UP Challenger

Hi,
Could someone share a brief history on the UP Challenger w/ regards to its most noted use. Was it associated w/ a famous freight or passenger train
during its hay day?
Many Thanks, Matt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I believe the Challenger was strictly a freight locomotive. That would be an awful lot of power to dedicate to a passenger train, which is comparatively light weight. The 3985 could handle a fan trip almost a mile long if there was a point to doing it. The Big Boy was developed to trump the freight capabilities of the Challenger class.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
R.Glueck wrote:
"I believe the Challenger was strictly a freight locomotive. That would be an awful lot of power to dedicate to a passenger train, which is comparatively light weight. The 3985 could handle a fan trip almost a mile long if there was a point to doing it. The Big Boy was developed to trump the freight capabilities of the Challenger class."
Actually, some of the 1937 CSA-2 challengers #3934 through 3939 were set up for passenger service.
The two tone grey challengers were used for passenger service.
http://www.utahrails.net/up/steam/greyhounds.php
Eric
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@bigfoot.com wrote:

And I believe they were the largest locomotives ever assigned to regular passenger duty.
2-6-6-4 Class A's sometime pulled large passenger trains on the N&W, and the C&O had some Alleghenies equipped for passenger service (primarily for large troop trains in WWII), but these were not regular assignments.
--Jim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Not quite. #3934-39 were of the early series of Challengers, and while used in passenger service in the late 1930's, I believe they were only used in freight service after WWII. The passenger Challengers most of us think of were the larger, later series locos, #3975-84 that were converted to oil after WWII and repainted in the distinctive "greyhound" scheme. These weighed 1,070,000 lbs vs. 899,000 lbs for the early Challengers.
But there was also the Pennsy S-1 6-4-4-6 loco. It ran in regular passenger duty (while it ran) and was longer that both Challenger series (140' 2.5" vs. 110' 7.1" or 131' 10.9") and heavier that the 3934-39 series (at 1,060,000 lbs).
And while I am not that knowledgeable about the Espee, I have seen several pictures of Cab Forwards on passenger trains, and believe they were, at least for a time, regularly assigned to passenger runs over Tehachapi, Donner, and perhaps Cajon.
(Thanks. It's fun to split hairs about trains, especially when someone makes an ".....est" statement.) Geezer
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The SP Cajon Pass line was built in the -70s so cab forwards wouldn't have been used ther.
-- Why do penguins walk so far to get to their nesting grounds?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob May wrote:

I believe the SP Cab Forwards used for passenger service
were of the 4-6-6-2 type.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dennis Mayer wrote:

2-6-6-4 type!
The convention with steam locos is to count from the chimney end to the firebox end. (with some obvious exceptions)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Greg Procter wrote:

[...]
SP Cab forwards are 4-6-6-2s. The wheels are counted from the front end of the loco, regardless of where the smokestack is...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 09:50:04 -0400, Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:

. . . or 2-6-6-2s, or 2-8-8-2s, or 4-8-8-2s (one of which is supposedly the only remaining example, here at the California Railroad Museum; rerettably with one side blocked off by a wall - not sure it it's supposed to be simulating part of a snow shed, or just backing exhibits on the other side).
Lots of photos here:
http://www.northeast.railfan.net/steam24.html
--
Steve

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:

It depends ... like many things! It's a common variation, just NOT in the USA.
Dan Mitchell ===========
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:

Ok, but that defies the convention!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Greg Procter wrote:
>>> The convention with steam locos is to count from the chimney end >>> to the firebox end. (with some obvious exceptions) >>> >> SP Cab forwards are 4-6-6-2s. The wheels are counted from the front >> end of the loco, regardless of where the smokestack is... > > Ok, but that defies the convention!
The convention in the US is to count from the front of the loco. And as far as I can make out, that convention also applies in Europe...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
mark_newton wrote:

The European convention is to count from smokebox to firebox. The only European "cab forwards" I can think of were the German BR 05 (4-6-4 so it doesn't matter) and the Italian 4-6-0 or 0-6-4 express loco. (I can't remember the class offhand)
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Greg Procter wrote:
> The European convention is to count from smokebox to firebox. The > only European "cab forwards" I can think of were the German BR 05 > (4-6-4 so it doesn't matter) and the Italian 4-6-0 or 0-6-4 express > loco. (I can't remember the class offhand)
Gr670. Every Italian publication I've ever seen that mentions them refers to them as 4-6-0s.
As for other European "cab-forwards", there were a number of locos built for tramways and light railways by Tubize, and others that were designed to run cab-end leading. Their wheel arrangements are usually counted from the firebox end as well, at least in the European literature...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Greg Procter wrote:

Er, to me it looks like a _different_ convention, is all... :-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:

Good point!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 23:26:01 -0400, Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:

If it's a convention, do we get to wear funny hats?
Oh - never mind: we already have funny hats, and vests to go with them.
--
Steve

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Greg Procter wrote:

Hi Greg:
Here we go again! That's a common argument that always starts fights here (and elesewhere). The reverse designation is the common one in the USA, with the order usually staring from the FRONT of the engine, regardless of the stack location. Thus an SP "AC" is a 4-8-8-2 here, but to you it's a 2-8-8-4 type.
I have a similar problem with my preferred convention to list the articulated joint with a "+" sign unstead of a "-" sign. So, to me, the same loco is a 4-8+8-2. I like that designation as it conveys SIGNIFICANT additional information. Neither is particularly right or wrong, just differing conventions.
It is sometimes important to make such differences known, however, to avoid confusion.
Dan Mitchell ===========
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Daniel A. Mitchell" wrote:

The normal (European) use of the "+" is for locos where individual loco units are perminantly coupled together, such as the Swiss Ae 8/14 - two complete locos but some (control) equipment is not duplicated. A US example might be the earliest F units as originally delivered ie Bo'Bo'+Bo'Bo'. for an A+B "unit". The apostrophes show a separate flexible frame, so the SP AC becomes a 4'8'-8 2'. (the second set of drivers has no apostrophy because they are mounted on the rigid main frame)

Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.