You beat me to it.
Big Boy Locomotive Came to Nor Cal.
- Thread starter UncleDave
- Start date
Years ago went with a trucker to Ca down I-5 from seattle, I remember stopping at a rest area or park and walked down a hill to a place where I think a Big Boy was parked, I climbed on it as did others. Does anyone know where that is or was? I don't remember what state or where that was.
Probably wasn't a Big Boy. Most were scrapped, and the roster of surviving ones doesn't show any that ended up on the west coast.
The only one on static display on the west coast was restored and the one discussed here. UP took possession of it for restoration to operating condition.
http://www.railgiants.org/union-pacific-big-boy.htm
Does anyone who used to watch Captain Kangaroo remember this song? I used to watch before going to school and would always hope it would play. I did a search and couldn't find the original, but someone made a similar one with all steam engines to go with the song.
I think it was late 80's or early 90's when I saw it, and yes I think it was a big boy. So where did this restored one come from? That could have been it.
This one got to the RailGiants Train Museum in Pomona in 1962 but was sold back to Union Pacific in 2013.
It's mostly an outdoor train museum that's part of the "Fairplex" that hosts the Los Angeles County Fair.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/R...833803!4d-117.7701018!16s/m/0ch2y5f?entry=ttu
That's the smoke box. Combustion products leave the fire tubes and exit out the stack. Painted jacket wouldn't survive the heat. Large steam generators used for power production use water tube boilers. The water(condensate) circulates in the tubes and the combustion process takes place outside of the tubes. Water tube boilers and fire tube boilers.
Showed "Last of the Giant" every year to my 8th grade students in American History. Nice fit when discussing how the railroads help build the country.
Took five years
15 years ago, I remember more than one person active in steam preserveration/operation claim that a Big Boy would never again be under steam. I'm glad that they were wrong(those same people also said the same about N&W 611, but here we are...).
I've unfortunately not seen one under steam, but we are fortunate here in St. Louis to have 4006. Although this one probably truly will never be under steam again, it's still impressive to see especially to be able to literally see side-by-side how massive it is compared to a lot of other steam locos.
At least this one too you can climb into the cab and see what's going on. By the way, I've been in a few steam loco cabs...and well a half dozen people could probably stand comfortably, and few others on the footplate.
With all of that said, though, I admit some partiality to Eastern Mountain steam, and N&W in particular. Consequently, it's an even bigger treat to see this a few hundred feet away. This is a Y6a-it's a bit smaller than the Big Boy, but as a simple articulated would beat the Big Boy in tractive effort by a decent margin. The Big Boy does offer more drawbar pull-one of those things why there's so many things that go into the debates about whether the Big Boy, Y-Class, Allegheny, or one of a few others are most deserving of the "biggest"steam locomotive label. Both the Big Boy and the Y had similar design goals-hauling big heavy freight trains over the mountains at moderate speeds(50-60mph).
I don't have exact fuel consumption figures at hand, but as a Mallet I'd expect the Y class to be somewhat more efficient than the Big Boy For those not versed in steam terminology, notice that the Y6a front cylinders are considerably larger than the rear cylinders. Steam locomotives were designed as either "simple" or "compound". A "simple" engine feeds all cylinders with boiler pressure steam(2 cylinders in most non-articulated/duplex locomotive, 4 cylinders in an articulated). A "compound" locomotive has additional cylinders(sometimes down in the frame on a non-articulated design, like the British Gresley Pacifics that had a 3rd cylinder in the center) that are fed exhaust steam from high pressure cylinders, extracting more of the availabe energy of the steam. A "Mallet" is an articulated locomotive where the front cylinders are low pressure(most Mallets can operate in "simple" mode, feeding boiler pressure to all cylinders, to start, and then can be switched when underway).
In any case, I wish we'd see this one under steam, as it is the only surviving member of the Y6 class. It's a shame N&W didn't preserve any examples of the even more advanced Y6b
In fact, oil conversions of coal locomotives are not always successful for that reason. A coal firebox is designed so that a lot of the coal in the firebed is actually "coking out", and the gases that are released in the coking process are drawn into the flues and burn there, although they also depend on having that stability of the big hot firebed throwing out a lot of heat. Oil burners need to atomize the fuel enough-often with an elaborate steam jet-that it can be drawn into the flues and then combust there.
The smokebox has to be pretty darn heat tolerant considering that it's inevetable that some combustion will happen there too-that wouldn't be as desireable since it would mostly be wasted, but it will happen. I seem to remember too that with coal, there's a certain balancing act(really an art) to having the firebed be the appropriate depth, as too deep is sluggist to respond and difficult to draft through, but too shallow can be lifted off the grates under heavy drafts.
BTW, I seem to recall some discussion from folks who would know that that the Big Boy oil conversions were not particularly successful and that they didn't steam particularly well after the conversion. I do seem to recall that a lot of work was done on the firebox during restoration to better adapt it to oil burning...
I've unfortunately not seen one under steam, but we are fortunate here in St. Louis to have 4006. Although this one probably truly will never be under steam again, it's still impressive to see especially to be able to literally see side-by-side how massive it is compared to a lot of other steam locos.
