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
Reply to
KATHLEEN BRENNAN
Loading thread data ...
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.
Reply to
R.Glueck
"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.
formatting link

Eric
Reply to
newyorkcentralfan
Believe most were used to haul coal around the western states along with the Big Boy. Some where used for passenger service on express runs.
I built an HO kit of one and boy what a chore. Took me about 40 hours and there must have been 1,000 pieces. But it was worth it. What a beautiful Steam Locomotive! I still need to get the correct tender for it, in order to make it complete.
Rich
Reply to
evodawg
from:
formatting link

The Challengers were designed for fast freight service, but occasionally pulled passenger trains. No. 3985 originally burned coal and pulled a tender with a 32-ton capacity. In 1990, it was converted to use No. 5 oil. The top speed of No. 3985 is about 70 miles an hour.
Reply to
VManes
Many Thanks to All of you!!!
Great information. I'd like to plan for one of the Athearn models [any opinions and/or experience w/ their model], but it will certainly take some time to set aside that type of cash.
Reply to
KATHLEEN BRENNAN
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
Reply to
mallbery
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
Reply to
Geezer
And, on the GN, the N-3 2-8+8-0's pulled a lot of troop trains too, but they sure were not passenger locos. SP also used their cab forwards in similar fashion. During the war you used what you had.
AT&SF did have a couple classes of small purpose-built passenger Mallets (articulateds), but they were not notably successful.
Dan Mitchell ============
Reply to
Daniel A. Mitchell
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?
Reply to
Bob May
I believe the SP Cab Forwards used for passenger service
were of the 4-6-6-2 type.
Reply to
Dennis Mayer
Those were the ones I actually meant to refer to. Snipped the the wrong part.
Ah... good point. I had forgotten about the S-1.
Another good point. It's funny, I was merely quoting something I read in a book, but you are absolutely right: I've seen those pictures, too.
No problem. Glad to provide a target ;^)
--Jim
Reply to
mallbery
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)
Reply to
Greg Procter
[...]
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...
Reply to
Wolf Kirchmeir
IIRC, SP has had trackage rights over Cajon since before Methuselah wet his diapers.
Reply to
Wolf Kirchmeir
. . . 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:
formatting link
Reply to
Steve Caple
Perhaps so intended, but ...
I've seen lots of photos of the 4-8+8-2 "AC" types in passenger service. This was especially tue of the heavy troop trains around the time of WW-II.
Dan Mitchell ============
Reply to
Daniel A. Mitchell
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 ============
Reply to
Daniel A. Mitchell
It depends ... like many things! It's a common variation, just NOT in the USA.
Dan Mitchell ============
Reply to
Daniel A. Mitchell
the only time that SP ran up Cajon pass was when their own route through another pass was blocked and they had to run to Barstow and then turn around to get to Mojave via the ATSF route there. SP also has the Beaumont Pass route to the east. Several SP locos of the articulated variety were used for passenger serviece with the AM class (2-6-6-2) being the first and they were dedicated to passenger service.
-- Why do penguins walk so far to get to their nesting grounds?
Reply to
Bob May

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.