Well,as a child,I never thought a Big Boy,would ever run the rails again. Great engine....but the Alleghany was built by Lima. The best next to Norfolk and Western`s own designs. So miracles do happen!!! To answer your question-YES!!!! Bring it back!!!!
The Allegheny was a classic example of many late modern steam engines. It had all the potential to be a stunning engine- BUT the C&O was a very conservative railroad and never developed the Allegheny to its full potential. It ran at only 260PSI versus 300PSI for the N&W "big three" and 300psi for the "Big Boy". As a result it had an extremely high factor of adhesion 4.75 but it could stall with a heavy train as a result. Increasing the psi to 300 would have moved its tractive effort from the 115.000 range to upwards of 125.000. And it was built to incorporate a booster in the trailing truck which would have added another 13,000 TE. It was very heavy, but this was caused by the AMC constantly asking Lima to increase this, and that part to fulfill their wishes. The C&O sued Lima, but they were the cause of its excessive weight. But keep this in mind, 75 Alleghenys (plus 6 for the Virginian) were built, the last being in 1948. There were only 25 "Big Boys". AND Alleghenys were NOT retired in 1952. Some were still running in 1955. AND the "Big Boy" boiler would fit INSIDE the Allegheny boiler. This was a magnificent machine but unlike the N&W engines it was not developed to its maximum. That having been said- it had the horsepower!
@Reg mason - What a glorious rant. It is sad to think that the very people who were the cause of this engine's development never properly used it. The fact - if true - that the Big Boiler could fit inside the allegheny boiler has nothing to show but that Big Boy was more powerful and developed more HP to the same purpose. It is tragic that these wonderful machines, was never utilized to the maximum. I wonder who won the lawsuit?? All in all, I think you would enthusiastically agree that the place for these is on the rails where their power and effectiveness can be demonstrated again.
@@blockstacker5614 Hi - Thanks. I had the feeling that the Allegheny has something extra. Wouldn't it be wonderful if that could be restored to working condition. Two of those hi tech machine working. Well, one can dream.
Allegheny indeed had such a veracious boiler, that steam was always abundant. In tests, nearly 7500hp at the drawbar could be attained. At 110,200 lbs tractive effort, although impressive, it was way to low for such a heavy locomotive, with 80,000 lbs per axle. T. E. should've been easily in the 125,000 lbs range. Obviously, the UP 4000's were magnificent steamers, and with more driving wheels, had tremendous pulling power. However, "only" about 6300 hp could be attained at drawbar. So, who's the most powerful?? Depends on if it's sheer horsepower or sheer tractive effort.. My vote is for the N&W's Y- class, 2-8-8-2's !! Built for mountain duty specifically. They could develop 5000hp,but amazingly could produce 160,000 lbs tractive effort, or more... The Y's, theoretically could outpull both Big Boy and Allegheny, in them there mountains!!
@@organbuilder272 Mr. Shaw I just saw your response. Yes the Big Boy boiler would fit inside the Allegheny boiler. C&O won the lawsuit- Lima probably lost money on the C&O order. Bob Hundmans book " The Allegheny- Limas Finest" covers all the points I mentioned. Thanks for your comment!
Despite the Allegheny being one of the largest and most powerful locomotives built, there is really no film footage of this amazing locomotive to be found. The only video I have ever seen is played on a loop at the Henry ford museum where the other Allegheny is on display. Even that video is only a few minutes long.
My Ggrandfather was a fireman for the B&O. He was killed in McConnellsville PA by a passing freighter. It seems his train was on a siding and he stepped he fell into the path of the approaching train and according to newspaper accounts his body was hurled some distance. This happened 29 June 1913. The only record of him that I’ve ever been able to find is his obituary. I wish more records of this company had been preserved
For those who must know... ALLEGHENY (Heavy-Duty Coal Dragger) 124'4" long (76'8" locomotive, 47'8" tender) 11'2" wide * 16'6" tall * 549 Tons (388 Tons from locomotive *) 260 psi (But possibly more?) 110211 TractEff (But possibly more?) 7,500 HP * BIG BOY (Sub-Mountain Fast Freighter) 132'10" long (85'10" locomotive, 47' tender) * 11' wide 16' tall 608 Tons * (386 Tons from locomotive) 300 psi * 135375 TractEff * 6,300 HP (* star means higher stat than the other locomotive)
Nice to see you've got her indoors. My dad photographed 1604 sitting out by the parking lot in the early 70s, and I remember seeing the H-8 in the early 80s, looking rather the worse for wear.
