WorldRailFans

Who says there was an engine bigger then the Big Boy?

I read in a string on one of the posts that there were engines bigger and more powerful then the Big Boy. Where? I've never heard of one, unless you consider the Matt H. Shay which was a complete failure after being put in service.

I saw a picture in a book about a Soviet loco with seven coupled axles in one rigid frame. I do not know if this loco is bigger than the Big Boy, but I read, that this particular loco was a great failure, because it wore the turnouts very heavily. So it was withdrawn from service after the first test run.

It was me that stated that there were larger locos than a Big Boy, now I suppose I'll have to try and find the evidence to prove it. The problem might be the definition of "biggest" - length, weight, height, "biggest" is very ambiguous.


For this sepcific discussion, what measure shall we use for "biggest"?

First of all, I take it we're exclusively talking about steam-engines here.


Although I don't have any data about how heavy or powerful BigBoys were, I found something about an Russian Garret, SZD class R (actually, it should be a backwards-R) which had a weight of 262,5 tons and a hook-power of 35.000 kg. It had a 2D1-1D2 axle-arrangement.

An Australian Garrat (WSWGR class AP60) was even heavier, 268,7 t, but nothing like as powerful.


Could anyone provide the exact data for BigBoys, so that we know what we have to "beat"?


Robert

Sorry, mistype: The hook-power of this Russian thing is even 35.700 kg!


RoB

As John said the terms biggest, most powerful...and so on, depend on how do you want to define it. But, one locomotive that has been mentioned as being heavier and more powerful than UP Big Boy was class M-3 locomotive of the Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railway (DMIR). Eight of these single-expansion 2-8-8-4 Mallets were ordered from Baldwin in 1941. Here are some of the data of this locomotive, compared to Big Boy.


Boiler Diameter: M-3 104 in.; Big Boy 95 in.

Boiler Pressure: M-3 240 lb.; Big Boy 300 lb.

Engine Wheelbase: M-3 67 ft. 2 in.; Big Boy 75 ft. 5 1/2 in.

Engine+Tender Wheelbase: M-3 113 ft. 4 1/2 in.; Big Boy 117 ft. 7 in.

Locomotive Weight: M-3 699,700 lb.; Big Boy 762,000 lb. (772,000 lb. in 2nd batch)

Engine+Tender Weight: M-3 1,138,000 lb.; Big Boy 1,198,000 lb. (1,209,000 lb. in 2nd batch)

Adhesion Weight: M-3 565,000 lb.; Big Boy 540,000 lb.

Tractive Force: M-3 140,000 lb.; Big Boy 133,375 lb.


As you can see the Big Boys were longer and heavier, but the M-3 had slightly more adhesion weight and tractive force. Thus, the Big Boys were the largest and heviest locomotive ever built, but they were probably not the most powerful. I do not think that there was any locomotive in Europe or anywhere else that ever came close to these locomotives. Here we are talking about locomotives (and tenders) that weighed more than 500 tonnes, with about 60 tonnes tractive force.


The Big Boys had one big advantage over the M-3, and that was speed. I do not know the top speed of the M-3, but it was definitely less than that of the Big Boys which were designed for a top speed of 70 m.p.h. Most of the traffic on the Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Rlwy. (~95%) was the transportation of iron ore to ports on the Great Lakes. Class M-3 locomotive were used to haul ore trains. It was said that they made an 80 miles round trip run in 12 hours, hauling an ore train weighing more than 6000 tons one way and, presumably, empty hopper cars on the return trip.


The Matt H. Shay, which was also built by Baldwin in 1914 for the Erie Railroad, had a tractive force of 160,000 lb. and a total weight of 853,050 lb. It was a triple artculated compound locomotive (Triplex) with a wheel arrangement of 2-8-8-8-2. The Erie used this engine in heavy pusher service on the Starruca grade near Susquehanna, N.Y. Two more locomotives of this type were ordered in 1916. They were not successful, mainly because the boilers, big as they were, could not supply enough steam to three pairs of cylinders.

I know less or more what kind of machines you are talking, but which company and type are we talking about? Are there some preserved in working condition? It must be a terrible job for amateurs to maintain them..

There are several Big Boys preserved as static displays. One, at the Los Angeles County faiirgrouds in Pomona, has reportedly been maintained to allow restoration to working condition without a great deal of effort. UP 3985, a 4-6+6-4 very similar to the Big Boy, is maintained in working condition by Union Pacific and used on excursions. It is definitely a major effort to maintain a main line steam locomotive in working condition.

Could someone compare Big Boy to heaviest machines in Europe, for instance, how many BR45 we need to win tug'o'war with Big Boy???

From past reading, the "Big Boy" can be beaten on any one count by at least one other locomotive, so I am pretty certain it cannot claim to be the biggest historically at anything. I am also certain that today it can claim that honour from any locomotive in existance.


If anyone wants to test my claim, line it up and I will knock it down

(give me time though, it may take some searching out of imformation)


Regards,

Greg.P.

I mean this in a good natured manner, but....



It seems as if I might have just taken a shot at American pride here. I can see them boys in bars out west... "How dare some upstart Englishman claim that there be a an engine bigger than our Big Boy! Let's take him out side and discuss this man-to-man."



There was a similar discussion on which was the fastest steam locomotive, and the English Mallard is the winner, but the German 05 002 was *REALLY* close, 200.4 km/h for the 05, against 202.4km/h for Mallard. That upset a few Germans who had always thought that the 05 was the World's fastest steam loco.


viewtopic.php?t=5678


Don't worry, I know for a fact that there is nothing in England even vaguely close in size to a Big Boy.!



Like I said before, I mean this in a good mannered fashion.