At least this one too you can climb into the cab and see what's going on. By the way, I've been in a few steam loco cabs...and well a half dozen people could probably stand comfortably, and few others on the footplate.
With all of that said, though, I admit some partiality to Eastern Mountain steam, and N&W in particular. Consequently, it's an even bigger treat to see this a few hundred feet away. This is a Y6a-it's a bit smaller than the Big Boy, but as a simple articulated would beat the Big Boy in tractive effort by a decent margin. The Big Boy does offer more drawbar pull-one of those things why there's so many things that go into the debates about whether the Big Boy, Y-Class, Allegheny, or one of a few others are most deserving of the "biggest"steam locomotive label. Both the Big Boy and the Y had similar design goals-hauling big heavy freight trains over the mountains at moderate speeds(50-60mph).
I don't have exact fuel consumption figures at hand, but as a Mallet I'd expect the Y class to be somewhat more efficient than the Big Boy For those not versed in steam terminology, notice that the Y6a front cylinders are considerably larger than the rear cylinders. Steam locomotives were designed as either "simple" or "compound". A "simple" engine feeds all cylinders with boiler pressure steam(2 cylinders in most non-articulated/duplex locomotive, 4 cylinders in an articulated). A "compound" locomotive has additional cylinders(sometimes down in the frame on a non-articulated design, like the British Gresley Pacifics that had a 3rd cylinder in the center) that are fed exhaust steam from high pressure cylinders, extracting more of the availabe energy of the steam. A "Mallet" is an articulated locomotive where the front cylinders are low pressure(most Mallets can operate in "simple" mode, feeding boiler pressure to all cylinders, to start, and then can be switched when underway).
In any case, I wish we'd see this one under steam, as it is the only surviving member of the Y6 class. It's a shame N&W didn't preserve any examples of the even more advanced Y6b
Combustion should be occurring in both the firebox and the boiler flues. In fact, in a boiler of this size, I can’t imagine the stress that only having combustion in the firebox would cause.Combustion takes place on firebox if I recall correctly
In fact, oil conversions of coal locomotives are not always successful for that reason. A coal firebox is designed so that a lot of the coal in the firebed is actually "coking out", and the gases that are released in the coking process are drawn into the flues and burn there, although they also depend on having that stability of the big hot firebed throwing out a lot of heat. Oil burners need to atomize the fuel enough-often with an elaborate steam jet-that it can be drawn into the flues and then combust there.
The smokebox has to be pretty darn heat tolerant considering that it's inevetable that some combustion will happen there too-that wouldn't be as desireable since it would mostly be wasted, but it will happen. I seem to remember too that with coal, there's a certain balancing act(really an art) to having the firebed be the appropriate depth, as too deep is sluggist to respond and difficult to draft through, but too shallow can be lifted off the grates under heavy drafts.
BTW, I seem to recall some discussion from folks who would know that that the Big Boy oil conversions were not particularly successful and that they didn't steam particularly well after the conversion. I do seem to recall that a lot of work was done on the firebox during restoration to better adapt it to oil burning...
This is coming though my area in three weeks and stopping in my boyhood town of Watseka IL. It's on the same tracks as the old Chicago and Eastern Illinois rail line. Took my first passenger train ride from there to Chicago back in the 60s to go to a Cubs game with the Cub Scout troop. Next train trip was epic and to Denver last year.....
https://www.wcia.com/news/union-pacific-big-boy-coming-to-central-illinois/
https://www.up.com/heritage/steam/schedule/index.htm
https://www.wcia.com/news/union-pacific-big-boy-coming-to-central-illinois/
https://www.up.com/heritage/steam/schedule/index.htm
Last edited:
Tuesday, September 10th is definitely going to involve some train chasing for me.
The UP mainline going in to St. Louis passes about a mile away from my work, so that site's a 100% will catch it there.
The only question-do I cancel classes all day and try to catch the 9:00AM departure from Villa Grove, just cancel afternoon classes and follow from Nokomis, or skip out a bit early to catch at work.
In 5 years at my employer, I've taken very few days off, primarily doing it to avoid losing them at the end of the year. I think this may be one I take, or at least half a day, just because...
The last time I spent a day chasing trains(not counting times I've bought tickets to ride behind them...) was in 2009. I was in college and followed the inaugural run of RJC2008(QJ class 2-10-2, ex Quijong Ry 7040) through central Kentucky, an area I know a lot better than south central Illinois, but still, I can do it.
The big question is if my wife wants to come along too
. I think little man needs to see this if nothing else, even if it's just one sighting and not the whole day.
I'm super excited for this one...I might or might not have ordered a lens just for the occasion(just some practical considerations...) and am taking inventory on whether or not I have enough Nikon EN-EL18 series batteries to last for a day since rail photography generally is a minimum 3 camera event for me(no time to change lenses)....and checking my stash of slide film since I can't not shoot live steam on slides also...
The UP mainline going in to St. Louis passes about a mile away from my work, so that site's a 100% will catch it there.