In 1984 John Carrier and myself while attending engineering school at West Virginian Tech in Montgomery WV would occasionally go rail fanning Saturday nights at the New Rivers's edge at the base of the New River Gorge Arch Bridge, the highest arch highway bridge in the eastern United States at the time. On Bridge day people parachute off this bridge. This is the site of the CSX mainline, historically the C&O mainline and the only section of railroad the H8s regularly ran. CSX freight trains pulling up the grade would put on a real show. They'd been pulling hard for quite a few miles fighting a 0.6% grade, although you'd think it was more from the stain it placed on the coal rains. By this location the coal trains had lost most of their momentum and were frequently down to just 12mph or less at full throttle. At night these locomotives would visibly throw sparks and would be glowing from everywhere. They'd appear to be just about to meltdown or blow up. The entire area of the New River Gorge would rumble with 5-6 diesel locomotives straining against the grade at full throttle and we'd have a front row seat. It is pretty intense. You are not normally around diesel locomotives at full throttle and if you are, they normally pass you in an instant. Not so when they are near stall speed! The typical unit coal train these locomotive would be pulling was 10,000 tons. The same weight of train the H8 narrative said one H8 would pull at 15 mph. Well, that 15 mph was likely pulling up the New River grade at this location and is faster than the diesels we'd typically see pulling coal up that grade. If was typical for GE's to shutdown due to the strain of the grade causing the EMDs and the remaining GEs to pull near their stall speed through the area. That is one reason at that time we'd witness such a show. When things are running well maybe coal trains go through there at 22 mph. Being able to pull a 10,000 ton coal train up that grade with just one locomotive would seem impossible after seeing what it does to a string of diesels at that time, but there is really no other sensible location the H8 narrative could of been talking about. So those H8 were doing something truly incredible. Diesels at full throttle can't produce their full tractive effort for more than 10-15 minutes at 10-15 mph. They overheat and shutdown. In mountain service locomotives produce full throttle mile after mile climbing long grades and if coal trains frequently down at low speeds of just 12-15 mph, while in regular country once a train is started there is not much need for full throttle for freight trains. I frequently saw GE s that appeared to have shut themselves down and were still hot from overheating. A fully engineered steam locomotive can produce its full tractive effort at 10-15 mph all day if it had fuel and water to do so. That's why old railroaders say steam locomotives could pull more tonnage than the rated putting power of diesels. Diesels could only do it for a few minutes.
we went there, and went white water rafting for our senior trip, people thought I was b.s'n them when I told them the same thing. Ppl were base jumping that day in 2000. When the w.v. quarter came out, I was like hey look, that pic could very well have been taken the day we were there, they did photographers. now it's illegal to base jump I believe. ty for the history.
Thanks for your reply. We also discovered how to get onto the inspection cat walk and into the super structure inspection passages of the New River Gorge Bridge and did so many times bring doubters of our exploits that then found out what it is like to be on a cat walk over 900-feet above the bottom of the New River Gorge. I was from Northern VA and John from Albany NY. It seemed that most of the rest of the population of the school was from WV and would vacate on the weekends leaving a dead campus. I was the one that pushed to do the road trips and I drove all of them I think, but John really was well versed on railroads and I'm still expanding on much of what I learned and experienced because of him 30-years later.
I was a dispatcher on the New river SD years ago. The funny thing that struck me. In the fall an engineer would radio us and tell us he was hung up on the mountain. He said everything is running fine. I would ask him, then what is the problem. He would state that the leafs from the tree was on the rail and they would make them lose traction. Even with the sanders running fine I’ve seen many a coal train hang up that way. We would often run a small freight to clear the leafs off the rail in the fall.
That's amazing. Only 10,000 ton coal train. When I worked for CSX I think the heaviest I remember was 22,000. Over the mountain and down to Cumberland.
The C&O Allegheny type is an impressive articulated steam locomotive and they had a fairly short service life operation ; also, the class H-8 engines were not all retired by 1952. Several data sources researching the C&O "Allegheny" type state that some examples of this locomotive remained in operation for the C&O until 1956.
amazing machines, I just wish they were used at their designed operating profile so they got more impressive service. If you want a real nice locomotive for the profile these ran at, the n&w Y6b was a very well done locomotive for this type of train.
In the opening shots it is very impressive to see how many of the engines and cars are rust streaked, stained and peeling pain. What a wonderful way to preserve heritage. Next stop - scrap yard. That said - it is commendable that the two surviving locomotives are in interior protected areas. If either of those engines has any value, you will not climb into the cab and pretend to be an engineer - but these machines, maybe sponsored by the Ford Foundation, will be restored to working condition and put back to work. Paintings can hang in a museum and serve their pupose. Books can sit on library shelves. but if you wish to teach about history and heritage - machinery is only demonstrated by functioning in the original job. Then let someone into the cab. They can still pretend they are engineers (With the brakes locked) and feel the gentle rocking of the engine as the water boils, feel the heat of that enormous firebox - nearly as big as the ordinary bedroom, listen to the pumps and dynamo working in real time. Then the throttle is opened, drain cocks opened and the real locomotive does not have to pretend any more. UP did it with Big Boy - How about you guys doing it with one of your precious engines. Don't be so selfish, so covetous that you will not let this be free to thunder down the rails once more. Someday, when it is really too tired to work more - 50 years from now, bring it home to a peaceful retirement.
