Some info about a really big locomotive...

I designed the enginespec for the Huge Boy so that it has a 320-psi boiler and increased capacity, but it is not capable of very high speeds as its boiler does not produce enough steam to feed her voracious cylinders above a certain speed. I figured that firebox efficiency would not increase proportionally and therefore, even if you frantically hit the spacebar, she wouldn't be able to go as fast as a Big Boy...who knows, maybe the "production" model will work better...:D
 
Well If people would have kept producing steam locos then maybe in the future the huge boy would be faster.

Maybe Ben the connecting rods would be made out of a lighter material then mild steel.

GP 38-2:Read my post again because I don't recall saying that one had existed.
 
Last edited:
Read your own post again

OMG!!! I didn't know there was such thing as the Eerie 2-4-6-8-10-12 Multiplex.
Sorry try again.

The Huge Boy NEVER EXISTED EXCEPT ON PAPER. Even if they had continued developing steam engines, boiled water has it's limits. Pure and simple steam can only do so much. To actually get say a 2-8-8-8-2 Triplex past it's 5mph limit (set by the ERIE, but they couldn't go much faster reguardless) it'd need a MASSIVE boiler beyond the size that could be used on a locomotive. If it was however the locomotive would probably tear itself apart or turn the rails into curved noodles.
At some point you have to factor in cost effectiveness. Say they did make the Huge Boy? Let's say they made it out of the lightest/strongest metals available. Do you have any idea of ho much that would cost?
Compare that to diesels. Fueling a diesel is much cheaper than fueling a steamer. Yes, near the end of steamers they were efficient, however compared to diesels they were expensive and in-efficient.
The diesel to kill steam was probably the EMD FT with it's B unit a pair could develop 2700hp, couple up a A-B-B-A consist and your looking at enough power to challenge even the best steamer at a fraction of the cost.

P.S. I forgot about another loco:
the C&O 2-6-6-6 Allegheny was also technically bigger than the Big Boy
 
Last edited:
... and instead to have fantasy and creativity of this forum improved, we have rivet-counter flaming about what was bigger, longer, faster, economically and so on...

Somebody want to have some info about Santa Fe 2-10-10-2? Look here...

http://www.trainzitaliafoto.com/vbportal/forums/showthread.php?t=4521

Was the Big Boy the bigger? No way... the longest with tender included.

Can a articulated boiler works? Of course. ATSF had it build.

America Articulated Steam Locomotives of Bob Le Massena can be helpfull on this matter.
But, friends, let your creativity come out and use Trainz to play with it.

For this reason the Huge Boy existed and you can use it on your Trainz layouts...
 
I know that EMD FT were cheaper, but UP had to buy five more Big Boys because of wartime restrictions and many other roads were forced to buy steam locomotives instead of Diesels. UP, on the other hand, has always liked big and unorthodox locos, from 9000s to turbines, to double Diesels...
The Erie Triplex was a failure, but it was built some decades before with a far less advanced technology. I have been slightly optimistic as I wrote the enginespec, but nonetheless the engine does not produce enough steam at medium-high speed.
Maybe it could have been designed and built, maybe not...but in Trainz we can see how it looks and IMHO, it looks great :D !
 
That's right this forum is a bunch of rivet counters. Why? Well let's see what is model railroading?
Well a model is a miniture copy of something real so your making a miniture of a railroad (and all included).
Model railroading is not some fantasy land where anything goes. There is a fine line between prototype and free-lance. However, even free-lance railroads are based in reality.

Yes, ATSF I believe had an articulated BOILER made but it was never used and was scrapped (or recycled).

If you really do want to mislead people into thinking these paper ideas actually existed.
1. Make your info accurate (drawings of a 4-8-8-8-4 do not make a 4-8-8-8-6)
2. Any pictures that have been altered to try and prove the point aren't cheap copies Ferrous is too good :D

FT's were cheaper in the long run. However, yes during WWII steamers were built new (though not many as war time restrictions also cut into them, most locos were traded or re-located to other railroads).
WWII only shortly stopped dieselization.
UP's always had this thing for big locomotives, from the 4-12-2 9000's, 4-6-6-4 Challengers (which in their time were massive), 4-8-8-4 Big Boy's (and people thought the Challengers were big?), X class Gas Turbines (including the Veranda series) to the EMD DD40AX (basically a pair of GP40 (or was it GP35's?) on one common frame).
 
