Hi Steve. I am pretty sure that UP3985 is no longer being used in any type of service since Union Pacific donated it to the Railroading Heritage of Midwest America in 2022. They do plan on getting it back to operating condition. Good information never the less. - Jason
Hi Steve. Nice work. I appreciate the effort that goes into covering off so much in such a short video. I've a handful of thoughts: I think the cross compounds and tandem compounds were a little more than fleeting on North American roads - they were for a time fairly common, and the tandems held the records for biggest/strongest for a few years around the turn of thw 19th/20th Century. M. Mallet's own thoughts are interesting. My reading suggests that he did see his ideas as being for first tier roads - but that those roads weren't intereted. Thus, he sold his idea to second tier roads. His design principles endured, and save for the hinge were the basis of the Mallet through to the end of steam. I look forward to your next installment.
Hello theimaginationstation1899. Thank you for the feedback. My research suggests Mallet only saw the compound articulated as a special use locomotive. I didn't research his intentions for the cross compound and tandem compound since it was outside the scope of the video. You make some very interesting points that are definitely worth looking into. Thanks!!!
@@americansteamlegacy-yh9dr No sweat. It might have been in Weisner (sic?) , or in La Masina (sic?) that I read that. So attributed to him. I didn't make a particular note of it because if I did that I'd be drowning in a sea of particular notes. The AT & SF for instance loved their cross and tandem compounds. Anyway, the day job needs me...
Why didn’t you mention the controversy surrounding the weight of the C&O’s first order of Allegheny’s. Lima under calculated their weight by about 25 tons. The result was that C&O had to reimburse engineers and firemen for lost wages owed based upon the locomotives weight. C&O sued Lima and got reimbursed for the lost wages.
Hi cmdrflake. That's an excellent point!! In an effort to keep the video at a manageable length, I just touched on the high points. The Allegheny, as well as a great number of other locomotives, deserve a dedicated video that covers such details. This is something I intend on doing in the near future. Can you believe the damages paid to the C&O was greater than the total profit Lima made from all 68 Alleghenies? OUCH!!
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
I like to call the 2-6-6-4s articulated Adriatics. And I have been to the Henry ford museum seen 1601 up close and in person.
Can't wait for part 6
California western #46 is a 2-6-6-2 and she resides in campo,ca right next to the mexcio border
Hi Steve. I am pretty sure that UP3985 is no longer being used in any type of service since Union Pacific donated it to the Railroading Heritage of Midwest America in 2022. They do plan on getting it back to operating condition. Good information never the less. - Jason
Thanks, Jason. I should have double checked that. Thanks for watching!!
Hi Steve. Nice work. I appreciate the effort that goes into covering off so much in such a short video.
I've a handful of thoughts:
I think the cross compounds and tandem compounds were a little more than fleeting on North American roads - they were for a time fairly common, and the tandems held the records for biggest/strongest for a few years around the turn of thw 19th/20th Century.
M. Mallet's own thoughts are interesting. My reading suggests that he did see his ideas as being for first tier roads - but that those roads weren't intereted. Thus, he sold his idea to second tier roads. His design principles endured, and save for the hinge were the basis of the Mallet through to the end of steam.
I look forward to your next installment.
Hello theimaginationstation1899. Thank you for the feedback. My research suggests Mallet only saw the compound articulated as a special use locomotive. I didn't research his intentions for the cross compound and tandem compound since it was outside the scope of the video. You make some very interesting points that are definitely worth looking into. Thanks!!!
@@americansteamlegacy-yh9dr No sweat. It might have been in Weisner (sic?) , or in La Masina (sic?) that I read that. So attributed to him. I didn't make a particular note of it because if I did that I'd be drowning in a sea of particular notes.
The AT & SF for instance loved their cross and tandem compounds. Anyway, the day job needs me...
I've seen Allegheny 1604 in 2022.
Why didn’t you mention the controversy surrounding the weight of the C&O’s first order of Allegheny’s. Lima under calculated their weight by about 25 tons. The result was that C&O had to reimburse engineers and firemen for lost wages owed based upon the locomotives weight. C&O sued Lima and got reimbursed for the lost wages.
Locomotive litigation is something that I'd watch...
Hi cmdrflake. That's an excellent point!! In an effort to keep the video at a manageable length, I just touched on the high points. The Allegheny, as well as a great number of other locomotives, deserve a dedicated video that covers such details. This is something I intend on doing in the near future. Can you believe the damages paid to the C&O was greater than the total profit Lima made from all 68 Alleghenies? OUCH!!