Union Pacific's a Class One railroad with the money and infrastructure, as in the old Cheyenne backshop, to rebuild and subsequently maintain something of the 4014's and 1604's size. The B&O **Museum** does not have that luxury. Even if they did, where would they run it? Yes it's true that the sheer size and weight of the engine are what make it famous, but those same attributes also severely limit the operating range of the engine. Also, I'd be willing to bet that there would need to be significant infrastructure upgrades required to allow a fully intact and fully loaded Allegheny to operate over CSX lines, and any shortlines it may need to operate over, so good luck convincing someone to foot that bill. I say operate over CSX lines because if an Allegheny's rebuilt and brought back to operation, there's gonna be a demand for it to run over home rails, which are under CSX ownership nowadays. Also, there's gonna be a need to convert the tender trucks and trailing truck to roller bearings and get the air brake system working before moving it over rail to a suitable rebuilding site if that move includes going over CSX rails. So, that's time and money in getting that work done which would probably include cranes to lift the tender up to get the trucks out from under it. Are you starting to see why the 1604 is static and cold? There's a lotta factors set against an Allegheny coming back. Is it doable? Yes, the rebuilding of 4014 proved that it can probably be done, so long as the locomotive is in decent mechanical shape. Also, the crowds that would come out to see an operating Allegheny would probably equal the ones that greet the 4014 during its travels, and CSX hasn't hosted any big steam excursions like what an Allegheny would pull since the 90's, 1994 to be exact, so that'd probably make them even more reluctant to host the engine. Again, are seeing why it's even more unlikely for an Allegheny to come back to operation then it was for the 4014? Also, if you got the money to get all of the B&O Museum's collection cosmetically restored and looking brand new, and under climate controlled cover to avoid rust and corrosion, by all means, please do get that money over to them and let them know that's what you're donating that money to them for. I'd bet that they'll happily take it and use it for that purpose. Now, am I against an Allegheny coming back to operation? Absolutely not. I'm just being realistic about it. One would more likely then not need a big corporate sponsor to get the engine running again, or just hope and pray CSX starts their own steam program that involves them rebuilding an Allegheny themselves like UP did with 3985 and 4014 and NS did with the 1218, but I highly doubt that'll happen unless a very wealthy railfan decides to purchase CSX or just comes to power within the company and initiates that kinda thing.
ohh rare footage of them in usage, there is almost no video of the allegheny h8's in action, but there seems to be everything else out there including a few videos of the big boy class, but we all know the h8 was more powerful, I would love to see the one in dearborn restored to running oh that would be soo sweet.
The Allegheny was never used to its full potential by the C&O. The regulated them to 25 mph slow coal drags. It was a costly locomotive to Lima, as the builder never made any money from them thanks to a lawsuit filed by the C&O over the weight of the Alleghenies.
The railroad seems to have been very happy with the Allegheny as a slow "drag" freight locomotive though. And some of the same people ordered more of the same type for the Virginian Railway.
When the Diesels bumped them from the coal runs, they really found out what they could do. If an H-8 could get a train started, it could run with that train at speed. Here is where if the C&O has used a helper to get a train started, they could have cut off on the fly and the H-8 would have run away with trains heavier than it could start by itself. We don't know what the maximum power it could develop was as the test train had to be limited to what the engine could start. But at 7498 HP, it beat out anything else at 45MPH.
At least they're cared for at the Museum and not rotting away in a scrapyard. To restore an engine of the Allegheny's size would take millions of dollars and decades to accomplish. Then there's the issue of finding a place to run the locomotive - CSX's insurance policy is ludicrously expensive and they won't accept steam operations on that very basis. So, it may not be impossible to rebuild an Allegheny, but there are a lot of factors against it.
Ok. I got it. JUST RESTORE IT FOR GOD SAKE AND STOP THE EXCUSES!!! If they did it with the Big Boy you can do it with the Allegheny. JESUS!!! Nothing is impossible and impossible is nothing. The damn machine is asking desperately to be restored and put back to work, cant you guys see that??
@@jppicur Actually, there are some places on the CSX lines that could handle it. CSX does still use 141lb/yard rail and that is the minimum needed for them. Don't know if UP has any of that size rail.
Sorry Bud but the Allegheny had a 7500 HP the big Boy 6300 HP Well it didn't carry the name "BIG BOY" it proved that a mountain train is the King of the hill.
+Tim Pierce Sorry, but both were poor. A steam locomotive can and should be able to maintain 40ihp per ton of locomotive weight. This standard was established in the 1930s so in the 1940s what excuse did any builder have for producing such overweight/under powered machines?
@@floydrandol2731 not in accordance with any of the books I've read: where is that particular documentation? and of course it's all completely irrelevant, Paul Keifer being really the only one to start incorporating thermal dynamics - big boy managed to get about 12% more horsies out of about 60% larger grate area and 250% more weight than Andres' stunning 2-4-2...
@@floydrandol2731 Give both the same weight train, the max for the H-8, and it would have run away from the 4000s. The H-8s could move the freight faster than the UP engines for two reasons. While the UP engines had a higher BP, they also were fed poorer coal. The 1600s got good coal and could steam like crazy with the bigger firebox.
If I ever get a fortune. I will buy one, restore it, plow it across the US to Wyoming to face off against the big boy, and we will see once and for all which is more powerful. They can even load BB up with anthracite coal to compensate for the "low grade coal".
Actually the Alleghny’s were not the strongest, the Norfolk and Western had an coal dragger that had less horsepower but greater tractive effort, the Y6. I don’t know about the Y6 specifically but the Y6a has 166,000 lbs and the Y6b had 177,000 lbs easily outranking the Allegheny and the Big Boy. One Y6a is a still around number 2156. The Allegheny wasn’t even the most powerful steam locomotives, the extinct PRR S1 had 8,000 Horsepower. Side note: I think there’s one locomotive that’s more powerful than the Y6s but it wasn’t as successful.
Torrent7k You’re correct. The locomotive your thinking of is the Virginian XA Class 2-8-8-8-4 Triplex. It produced nearly 200,000 lbs of tractive effort when in simple mode. Sadly it was not a successful locomotive and as a result it was sent back to Baldwin and cut into 2 smaller locomotives, a 2-8-2 and a 2-8-8-0. It only served the Virginian for just shy of 4 years.