The only question-do I cancel classes all day and try to catch the 9:00AM departure from Villa Grove, just cancel afternoon classes and follow from Nokomis, or skip out a bit early to catch at work.
In 5 years at my employer, I've taken very few days off, primarily doing it to avoid losing them at the end of the year. I think this may be one I take, or at least half a day, just because...
The last time I spent a day chasing trains(not counting times I've bought tickets to ride behind them...) was in 2009. I was in college and followed the inaugural run of RJC2008(QJ class 2-10-2, ex Quijong Ry 7040) through central Kentucky, an area I know a lot better than south central Illinois, but still, I can do it.
The big question is if my wife wants to come along too
. I think little man needs to see this if nothing else, even if it's just one sighting and not the whole day. I'm super excited for this one...I might or might not have ordered a lens just for the occasion(just some practical considerations...) and am taking inventory on whether or not I have enough Nikon EN-EL18 series batteries to last for a day since rail photography generally is a minimum 3 camera event for me(no time to change lenses)....and checking my stash of slide film since I can't not shoot live steam on slides also...
MolaKule
Staff member
Smoke boxes were generally painted with a graphite-based paint to resist heat better, you'll notice the Firebox is similar.
Last edited:
The loco is going to be under its own power steaming along the UP mainline, including as best as I can tell the segment that runs alongside Rt 1.
The locations on the schedule I'm guessing are probably water stops, but also ones with decent viewing along the route. I'm sketching out my plans now for what I'm going to do on Tuesday the 10th, but will probably probably play the game of running ahead(not too difficult as a lot of the track parallels roads, and you can expect the Big Boy to probably be doing 50-60mph) and scoping out good spots to set up ahead for run-bys.
That's the tentative plan at least.
I will qualify this by saying that I've not seen UP steam operations in person(I've only lived in UP territory a few years now, and even then they rarely bring this far east). I've been a railfan my whole life, though, and have seen/ridden behind plenty of live steam, although not as much over Class 1 tracks as I'd like.
CSX and NS, when they allow steam(both have gone back and forth, although NS now runs a steam program...) require a diesel as part of the train. Typically a steam locomotive fitted for operation on modern class 1s will have a diesel control stand in the cab that can run the diesel(s) behind it by their MU(Multiple Unit) connections, so the steam crew would have full control over it.
The diesel is required mainly as "insurance", although depending on just how much they're hauling a single diesel locomotive probably wouldn't have a hope of being able to move what a single modern(relative term-say 1930s-50s) mainline steam locomotive could do. In fact there's a whole side discussion that could be had in different design philosophies-each steam locomotive requires a full crew to run it, so steam locos were often at least somewhat purpose built so that a single loco could pull the train it needed to pull under the conditions that were needed(flat, mountains, mixed, slow, fast, big trains, small trains, etc). A typical single diesel locomotive often has a fraction of the power of a big mainline steam locomotive, BUT a single crew can run one just as easily as they can a dozen. There were some huge, high powered diesels built, but by the 60s the philosophy was largely to build each unit with a relatively modest amount of power(I started to cite horsepower, but things like drawbar pull, tractive effort, etc are at least as important) and then just string together as many as needed to get the job done.
In any case, though, it's actually worth mentioning too that steam and diesel working in tandem can actually complement each other nicely. I don't pretend to have as good of a grasp of the physics as I'd like, but there's an old saying that "Steam can pull more weight than it can start, and diesel can start more weight than it can pull." The overly simple explanation is that since there's no mechanical coupling between the engine("prime mover") in a Diesel-Electric, one can in theory produce full horsepower at a standstill. By contrast, normal steam is about as close to direct drive as you get, considering that the driving wheels and siderods are the functional equivalent of a crankshaft in an internal combusion engine, so steam horsepower is entirely speed dependent. Not helping it too is that steam produces its maximum torque at stall(much like an electric motor...in fact steam cars often get the same sort of praise for acceleration as do electric cars). Steam is notorious for wheelslip when starting.
So, what that means is that when steam is paired with diesel-electric, the diesel electric can be a huge help when starting from a standstill, although provides minimal benefit at speed. I think it's an interesting synergistic use of technology, and as I understand it too, diesel is so much less prone to wheel slip that one "consequence" of dieselization was a pretty dramatic reduction in rail wear.
As far as infrastructure goes-yes actual repair facilities are few and far between, but major repair is unlikely to be needed on the road. Water is the big issue, in fact to the point that a second tender just for water isn't unheard of. Since mainline steam is a rare enough sight these days, usually fire departments are happy to help out at scheduled stops.
I'd be curious about what the fuel situation is. Oil is a bit easier to refuel without specialized facilities. Most steam locomotives at least originally used Bunker C fuel oil(basically a step above road tar), both for its energy density and because in the 40s and 50s it was essentially a waste product so was cheap. Plastics manufacturing made it not so cheap. Diesel would certainly make refueling logistics a lot easier, but I suspect on something this size the energy density isn't there to support it without some serious work(and a tender just hauling nothign but diesel...)
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
And Rotella
