Mullets after the switz guy
cool video
Thanks!
@@brendanstrains9725 your welcome
Did GN have any USRA 2 6 6 2 mallets? I normally run GN in N scale but my locos have historical prototypes. I bought this n scale Spectrum undec 2-6-6-2 but if I mark it Great Northern I probably won't be historically correct.
The GN never had 2-6-6-2s that are a USRA design
So this is basically a "Engines of" series, am I correct?
basically It is. each episode talks about the history of a steam locomotive class on the Great Northern. I've seen no videos of people talking about most of these GN steam locomotives.
Cool
Nice but I think you should also do the P class 4-8-2
I will be talking about the P class in a later episode I will probably be doing all of the classes of Steam locomotives on the GN.
Ok and Btw LJL Railyard is live streaming now
Can you do sp&s steam
Maybe I will in the future
You can do the challenges and northerns and more
@@nicholasspisak7600 ok
Yes sir
Thanks!