@@railfanjackson4531 Yep, like the UP 4000s, they can only make so much steam with the size fireboxes that they have. The 1600s were blessed with both good coal and a big firebox.
The upgraded Y6a and the Y6b were rated at 126,000 lbs. tractive effort in full compound mode. They were rated at 152,000 lbs. when live steam was injected into the low pressure cylinders when starting. However, the extra steam could only be be used briefly, as the Class Ys had very small boilers. The Class Ys also peaked at HP at 25 mph, then dropped off quickly, again due to their small boilers. They were great if you wanted to run a train at 15 to 25 mph. The higher figures you quoted came from railfan writer Robert Lemassena, who has been called out repeatedly for propagating false information. He was pretty much a pathological liar and just made stuff up to sell his books. The PRR S1 was indicated HP from the Altoona Test Plant when overfired to collect data. It was not actual HP at the back of the tender. The Allegheny's HP was measured in actual operation at the back of the tender.
@@markantony3875 I get a lot of residual replies from comments I've left ~4-5 years ago on train videos and this is the only one that's actually taught me something (instead of blabbering about how the N&W J could definitely do 140 mph), thanks.
The allagenhnys we're hevier and more powerful ,but shorter than the big boys not much difference both of them were masterfully locos in thier time it would be hard to say witch was best as they were designed to operate in much different terrain!
I’d Debate that issue! Weight is very questionable on Allegheny. Hp was Higher slightly for Allegheny BB 7,200 Hp vs 7400Hp but TE was Higher on BigBoy 138,000+. The two locomotives were probably the best made. C&O did utilize Allegheny properly.
The Allegheny/Blue Ridge class was 6,000 pounds heavier 778,000 to 772, 000, and generated 600 more horsepower 7500 hp to 6900 hp for the Big Boy. Sorry UP fans.
Sorry what your quoting was a tale told at a scale house. Never proven, I will eat my hat if Allegany actually weighed more that the 2nd series BigBoy.
Big Boy's maximum HP was 6290 with a clean boiler. In typical operating condition, they made 5500 to 5800 HP per Union Pacific test data. The 7000 HP for a Big Boy is a railfan myth. Union Pacific's own test data does not support the claim. The Big Boy has two handicaps. Its boiler does not steam as well as it should for its size and the western coal that was used is poor quality.
Hosted by Michael Gross? *cue theme music* I bet we been haulin' for a million years, And I bet we'll be chugging for a million more. Oh, It's like I started breathing when the whistle hissed And I can't remember what I ever did before. What would we do baby, Without steam? What would we do baby, Without steam? And there ain't no load we can't pull each other through. What would we do baby, Without steam? Sha la la la.
I kind of like it; it's got a sort of no-nonsense look to it, no ostentation, not fancy, just a sort of hulking devotion to purpose. Kinda like a T-1 writ large (my favorite steamer has to be the T-1).
kevin brooks no it was not locomotive and tender the h8 class was heavier, and could produce more power, its boiler was rated to 8000 hp, even though it ran about 7200 or so.
kevin brooks Sorry Kevin but the Big Boy had only 6500HP compared to the Alleghany's 7500HP and the Pennsy Q2 beat them both at 8000HP with it's boiler rated at 9000HP.
Who else thinks this giant beauty should storm the rails again.?
I think it should be restored to running
Well,as a child,I never thought a Big Boy,would ever run the rails again. Great engine....but the Alleghany was built by Lima. The best next to Norfolk and Western`s own designs. So miracles do happen!!! To answer your question-YES!!!! Bring it back!!!!
The one at the henry ford wouldn't be any good, but I think the one at the B&O rail road museum might have a fighting chance.
No
@@DMIRyellowstoneFanyes
You bone head
The Allegheny was a classic example of many late modern steam engines. It had all the potential to be a stunning engine- BUT the C&O was a very conservative railroad and never developed the Allegheny to its full potential. It ran at only 260PSI versus 300PSI for the N&W "big three" and 300psi for the "Big Boy". As a result it had an extremely high factor of adhesion 4.75 but it could stall with a heavy train as a result. Increasing the psi to 300 would have moved its tractive effort from the 115.000 range to upwards of 125.000. And it was built to incorporate a booster in the trailing truck which would have added another 13,000 TE. It was very heavy, but this was caused by the AMC constantly asking Lima to increase this, and that part to fulfill their wishes. The C&O sued Lima, but they were the cause of its excessive weight. But keep this in mind, 75 Alleghenys (plus 6 for the Virginian) were built, the last being in 1948. There were only 25 "Big Boys". AND Alleghenys were NOT retired in 1952. Some were still running in 1955. AND the "Big Boy" boiler would fit INSIDE the Allegheny boiler. This was a magnificent machine but unlike the N&W engines it was not developed to its maximum. That having been said- it had the horsepower!
@Reg mason - What a glorious rant. It is sad to think that the very people who were the cause of this engine's development never properly used it. The fact - if true - that the Big Boiler could fit inside the allegheny boiler has nothing to show but that Big Boy was more powerful and developed more HP to the same purpose. It is tragic that these wonderful machines, was never utilized to the maximum. I wonder who won the lawsuit?? All in all, I think you would enthusiastically agree that the place for these is on the rails where their power and effectiveness can be demonstrated again.
