Works for me. I have always been loyal to the Queen and Empire. ... pqr
----- Original Message ----- From: Mary Armstrong To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 1:58 PM Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} Re: New Pacific's Lets call them " KIWIS". All that steam ruunning down there in NZ in early 1943 was mind boggling. That was when I was traveling with those guys I cannot mention here. John Armstrong On Jul 30, 2008, at 3:15 AM, raleigh wrote: > and he notes - > > Interesting bit of history about the type's origins. It would seem > logical that the Ten-Wheeler would be the ancestor of the Pacific (as > opposed to the Atlantic). Ten-Wheelers could and did develop higher > horsepower than the Atlantic and with the advent of heavier trains, > need for more power made adding a trailing truck to support a larger > fire box a necessity to keep weight on the drivers within limits. > Since more railroads used Ten-Wheelers than Atlantics, they had more > experience with six-coupled locos. > > There were a few exceptions, of course - Reading's Atlantic started > out as 4-4-4s but were soon converted to outside bearing 2-wheel > trailing trucks to tracking problems. And the development of the > Hodges or Cole trailing truck also aided in the acceptance of the > later Pacifics as the early models also had tracking problems as well > as weight distribution. > > Unlike the Pennsy, which developed the Atlantic to the nth degree and > parlayed that design into the K class Pacifics for mainline passenger > trains, most roads had neither the facility or the resources to > develop their own designs. Even the mighty New York Central relied on > locomotive builders for new power rather than attempt to build their > own. They collaborated but mainly relied on the builder''s expertise > to fill their needs. There were a few exceptions of course. The N&W > and D&H come to mind but for the most part, roads like the B&M, New > Haven and a host of other roads, (big and small) developed a > statement of work and found a builder to make them. > > I didn't know about the 'Iron Mountain' types. I was thinking of the > SP's 'Sunbeams' and use one on our "Southern Pacific Collection Vol. > I" DVD cover. While it looks like a smaller version of a 'Daylight' I > think it was one of the more handsome streamline efforts. Of course > Pennsy, B&O, and NYC fans (to name a few) might disagree and Andy > Malette might say that the CP's 'Jubilee' class were prettier but > they were 4-4-4s. (I'm partial to them too Andy as I saw them in > action in Montreal back in the fifties). > > Maybe if the USRA Light Mikado effort is a success, a light Pacific > might be a logical follow-up. Except for the frame and drivers the > rest of the components are the same, which was the idea developed by > USRA - use as many similar parts as possible to produce as many > locomotives as needed in the shortest time span. Maybe a > collaboration with AM for Pacific chasses would work - just a thought. > > Raleigh In Maine > Emporiumpictures.com > > At 02:40 AM 7/30/2008, John Picur wrote: > > >The first order to the Gould lines was split between the MoPac and > >the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern -- then still a separate > >road. The StL,IM&S got more of them than the MP (12 vs. 9). I think > >the New Zealand order may have had more influence internationally in > >the acceptance of the name. Of course, since S Scalers are special, > >I suppose we could consider the StL,IM&S the primary originator of > >the type in North America and start calling them "Iron Mountain" > types. > > > >The Milwaukee's 4-6-2s were essentially overweight 4-6-0 which > >required a trailer to shift some of the excess weight from the > >drivers. The trailing wheel was rigid in the frame and not in a > >trailing truck. As you say, Raleigh, it was a narrow-firebox > >locomotive that did not encompass the essential design point of the > >Pacific type -- the wider firebox. One came from Schenectady in > >1889, and three from Rhode Island in 1893. > > > >Lehigh Valley had what may have been the first 4-6-2, named > >"Duplex", built in their Wilkes-Barre shop in October 1886. This > >locomotive used an experimental twin-barreled wide firebox for > >burning anthracite. It was not successful and was soon rebuilt to a > >conventional 4-6-0. However, if this is indeed the very first 4-6-2, > >it is the fourth wheel arrangement introduced by the LV -- 2-8-0, > >2-10-0 and 2-8-2 preceding it, but not in quantity. > > > >regards ... pqr > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: raleigh > >To: <mailto:S-Scale%40yahoogroups.com>[email protected] ; > ><mailto:S-Scale%40yahoogroups.com>[email protected] > >Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 8:27 PM > >Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} Re: New Pacific's > > > >and he notes - > > > >While there were examples of 'Pacific's' in existence before 1900, > >most were rebuilt Ten-Wheelers and Prairie types. Several were built > >new (by Brooks I believe) for the Milwaukee Road in 1896. They had > >narrow fireboxes and were really stretched Atlantics. Technically > >they could be called the first 'Pacifics' but didn't carry that > >appellation since the Whyte System was still a few years away. > > > >The application of the name 'Pacific' may be attributed to the dozen > >or so examples built by Baldwin in 1901 for New Zealand Railways. > >They needed locomotives with larger fireboxes to burn the low quality > >lignite coal mined there and since they were shipped over the Pacific > >Ocean, supposedly they were named for the Ocean. The design was > >successful enough to garner several orders for U. S. roads with the > >first going to MoPac and C&O in 1902 and since the MoPac got the > >first order, the name has been attributed to them. If they had been > >delivered to the Chessie first, we might be calling them 'Ohio' > types! > > > >The name seems to have persisted even though roads with heavier power > >often named those locos differently, i. e. NYC's Hudsons, Mohawks and > >C&O's Kanawhas, Greenbriers, etc. Over 6,000 were built in the U. S. > >alone with that many plus built for foreign roads. > > > >It's interesting to note that while the Whyte System of locomotive > >classification (proposed in 1900 by F. M. Whyte a mechanical > >engineer) most railroad employees knew their motive power by class or > >road numbers. I remember my early railfan days (way back in the 50's) > >being admonished for using a 'front office' term for a B&M steam > >loco. I quickly learned that correct jargon for a 'Pacific' was a P2 > >(or P3 or 4 depending on the road numbers). But interestingly, the > >B&M Atlantics were always called 'Trailers', probably due to the fact > >that the first ones were little more than 4-4-0s with a trailing > truck. > > > >So whether or not one accepts the New Zealand locos or those going to > >the MoPac as engendering the name, it lasted into the modern era and > >is still in use today. > > > >Raleigh in cool and comfortable Maine... > > > >BTW - one road did rename some of their Pacifics - anyone know which > >one and what they called them? > > > >At 10:23 PM 7/29/2008, Mary Armstrong wrote: > > > > >They named the Pacific after them as they had MO of them than any > > >other railroad. > > >John Armstrong > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
