Slightly OT: Most important train locomotives

Certainly - but all trains were very light weight originally.

I'd take you to task on that particular point. They proved the 'I/C motor/generator/electric motor' drive system could work efficiently and reliably and they were widely known throughout the loco design community world-wide.

Iran/Russia isn't/aren't exactly viewed as a leader in railway technology.

So did NZ's aircraft industry!

0

-1

0.5

Reply to
Greg Procter
Loading thread data ...

Mark Newton spake thus:

Please bear in mind that I prefaced this by saying I'd take a stab at it, not that I was going to supply the end-all, be-all authoratative list of historical locos. As is plainly evident, the question itself is highly flawed, or at least so far open to interpretation as to be almost useless. Nobody has yet defined "historical" or "important" in any meaningful way here, so we're going to get a lot of lists of "favorite" locos.

Again, I'm no expert here. Certainly not on non-U.S. equipment. I just thought it was a fun proposition and decided to throw in my 2 cents worth (adjusted for inflation).

I still think that what the O.P. (remember them?) is after is pictures of well-known locomotives; some of the items in my list certainly qualify for that.

Reply to
David Nebenzahl

While you are probably right, unfortunately, I only have 10 slots total.

locomotives to the end.

small slow locomotives and railways to large faster locomotives/railways)

Reply to
WisdomSeeker

Steam, Diesel, and Electric. Worldwide.

Reply to
WisdomSeeker

You are right. I am not that familiar with railways and probably don't understand important distinctions. Thanks for being patient with me.

Reply to
WisdomSeeker

Maybe if you described the project, it would help us give more meaningful answers.

Reply to
Frank A. Rosenbaum

Should have been more precise with my wording. Am looking for models/ makes rather than specific named instances of locomotives.

NorthAmerican centric is actually preferred but not at all required.

Should have also specified that I do need to be able to find pictures (or at least drawings) of any model recommended.

Thanks for your help.

Reply to
WisdomSeeker

That's a bit like picking the single most important car of the century, only we're coming up to two centuries. Horse. (100+ years) Steam. (150 years) Electric. (110 years) I/C railcars. (95 years) I/C - Diesel: Electric and Hydraulic. (110 years) High speed trains such as JNR Bullet train, SNCF TGV and DB ICE. (35 years) European fast goods trains. (70 years) US style low-tech heavy haulage. (100 years)

(years in existance just off the top of my head)

That's nine so far without mentioning specifics. We could round it to ten by adding city tramways which changed cities drastically.

Regards, Greg.P.

Reply to
Greg Procter

Reply to
Greg Procter

I am clearly not doing to good with my communication skills. :)

I was intending models/makes to be GE Diesel Electric type xyz.

Thanks for helping me to clarify what info I am hoping to obtain. And thanks also for making the previous recommendations on your list.

Reply to
WisdomSeeker

Well, I'll take a stab at it. Very North American-centric...

#1 would have to be one of the earliest functioning steam locos. They are specifically named (i.e. "Stephenson's Rocket", "The Dewitt Clinton", "John Bull") because they were generally one-off prototypes.

#2 The "American" type 4-4-0. From the early 1850's to nearly the turn of the next century they were the dominant type.

#3 The "Atlantic" type 4-4-2. Ushered in very high speed passenger service.

#4 The electrified commuter train. Made mass transit in big cities like NYC and Chicago practical. I'd include in this the interurbans.

#5 The heavy electric locomotive. Perhaps in particular the 1915 GE boxcabs of the Chicago Milwaukee and St. Paul. They had influence worldwide. Also my favorite loco :) Stick a diesel engine onboard and you can lose the wires- hence the modern diesel- electric was born.

I'll stop there. Is this more the format your seeking?

Dale

Reply to
Dale Carlson

Unfortunately, some of the most significant locomotives appeared as only one instance. For example, the Stephenson "Rocket" was significant because it developed the basic successful formula for all steam locomotives for the next 150 years, but only one example named "Rocket" was built.

Reply to
gl4316

I see you asked the same question in the 'jtrains' yahoogroup, using the name "uberboardgamer". What exactly is it you're trying to achieve? As it stands your question if far too general and non-specific.

Reply to
Mark Newton

Yes, these railcars were only intended for lightweight trains. But consider the two diesel loco types built by Burmeister & Wain and Frichs respectively for the Danish State Railway in 1929. These were mainline units, and were used to haul decent-sized trains.