@@organbuilder272 the Allegheny made more power than the big boy, but the big boy develops higher tractive effort.
@@blockstacker5614 Hi - Thanks. I had the feeling that the Allegheny has something extra. Wouldn't it be wonderful if that could be restored to working condition. Two of those hi tech machine working. Well, one can dream.
Allegheny indeed had such a veracious boiler, that steam was always abundant. In tests, nearly 7500hp at the drawbar could be attained.
At 110,200 lbs tractive effort, although impressive, it was way to low for such a heavy locomotive, with 80,000 lbs per axle. T. E. should've been easily in the 125,000 lbs range.
Obviously, the UP 4000's were magnificent steamers, and with more driving wheels, had tremendous pulling power.
However, "only" about 6300 hp could be attained at drawbar.
So, who's the most powerful??
Depends on if it's sheer horsepower or sheer tractive effort..
My vote is for the N&W's
Y- class, 2-8-8-2's !!
Built for mountain duty specifically. They could develop 5000hp,but amazingly could produce 160,000 lbs tractive effort, or more...
The Y's, theoretically could outpull both Big Boy and Allegheny, in them there mountains!!
@@organbuilder272 Mr. Shaw I just saw your response. Yes the Big Boy boiler would fit inside the Allegheny boiler. C&O won the lawsuit- Lima probably lost money on the C&O order. Bob Hundmans book " The Allegheny- Limas Finest" covers all the points I mentioned. Thanks for your comment!
Despite the Allegheny being one of the largest and most powerful locomotives built, there is really no film footage of this amazing locomotive to be found. The only video I have ever seen is played on a loop at the Henry ford museum where the other Allegheny is on display. Even that video is only a few minutes long.
My Ggrandfather was a fireman for the B&O. He was killed in McConnellsville PA by a passing freighter. It seems his train was on a siding and he stepped he fell into the path of the approaching train and according to newspaper accounts his body was hurled some distance. This happened 29 June 1913. The only record of him that I’ve ever been able to find is his obituary. I wish more records of this company had been preserved
For those who must know...
ALLEGHENY (Heavy-Duty Coal Dragger)
124'4" long (76'8" locomotive, 47'8" tender)
11'2" wide *
16'6" tall *
549 Tons (388 Tons from locomotive *)
260 psi (But possibly more?)
110211 TractEff (But possibly more?)
7,500 HP *
BIG BOY (Sub-Mountain Fast Freighter)
132'10" long (85'10" locomotive, 47' tender) *
11' wide
16' tall
608 Tons * (386 Tons from locomotive)
300 psi *
135375 TractEff *
6,300 HP
(* star means higher stat than the other locomotive)
The Alleghenys were designed to pull fast freight, but they were never used for that purpose
I'm a railroad employee and one of my old coworkers worked for the b&o railroad.
Nice to see you've got her indoors. My dad photographed 1604 sitting out by the parking lot in the early 70s, and I remember seeing the H-8 in the early 80s, looking rather the worse for wear.
Learned a whole lot about this locomotive and what a pleasant surprise to have Michael Gross as the host!
In 1984 John Carrier and myself while attending engineering school at West Virginian Tech in Montgomery WV would occasionally go rail fanning Saturday nights at the New Rivers's edge at the base of the New River Gorge Arch Bridge, the highest arch highway bridge in the eastern United States at the time. On Bridge day people parachute off this bridge. This is the site of the CSX mainline, historically the C&O mainline and the only section of railroad the H8s regularly ran. CSX freight trains pulling up the grade would put on a real show. They'd been pulling hard for quite a few miles fighting a 0.6% grade, although you'd think it was more from the stain it placed on the coal rains. By this location the coal trains had lost most of their momentum and were frequently down to just 12mph or less at full throttle. At night these locomotives would visibly throw sparks and would be glowing from everywhere. They'd appear to be just about to meltdown or blow up.
The entire area of the New River Gorge would rumble with 5-6 diesel locomotives straining against the grade at full throttle and we'd have a front row seat. It is pretty intense. You are not normally around diesel locomotives at full throttle and if you are, they normally pass you in an instant. Not so when they are near stall speed! The typical unit coal train these locomotive would be pulling was 10,000 tons. The same weight of train the H8 narrative said one H8 would pull at 15 mph. Well, that 15 mph was likely pulling up the New River grade at this location and is faster than the diesels we'd typically see pulling coal up that grade.
If was typical for GE's to shutdown due to the strain of the grade causing the EMDs and the remaining GEs to pull near their stall speed through the area. That is one reason at that time we'd witness such a show. When things are running well maybe coal trains go through there at 22 mph. Being able to pull a 10,000 ton coal train up that grade with just one locomotive would seem impossible after seeing what it does to a string of diesels at that time, but there is really no other sensible location the H8 narrative could of been talking about. So those H8 were doing something truly incredible.
Diesels at full throttle can't produce their full tractive effort for more than 10-15 minutes at 10-15 mph. They overheat and shutdown. In mountain service locomotives produce full throttle mile after mile climbing long grades and if coal trains frequently down at low speeds of just 12-15 mph, while in regular country once a train is started there is not much need for full throttle for freight trains. I frequently saw GE s that appeared to have shut themselves down and were still hot from overheating. A fully engineered steam locomotive can produce its full tractive effort at 10-15 mph all day if it had fuel and water to do so. That's why old railroaders say steam locomotives could pull more tonnage than the rated putting power of diesels. Diesels could only do it for a few minutes.
we went there, and went white water rafting for our senior trip, people thought I was b.s'n them when I told them the same thing. Ppl were base jumping that day in 2000. When the w.v. quarter came out, I was like hey look, that pic could very well have been taken the day we were there, they did photographers. now it's illegal to base jump I believe. ty for the history.