Last edited:
I think that model railroading is a kind of an art where phantasy and creativity become heavenly important. Looks at Mr.Allens Golph and Diaphetic experience, look at the many "what if" layout, look at the fantastic pictures you see here and on all model railroading devoted magazine. All of them are pieces of art, expression of fantasies, a way to realize builder's own dreams of a reality that mostly remain only but a small part in the mind of the builder.
Somebody like it, sombody else prefer to think they are "limited" to reproduce reality.

Regarding the articulated boiler locomotives, find here a couple of images I found on Articulated Locomotives of Lionel Wiener, a book published first time in 1930 and republished 1970 from Kalmbach (I know. I got one).
ATSF had three locomotives build with articulated boiler:

1157 a 2-6-6-2 built in ATSF road shop with two 2-6-2 by connecting the two boilers with a double ball-and-soket joint in 1910.

1158 and 1159 renumbered from 1170 and 1171 build as commercial version of the 1157 by Baldwin in 1910 too. The 1170 had a ball joint that where replaced in th1 1171 by an metal accordion joint.

Here are some unmodified drawing and pictures. For the brave of heart I have some more pictures of these locomotives I need to pass through the scanner:

http://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/artloc/atsf1.jpg

http://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/artloc/atsf2.jpg

http://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/artloc/atsf3.jpg

http://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/artloc/atsf4.jpg

http://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/artloc/atsf5.jpg

http://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/artloc/atsf6.jpg

To demonstrate that sometime reality is crazy, a couple of drawings of two Bayer Peacock project for the development of the locomotive. From my sources I understand both concepts have been patented....

http://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/artloc/artgarrat.jpg

http://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/artloc/turbgarrat.jpg
 
Last edited:
Model railroading is not some fantasy land where anything goes. There is a fine line between prototype and free-lance. However, even free-lance railroads are based in reality.

And this is what we tried to do. IF the Huge boy had ever been designed and built, it would have been no better than a Big Boy, being incapable of attaining the same speed because of insufficient steam production. Perhaps it could have found its place hauling coal drags on some Appalachian road, but it would never been able to negotiate those tight curves...it would have been a failure, but a spectacular one :) .

We thought that a 4-8-8-8-6 wheel arrangement would be better suited to support a bigger firebox...but we failed to update the drawing :o

UP's always had this thing for big locomotives, from the 4-12-2 9000's, 4-6-6-4 Challengers (which in their time were massive), 4-8-8-4 Big Boy's (and people thought the Challengers were big?), X class Gas Turbines (including the Veranda series) to the EMD DD40AX (basically a pair of GP40 (or was it GP35's?) on one common frame).

DD40AX were "double" GP40s; DD35s were "double" GP35 and also existed in cabless version (DD35B). UP also had the ugly U50s and very few ALCo units (I don't remember the model number). In the era of MU'd Diesels perhaps these were useless giants, but I like them much more than a string of SD-40s.
 
the Gorre and Daphited was a spectacular layout. But reguardless of it being fatasty it was very much based in reality. The equipment and scenery were all based around something very real. There is a veryfine line between prototype, freelance and just plain insanity. John Allen walked that line very well. His railroad was prototypical in that the line ran and made sense, but it was very free-lanced in it's design and the way it was run.

As for that ATSF, most are drawings and only one "picture" of the actual locomotive, however it does not show any sort of RR name or road number hence it can't be very trustworthy. I've studied the ATSF RR and while I have seen the oddball drawing there has never once been a mentioning of the actual "articulated boiler" actually being put into service, it was made there's no doubting that, but ATSF saw no reason to put it into actual service. Soon after being built they were split into conventional locos.
There is a huge difference between patented and actually being built. yes the garretts do exists and I believe I've seen some following those designs. But again there is a big difference between someone patenting the drawing/design and someone actually building and using it. (For instance the US patent office has thousands of patents but some/many have never been made, not even a prototype)
Pendolino heheupate that pic :p
Ah yes that's right DD35 and DD40's now why couldn't I remember that.

Now I may be getting the wrong idea, but you are actually making this monster for Trainz?
If so please stop trying to claim it as a RUNNING prototype it never did, and you're making a lot of people think it did.
Also consider the fantasy of it. yes it is a fantasy but even a fantasy is based in reality. UP would have never actually considered such a long loco. if anything I would guess on them taking the Triplex design into the new century. A 3rd set of drivers under the tender would make much more sense. Even in Trainz a "Huge Boy" like that would require IMMENSE radius curves, far bigger than anyone would model.
 
Last edited:
... and who define the line between "art" and "insanity"?