Looking further afield, in 1931 the Royal State Railway of Siam bought 6 A1A-A1A locos built by the consortium Sulzer/Oerlikon/Henschel. These were mainline power, and at least two were still in service in

1977. Frichs built 7 locos for the RSR in the same year - 6 were 2-Do-2 units, and the seventh an articulated 2-Do+Do-2. The 2-Do-2s were flogged during WW2, and were withdawn during the mid 50s. The 2-Do+Do-2 remained in service until 1964.

Even further away, the Buenos Aires Great Southern Railway in Argentina had a number of mainline diesel locomotives in service from the 1930s onwards, most of which were very successful and had long careers. There are other examples, but these will serve to make the point that by the time the RS-1 was delivered, viable mainline diesels were already a reality.

Indeed, they were. But so were all the examples quoted above, all of which predated the RS-1 by at least a decade.

Arguable. Their influence was quote apparent in the Scandinavian countries, as well as the rest of the world. I'd make the point that in Europe, the diesel had stiff competition from electrification, which was already a well-proven and widespread technology.

I'd regard the RS-1s on the Trans-Iranian as a special case. I reckon the diesels already in service on US railroads during WW2 had the greatest influence on the way the USA thought about diesels.

Cheers,

Mark.

Reply to
Mark Newton

Mate, when you make sense I'll back you up every time.

No worries!

Cheers,

Mark.

Reply to
Mark Newton

Only 10? I think you've got buckley's of narrowing it down to 10 locos.

Mark.

Reply to
Mark Newton

Well, that will work fine for North American diesels, less so for steam or electric locos from there, or from anywhere else. NA diesels,

*generally speaking*, tend to be mass-produced designs ordered from a catalogue, whereas steam and electric locos, *generally speaking*, tended to be custom-designed and built for each customer. Before all the pedants leap on that, I know very well that most steam builders offered catalogue designs, but with the possible exception of Baldwin - maybe, they were not the majority of their output.

Cheers,

Mark.

Reply to
Mark Newton

Mate, I agree, the question is far too general to generate any meaningful replies. I'd tend to interpret "historically important" as referring to technical development and innovation, but that just reflects my background and biases.

David, I'm sorry if my question to you came across the wrong way. I was interested in the contrast between your perspective and mine, and the reasons for that. FWIW I too think it's a fun idea, but I'm *still* scratching my head as to which 10 locos I'd choose!

They would, no doubt about that. I wonder if "well-known" is what the OP really meant all along? In that case any list I'd offer would be useless to them.

The idea of "Well-known" trains throws up a few conundrums. In your list you included "The Flying Scotsman", which could mean either the named train or the preserved loco. Once I would have said the train was more significant than the loco, but these days I'd probably take the opposite view. The engine would now have to be the most widely-travelled steam loco in existance, and is widely known in the general, non-railfan community. But as an example of steam loco development, it is not especially significant, IMO.

And then there's my favourite example of a well-known train whose recognition and reputation is far greater than it deserves, the bloody Orient Express. Blame Agatha Christie and Hollywood for that one!

Cheers,

Mark.

Reply to
Mark Newton

Hmm, historically important is a pretty broad description. Take, for example - your example GE Diesel Electric Model xyz... OK, take for example GE Diesel U-25B - this first road switcher entry of GE (at least North American market) was recieved well enough for GE to continue further RS locomotive development, first with the U-Boats (which pretty much squeezed Alco out of the NA locomotive market), then the -7s & -8s and so on till GE eventually toppled EMD's then 4- decade iron-grasp on the NA locomotive market (so much that a few years back after GM sold off EMD, there was much questioning as to whether EMD would be discontinued). The U-25B wasn't really technologically innovative per-se (yes, it had some good ideas, but nothing not developed before by other mfgs), and there's no real way to know that if it had been panned by the market GE would have never pursued further roadswitcher development, but what historically occurred did eventually lead to GE becoming the dominant NA locomotive manufacturer, and that's very historically important if not technically important...

Reply to
Sir Ray
[ ... ]

Do you know where in Thailand these ran? Any pics online? There seemed to be some separation of equipment with little interchange between the North and Northeast lines and the line that ran south to Malaysia.

As and aside, what's the significance of the + and - in things like

2-Do+Do-2? If I ever knew the distinction, I've forgotten it.
Reply to
<wkaiser

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.