Thanks for your reply. We also discovered how to get onto the inspection cat walk and into the super structure inspection passages of the New River Gorge Bridge and did so many times bring doubters of our exploits that then found out what it is like to be on a cat walk over 900-feet above the bottom of the New River Gorge. I was from Northern VA and John from Albany NY. It seemed that most of the rest of the population of the school was from WV and would vacate on the weekends leaving a dead campus. I was the one that pushed to do the road trips and I drove all of them I think, but John really was well versed on railroads and I'm still expanding on much of what I learned and experienced because of him 30-years later.
@@douglasengle2704 *blink*blink* The Gorge is 900 feet deep? My sense of the scale of things is off by a bit. :D
mrz80 The gorge is at some points 1400 feet deep but you’d have to check to see exactly where that distance is.
I was a dispatcher on the New river SD years ago. The funny thing that struck me. In the fall an engineer would radio us and tell us he was hung up on the mountain. He said everything is running fine. I would ask him, then what is the problem. He would state that the leafs from the tree was on the rail and they would make them lose traction. Even with the sanders running fine I’ve seen many a coal train hang up that way. We would often run a small freight to clear the leafs off the rail in the fall.
You're extremely fortunate to have saved two, only just.
I saw 1601 at The henry Ford museum
Thanks for the information on the Allegheny (2666). Hope you will/have provided more.
That's amazing. Only 10,000 ton coal train. When I worked for CSX I think the heaviest I remember was 22,000. Over the mountain and down to Cumberland.
Beautiful ladies. Thank you
The C&O Allegheny type is an impressive articulated steam locomotive and they had a fairly short service life operation ; also, the class H-8 engines were not all retired by 1952. Several data sources researching the C&O "Allegheny" type state that some examples of this locomotive remained in operation for the C&O until 1956.
thats a beautiful machine. great vid :)
The 2-6-6-6
amazing machines, I just wish they were used at their designed operating profile so they got more impressive service. If you want a real nice locomotive for the profile these ran at, the n&w Y6b was a very well done locomotive for this type of train.
In the opening shots it is very impressive to see how many of the engines and cars are rust streaked, stained and peeling pain. What a wonderful way to preserve heritage. Next stop - scrap yard. That said - it is commendable that the two surviving locomotives are in interior protected areas. If either of those engines has any value, you will not climb into the cab and pretend to be an engineer - but these machines, maybe sponsored by the Ford Foundation, will be restored to working condition and put back to work. Paintings can hang in a museum and serve their pupose. Books can sit on library shelves. but if you wish to teach about history and heritage - machinery is only demonstrated by functioning in the original job. Then let someone into the cab. They can still pretend they are engineers (With the brakes locked) and feel the gentle rocking of the engine as the water boils, feel the heat of that enormous firebox - nearly as big as the ordinary bedroom, listen to the pumps and dynamo working in real time. Then the throttle is opened, drain cocks opened and the real locomotive does not have to pretend any more. UP did it with Big Boy - How about you guys doing it with one of your precious engines. Don't be so selfish, so covetous that you will not let this be free to thunder down the rails once more. Someday, when it is really too tired to work more - 50 years from now, bring it home to a peaceful retirement.
Union Pacific's a Class One railroad with the money and infrastructure, as in the old Cheyenne backshop, to rebuild and subsequently maintain something of the 4014's and 1604's size. The B&O **Museum** does not have that luxury. Even if they did, where would they run it? Yes it's true that the sheer size and weight of the engine are what make it famous, but those same attributes also severely limit the operating range of the engine. Also, I'd be willing to bet that there would need to be significant infrastructure upgrades required to allow a fully intact and fully loaded Allegheny to operate over CSX lines, and any shortlines it may need to operate over, so good luck convincing someone to foot that bill. I say operate over CSX lines because if an Allegheny's rebuilt and brought back to operation, there's gonna be a demand for it to run over home rails, which are under CSX ownership nowadays. Also, there's gonna be a need to convert the tender trucks and trailing truck to roller bearings and get the air brake system working before moving it over rail to a suitable rebuilding site if that move includes going over CSX rails. So, that's time and money in getting that work done which would probably include cranes to lift the tender up to get the trucks out from under it. Are you starting to see why the 1604 is static and cold? There's a lotta factors set against an Allegheny coming back. Is it doable? Yes, the rebuilding of 4014 proved that it can probably be done, so long as the locomotive is in decent mechanical shape. Also, the crowds that would come out to see an operating Allegheny would probably equal the ones that greet the 4014 during its travels, and CSX hasn't hosted any big steam excursions like what an Allegheny would pull since the 90's, 1994 to be exact, so that'd probably make them even more reluctant to host the engine. Again, are seeing why it's even more unlikely for an Allegheny to come back to operation then it was for the 4014?
Also, if you got the money to get all of the B&O Museum's collection cosmetically restored and looking brand new, and under climate controlled cover to avoid rust and corrosion, by all means, please do get that money over to them and let them know that's what you're donating that money to them for. I'd bet that they'll happily take it and use it for that purpose.