Regarding the articulated boiler, I think you cannot negate evidence:

http://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/atsf/atsf1157.jpg

http://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/atsf/atsf1170.jpg

http://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/atsf/atsf2.jpghttp://private.trainzitalia.com/alm/pict/atsf/atsf1171.jpg


(I hope the webmaster can excuse the dimension of the pictures. I would like to have Ferrous testing for the autenticity of these pictures, scanned at 300 dpi from the Robert LeMassena's book and posted only as jpg pictures without even changing it to grey scale)

And are you considering the following locomotive an insanity or a real one?


gott1.jpg


I agree with you that a patent doesn't mean a real products, but why should a company (not a single man) spending the money to patent a product? Corporate insanity?

Regarding the Huge Boy for Trainz: we don't think to do it, we made it:

atsf1.jpg
huge01.jpg





like we made the Challenger and the Big Boy. And it works...
 
Last edited:
art and insanity? what's that have to do with anything?

Yes I certainly can negate "evidence" one picture and a few "drawings" hardly counts as evidence. And as I already mentioned ATSF DID have an articulated boiler. BUT it was never put into service, ATSF realized that that it was a useless design.

As for that steam snowplow. Yup that's insanity. However it very might have well existed. That of course would need someone that is an expert in that particular country and that particular railroad.
 
Because of the dimension of the pictures, I edited the previous message, after the webmaster cancelled it.
Sorry for the mistake.
 
the Gorre and Daphited was a spectacular layout. But regardless of it being fantasty it was very much based in reality. The equipment and scenery were all based around something very real. There is a very fine line between prototype, freelance and just plain insanity. John Allen walked that line very well...
John Allen had a dinosaur working the switch yard. She could work both standard and narrow gauge all day on a bale of hay.
Model railroading is based on real railroading, but it's a hobby. It's done for fun, so it's okay to have fun with it. That's why no layout is really complete without an 0-2-0 steamer or a steisel kitbashed from a Pacific and an EMD F-7.
The Huge Boy and the Multiplex never existed, but maybe they should have, just for fun. And maybe they should exist in Trainz, if only to look huge and impressive rolling across the Great Canyon Bridge.
After all, it's just a hobby, and no train police are going to break you're door down to make sure you're not having too much fun. Pick the level of realism you're most comfortable with and enjoy it.

:cool: Claude
 
John Allen had a dinosaur working the switch yard. She could work both standard and narrow gauge all day on a bale of hay.
Model railroading is based on real railroading, but it's a hobby. It's done for fun, so it's okay to have fun with it. That's why no layout is really complete without an 0-2-0 steamer or a steisel kitbashed from a Pacific and an EMD F-7.
The Huge Boy and the Multiplex never existed, but maybe they should have, just for fun. And maybe they should exist in Trainz, if only to look huge and impressive rolling across the Great Canyon Bridge.
After all, it's just a hobby, and no train police are going to break you're door down to make sure you're not having too much fun. Pick the level of realism you're most comfortable with and enjoy it.

:cool: Claude

I'm not saying that fantasy is a problem, nor should it be excluded from something like model railroading. If you read back through this thread the have repeatedly confused users into thinking the Huge Boy was an actual locomotive that UP built and operated. While it is fantasy that's fine, but misleading the public is not.
 
I would like to know how anyone could be misled into thinking that the Huge Boy really existed.

If I try a simple Google image search using "Big Boy" as keywords i get 18 pictures, 14 of them representing UP 4000-class locomotives or models. If I change the keyword to "Huge Boy" 11 out of 18 pictures represents pets nicknamed "Huge Boy". And if I ask for "Erie Triplex", I get 10 out of 18 pictures of this ill-fated behemoth.

There is no reference in any steam-related website to this machine. If it existed, it should be at least as famous as the Big Boy...it should be clear that this loco never existed and it is clearly a hoax...unless you want to believe to the "Great EMD Conspiracy Against Steam" :) .

P.S. Of course, I know everything about the "Great EMD Conspiracy Against Steam", but they're tracking me now...:D :D :D

P.P.S. Emma the switcher stegosaurus...what an idea!!!

Regards
 
I'm not saying that fantasy is a problem, nor should it be excluded from something like model railroading. If you read back through this thread the have repeatedly confused users into thinking the Huge Boy was an actual locomotive that UP built and operated. While it is fantasy that's fine, but misleading the public is not.

I reread many time my posts and I never found and indication asking people thinking this was a real functional operating locomotive.
Somebody has tought I really belive the Huge existed ouside of a virtual world. My goal was to start a discussion about "possible" or "improbable" locomotives and rolling stock.

I repeat my question here:

who have pictures of the UP8000 class locomotives or some other that could be interesting to have in Trainz?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top