Locomotive Classes
Danny mentioned several weeks ago that he was often confused about locomotive classes. His comment was that he understood the Whyte designation (4-4-0, 2-8-2, 4-6-2,…), but when classes were mentioned, he was at a loss to picture the locomotive. That’s okay! Class designations were specific to the individual railroads. So unless you study a particular railroad or two, generally only a few of each railroad’s classes are recognized. Let’s provide some examples:
The famous NYC Class J’s were Hudsons (4-6-4) that pulled their premier passenger trains during the ‘30s & ‘40s. Here’s NYC #5344, the Commodore Vanderbilt, the last J-1e, built by ALCO Schenectady in 1934.
…And a second image of #5344 without the shrouding.
Another famous J Class was the Norfolk & Western J’s. This is N&W #603 displayed at the Roanoke shops where she was built. The N&W J Class were Northerns (4-8-4).
Still another famous J class were the PRR J’s. Here’s #6448, a Texas (2-10-4).
The C&O made their J Class even more confusing. The J-1’s and J-2’s were Mountains (4-8-2), like #543 (pic).
But a C&O J-3 was a Greenbrier (4-8-4) like #614 (pic). But the Class J-3 Whyte designation, 4-8-4, matches the N&W J Class, 4-8-4, and the Class J-1 and J-2 do not, 4-8-2! And N&W called them Northerns while C&O called their J-3’s Greenbriers!
But a C&O J-3 was a Greenbrier (4-8-4) like #614 (pic). But the Class J-3 Whyte designation, 4-8-4, matches the N&W J Class, 4-8-4, and the Class J-1 and J-2 do not, 4-8-2! And N&W called them Northerns while C&O called their J-3’s Greenbriers!
Let’s go a different direction on a look at locomotive classes. One of the most common steamers was the Mikado, specifically USRA Light Mikados (2-8-2) or those closely resembling the USRA design. Since I know NYC Class H-6a are allocated USRA Light Mikados (from my Cincinnati Northern searches), here’s NYC #1724 which ran on the Cincinnati Northern.
Here’s B&O #4500, the first of B&O’s USRA Light Mikado’s, parked at the B&O museum in Baltimore. These were B&O Class Q-3’s (Class Q was a Mikado, and subclass 3 designated the USRA standard Mikado’s).
The Chicago, Indianapolis & Louisville (MONON) had (5) USRA allocated Light Mikado’s. #550 was the first of the MONON Class J-2’s (J being Mikado, and 2 designating the USRA design). We could have listed this one up in the Class J category above – one more Class J with a different Whyte designation!
Maine Central RR #623, USRA Light Mikado, was a Class S.
The PRR was allocated (5) USRA light Mikados, PRR #108 – #112, built in 1919. #108 was later renumbered #9627. These were Class L2s, and were one of the few PRR classes that did not have the Belpaire firebox.
The earlier PRR Class L1 was built from 1914 to 1919. #520 sports the “squared off” look of the Belpaire firebox. #520 is in the PRR museum in Strasburg, PA.
The AT&SF didn’t have USRA Mikados, but bought similar ones built around the same period – 1917 through 1920. The AT&SF had a classification system that coordinated directly with their numbering scheme. There were several Mikado classes, but the ones that were similar to the USRA light Mikados were class 3160. These Mikados were numbered 3160 – 3287. They had two earlier classes of Mikados: Class 3100 covered locos 3100 – 3128, built around 1913, and Class 3129 which covered locos 3129 – 3158, built around 1916.
AT&SF #888 was an even earlier Mikado, part of Class 885 which covered 885 – 899, built in 1902.
The St. Louis – San Francisco Line, better known as the Frisco, ended up with (33) USRA light Mikado’s, #4000 to 4032. Like the Santa Fe, the Frisco tied their classification to the numbering. Hence, #4018, being displayed at Sloss Furnaces in Birmingham, Alabama, is a Class 4000.
Southern Railway classified their USRA Light Mikados as Class Ms-1. Southern was allocated (25) of the USRA steamers numbered #4750 – 4774.
Let’s take one more route through a classification system. Let’s compare NYC (a railroad that helps us with CNor) to Southern Pacific. Let’s start with the early Americans (4-4-0).
SP classified Americans as Class E. This is SP #1355, a Class E-11, built by Baldwin and inherited from the Oregon & California RR.
NYC classified most Americans as Class C. #7034 was a Class C-61 built by Brooks in 1883.
SP #1121 was an 0-6-0 switcher Class S-7. SP put the 0-6-0s in Class S with the 7 representing the subclass.
NYC #6807, an 0-6-0 switcher, was a Class B-10g – Class B being 0-6-0’s.
SP #1654, a Mogul (2-6-0), was Class M-4, “M” being Mogul and “4” being the subclass.
NYC #1888, Mogul (2-6-0), was Class E-1e
SP #2429, a Pacific (4-6-2) built by Baldwin, was Class P3.
NYC #62, a Pacific (4-6-2) built by ALCO-Schenectady, was Class K-4A.
Finally, SP #4318, a Mountain (4-8-2), was Class Mt-1.
…While, NYC #2516, a Mohawk (4-8-2, known as Mountains to many competing railroads), was Class L1a.
So…When Danny said he was a bit confused – well, so are most of us. Of all the pics listed above, if you had shown me the photo and asked for the Class, I would have gotten probably (5) Classes correct but probably none of the subclasses. And I’m the guy who had most of these pics stashed in a file or bookmarked on my browser! So next time someone asks, “Isn’t that Reading T-1 they rebuilt pretty cool?” You can look it up on Wikipedia and find:
Or, you can be humble and ask like Danny would, “I’m a bit confused. Which loco are you talking about?”
Thx,
Kevin
Would a Pennsylvania railroad T1 be its own class or part of a class of articulated or something like that?
For the PRR the T is the class and the 1 is the revision/subtype. In PRR parlance the class only refers to the wheel arrangement. The revision gets bumped with each generation (the E series Atlantics made it to a 7). The class mapping to wheel patterns is why you will see crossover between the PRR’s steam and electric loco designations. The G series were 4-6-0 ten wheeler steamers. The GG1s were 2 ten wheelers stuck end-to-end with electric drive.
As Kevin pointed out, it gets complicated.
Also, the PRR T1 was not articulated – it was actually a duplex. The drivers are on a fixed frame with separate equal diameter cylinders. Similar plumbing, but without all the leaks from the articulation joints. The design lowered the mass of the reciprocating parts and shortened the stroke.
Monty