Now, am I against an Allegheny coming back to operation? Absolutely not. I'm just being realistic about it. One would more likely then not need a big corporate sponsor to get the engine running again, or just hope and pray CSX starts their own steam program that involves them rebuilding an Allegheny themselves like UP did with 3985 and 4014 and NS did with the 1218, but I highly doubt that'll happen unless a very wealthy railfan decides to purchase CSX or just comes to power within the company and initiates that kinda thing.
ohh rare footage of them in usage, there is almost no video of the allegheny h8's in action, but there seems to be everything else out there including a few videos of the big boy class, but we all know the h8 was more powerful, I would love to see the one in dearborn restored to running oh that would be soo sweet.
The Allegheny was never used to its full potential by the C&O. The regulated them to 25 mph slow coal drags. It was a costly locomotive to Lima, as the builder never made any money from them thanks to a lawsuit filed by the C&O over the weight of the Alleghenies.
***** that and C&O Sued Lima for weight on the first Alleghenies cab numbers 1600 to 1605.
So why is the signal bridge at Summerhill,Pa witch is on the PRR Pittsburgh divison in a documentory on the B&O?
B&O Railroad Museum or anyone else.
What type of whistle did the 2-6-6-6 "Allegheny/Blue Ridges" used?
C&O single chime.
Christ...what a beauty!!
Fine job burt!
What is the music playing during "The War Came BY Train" ad segment?
Thanks;
Lew
skyhawkrg11 is
This is the locomotive that sam was based on
The railroad seems to have been very happy with the Allegheny as a slow "drag" freight locomotive though. And some of the same people ordered more of the same type for the Virginian Railway.
When the Diesels bumped them from the coal runs, they really found out what they could do. If an H-8 could get a train started, it could run with that train at speed. Here is where if the C&O has used a helper to get a train started, they could have cut off on the fly and the H-8 would have run away with trains heavier than it could start by itself. We don't know what the maximum power it could develop was as the test train had to be limited to what the engine could start. But at 7498 HP, it beat out anything else at 45MPH.
Great movie.
I would'nt go near Baltimore , not a chance NO WAY !
A museum is not the place for these machines. For when the full restoration?
At least they're cared for at the Museum and not rotting away in a scrapyard. To restore an engine of the Allegheny's size would take millions of dollars and decades to accomplish.
Then there's the issue of finding a place to run the locomotive - CSX's insurance policy is ludicrously expensive and they won't accept steam operations on that very basis.
So, it may not be impossible to rebuild an Allegheny, but there are a lot of factors against it.
Ok. I got it. JUST RESTORE IT FOR GOD SAKE AND STOP THE EXCUSES!!! If they did it with the Big Boy you can do it with the Allegheny. JESUS!!! Nothing is impossible and impossible is nothing. The damn machine is asking desperately to be restored and put back to work, cant you guys see that??
There is no place it can be run. It is too heavy for modern track structure.
@@jppicur It must've been quite a job just getting that monster into Mount Claire in the first place. :D
@@jppicur Actually, there are some places on the CSX lines that could handle it. CSX does still use 141lb/yard rail and that is the minimum needed for them. Don't know if UP has any of that size rail.
Sorry Bud but the Allegheny had a 7500 HP the big Boy 6300 HP Well it didn't carry the name "BIG BOY" it proved that a mountain train is the King of the hill.
+Tim Pierce
Sorry, but both were poor. A steam locomotive can and should be able to maintain 40ihp per ton of locomotive weight. This standard was established in the 1930s so in the 1940s what excuse did any builder have for producing such overweight/under powered machines?
Sorry wrong, BigBoy was almost 6900hp per BigBoy book. Also higher T.E. Than Allegheny. Flat kick the crap out of the Allegheny.
You are all wet, Big Boy was around 6,800hp tested and documented. Allegany was not able to start nearly as heavy Train.
@@floydrandol2731 not in accordance with any of the books I've read: where is that particular documentation? and of course it's all completely irrelevant, Paul Keifer being really the only one to start incorporating thermal dynamics - big boy managed to get about 12% more horsies out of about 60% larger grate area and 250% more weight than Andres' stunning 2-4-2...
@@floydrandol2731 Give both the same weight train, the max for the H-8, and it would have run away from the 4000s. The H-8s could move the freight faster than the UP engines for two reasons. While the UP engines had a higher BP, they also were fed poorer coal. The 1600s got good coal and could steam like crazy with the bigger firebox.
If I ever get a fortune. I will buy one, restore it, plow it across the US to Wyoming to face off against the big boy, and we will see once and for all which is more powerful. They can even load BB up with anthracite coal to compensate for the "low grade coal".
IF A WOULD OWN A ALLEGHENY IM PREETY SURE IT IS THE STRONGEST TRAIN
I heard the "Yellowstones" were the most powerful?
N&W Y6b had the most tractive effort. Allegheny had most horsepower. Big Boy was fastest.
@@paullangford8179 So, where does that put the Yellowstone?
@@JungleYT the Yellowstone's or more specifically the DM&IR versions were more powerful than the big boy with around 135k tractive numbers.
Actually the Alleghny’s were not the strongest, the Norfolk and Western had an coal dragger that had less horsepower but greater tractive effort, the Y6. I don’t know about the Y6 specifically but the Y6a has 166,000 lbs and the Y6b had 177,000 lbs easily outranking the Allegheny and the Big Boy. One Y6a is a still around number 2156. The Allegheny wasn’t even the most powerful steam locomotives, the extinct PRR S1 had 8,000 Horsepower. Side note: I think there’s one locomotive that’s more powerful than the Y6s but it wasn’t as successful.
Torrent7k You’re correct. The locomotive your thinking of is the Virginian XA Class 2-8-8-8-4 Triplex. It produced nearly 200,000 lbs of tractive effort when in simple mode. Sadly it was not a successful locomotive and as a result it was sent back to Baldwin and cut into 2 smaller locomotives, a 2-8-2 and a 2-8-8-0. It only served the Virginian for just shy of 4 years.
@@railfanjackson4531 Yep, like the UP 4000s, they can only make so much steam with the size fireboxes that they have. The 1600s were blessed with both good coal and a big firebox.
The upgraded Y6a and the Y6b were rated at 126,000 lbs. tractive effort in full compound mode. They were rated at 152,000 lbs. when live steam was injected into the low pressure cylinders when starting. However, the extra steam could only be be used briefly, as the Class Ys had very small boilers. The Class Ys also peaked at HP at 25 mph, then dropped off quickly, again due to their small boilers. They were great if you wanted to run a train at 15 to 25 mph. The higher figures you quoted came from railfan writer Robert Lemassena, who has been called out repeatedly for propagating false information. He was pretty much a pathological liar and just made stuff up to sell his books.
The PRR S1 was indicated HP from the Altoona Test Plant when overfired to collect data. It was not actual HP at the back of the tender. The Allegheny's HP was measured in actual operation at the back of the tender.
@@markantony3875 I get a lot of residual replies from comments I've left ~4-5 years ago on train videos and this is the only one that's actually taught me something (instead of blabbering about how the N&W J could definitely do 140 mph), thanks.
why not tell my light a fire in her fire box and fill the boiler with water and get steam up and find out what it was like driving one at speed
Not quite that simple. They've been sitting. And just like cars, trains get stuff wrong with them when they sit.
That's a great way to initiate a major boiler explosion.
Guys, lighten up, she was only dreaming out loud. Let us dream with her. Lighten up!
Wow
The allagenhnys we're hevier and more powerful ,but shorter than the big boys not much difference both of them were masterfully locos in thier time it would be hard to say witch was best as they were designed to operate in much different terrain!
I’d Debate that issue! Weight is very questionable on Allegheny. Hp was Higher slightly for Allegheny BB 7,200 Hp vs 7400Hp but TE was Higher on BigBoy 138,000+. The two locomotives were probably the best made. C&O did utilize Allegheny properly.
The Allegheny/Blue Ridge class was 6,000 pounds heavier 778,000 to 772, 000, and generated 600 more horsepower 7500 hp to 6900 hp for the Big Boy. Sorry UP fans.
Sorry what your quoting was a tale told at a scale house. Never proven, I will eat my hat if Allegany actually weighed more that the 2nd series BigBoy.
@@floydrandol2731 Funny thing of course is that the NP W1 weighed the same as the second series big boy, all great locos
Big Boy's maximum HP was 6290 with a clean boiler. In typical operating condition, they made 5500 to 5800 HP per Union Pacific test data. The 7000 HP for a Big Boy is a railfan myth. Union Pacific's own test data does not support the claim. The Big Boy has two handicaps. Its boiler does not steam as well as it should for its size and the western coal that was used is poor quality.
Hosted by Michael Gross?
*cue theme music*
I bet we been haulin' for a million years,
And I bet we'll be chugging for a million more.
Oh, It's like I started breathing when the whistle hissed
And I can't remember what I ever did before.
What would we do baby, Without steam?
What would we do baby, Without steam?
And there ain't no load we can't pull each other through.
What would we do baby, Without steam?
Sha la la la.
POOR 2101 AND 490
Fire up the 1604
No
No
The Alleghenies don't hit my spot. I'd rather stick with the Union Pacific Challengers and Big Boys.
***** Idk I got a Allegheny model in my basement and I love it.
I think they look ugly. Real life OR model... And their PITIFUL careers didn't help much either.
+Jim van der Kolk How were their careers pitiful? They were in service for some time.
@@Benry2 they were too heavy Lima was sued
I kind of like it; it's got a sort of no-nonsense look to it, no ostentation, not fancy, just a sort of hulking devotion to purpose. Kinda like a T-1 writ large (my favorite steamer has to be the T-1).
sorry ,but the big boy was heavier.over 900,000 lbs,and it had slightly more tractive effort and h.p.!
kevin brooks no it was not locomotive and tender the h8 class was heavier, and could produce more power, its boiler was rated to 8000 hp, even though it ran about 7200 or so.
kevin brooks Sorry Kevin but the Big Boy had only 6500HP compared to the Alleghany's 7500HP and the Pennsy Q2 beat them both at 8000HP with it's boiler rated at 9000HP.
prydonian460 yea but the Q2 was not articulated...
Joshua Peterson All the better and what difference does being articulated make ? I thought we were discussing steam engine horse power ?
well horsepower is a main statistic but there are many others...
BURT!
I thought I was the only one that noticed that too
RUFF RUFF PACK
fire up 1604 and let her steam on passagers trains
NEVER GiVE UP