Greg, I am not sure that you can find any locomotive that is heavier than the second batch of Big Boys that were built in 1944 (UP road nos. 4020-24). The locomotive alone weighed 772,000 lbs. The weight of engine plus tender was 1,209,000 lbs. As a matter of fact, I think that the weight of the first batch (road nos. 4000-19), with locomotive weight of 762,000 lbs and engine + tender weight of 1,198,000 lbs., was already heavier than any other locomotive type.


This claim does not have anything to do with national or regional pride. But, I think that starting from early this century the "biggest" steam locomotive in the world was usually, if not always, one of the American Mallets. The Big Boys, which came late in the development of this type of locomotive in the U.S., just happened to be the heaviest of them. Operating conditions and generous loading gauges, rather than the desire to be the first, were the reasons that American locomotives were bigger and more powerful than most of those in other countries.

I know, I know, I was just kidding.!


You are right of course, in America you had the perfect conditions to promote the need and use of large locos :- big trains, large loading gauge, and long disctances. Its hardly surprising that US locos are so big.

I know that you are kidding, John. Actually, I don't like this kind of discussion very much, trying to come up with the biggest of something or which one is the better, although it is hard to totally avoid them when more than one enthusiasts start to talk about subjects that are dear to their hearts. On the other hand, you can learn some new and interesting facts from this type of discussion, provided that you are not too opinionated and is willing to learn something new. This brings me back to the question that I asked Greg yesterday. I did not intend that to be a challenge. I would be very happy to learn some more facts about the largest or heaviest locomotives.


I have looked at the data of a number of large locomotives. So far, I have not found any locomotive outside N. America that weighed more than one million pounds (engine + tender). The biggest locomotives on other continents were usually the Garratts, and the heaviest of them weighed only around 250-270 tons. There were many Garratts in this weight range in Europe (Russia), Asia, Africa and Australia. Even in the U.S., locomotives with total weight over one million pounds were rare. The first type that exceeded this magic number was the 2-8-8-4 Yellowstone class of the Northern Pacific, which appeared in 1928-30. As a matter of fact, these locomotives retained the claim of being the "largest steam locomotive in the world" for a number of years. It was said that only two other types of locomotives later exceeded the weight of the Yellowstone class, the C&O-Virginian 2-6-6-6 and the Big Boys. The Yellowstone's grate area of 182 sq.ft. has never been exceeded, however. The very large grate area was necessary because the Northern Pacific used lignite as fuel. Other locomotive types that weighed more than one million pounds were the second batch of DRG&W's class L-131 (2-8-8-2) and the later batch of Challenger (4-6-6-4), built by Alco between 1942-44. I should also mention here that in 1943 the Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railway ordered an additional 10 locomotives of similar design to their M-3 class from Baldwin. The classified these 10 locomotives as class M-4. Finally, in 1954 Baldwin built a single example of steam turbine-electric for Norfolk & Western, with the name "Jawn Henry." This was not a conventional steam locomotive. It used steam turbine to generate electricity to drive traction motors. It had 12 traction motors and Co'Co'Co'Co' wheel arrangement. It used water-tube boiler with 600 lb/sq. in. pressure, built by Babcock & Wilcox. This locomotive was claimed to be the largest single unit (?rather than an articulated) locomotive in the world. The engine weight alone exceeded that of Big Boy at 807,000 lb., but its engine + tender weight (1,172,000 lb.) was less than Big Boy's.


To answer Jakub's question, BR 45, which was the biggest and most powerful steam engines on German railways, weighed 125.5 tonnes. Its indicated horsepower (PSi) was 2780 h.p.; its draw-bar horsepower (PSe) was 2465 h.p. I do not have any reliable data on the power of the Big Boys. One source that I read gave the number 3000 as its draw-bar horsepower, but this must be a typo error because it was ridiculously low. As a rule, large Mallets that were used by the American railways during the 1930-40 had draw-bar horsepower around 6000-7000 h.p. For example, the Norfolk & Western's A-class (2-6-6-4) developed 6000-6300 draw-bar horsepower, with indicated h.p. close to 8000. The C&O 2-6-6-6 Mallets that I mentioned above could produce 7500 draw-bar h.p. These locomotives routinely hauled 6000-7000 t trains.

Last weekend I've read a (short) article about the South African class 26. This is an 2-D-2 steam loco, but NARROW gauge (1067mm). The article didnt say anything about the weight, length or speed of this loco, but it was said it has about 4000 HP. Is this the biggest/ most powerful narrow gauge (steam)engine in the world?

my information may be incorrect so I will run off with my tail between my legs!

I have:

Big Boy 1,120,000Lb. U.P.

M3 1,131,675lb. DM&IR 2.8.8.4

H8 1,183,540lb. Virginia Railway. 2.6.6.6

AG 1,195,000lb. Chesapeake & Ohio. 2.6.6.6


I don't know if these weights are empty or in operating condition.


Big Boy is the longest loco I have found so far!


I certainly intended no slur on US ability to make big (or the biggest) locomotives.


Greg.

The locomotive weight data that I have are slightly different from Greg's. There is a table in one of the Locomotives in Profile series (The Mallets) comparing the weights of some of these locomotives. The table shows the weight of H-8 at 1,076,000 lb., M-3 at 1,138,000 lb. and Big Boys at 1,198,000 lb. (1st batch) and 1,209,000 lb. (2nd batch). Which set of numbers are more accurate? Actually, I am not too concerned about this question. Ten to twenty thousand pounds difference, one way or the other, in locomotives that weighed over 1,000,000 lb. should not have any practical effect. In the days when these loccmotives were built, it was in the interest of the locomotive builders and railroad companies to advertise that their locomotives were the largest, the fastest, etc., even by a minuscule amount. For us, it is not that important.


For German locomotives the "working weight" was the weight of locomotives with water and fuel at 2/3 capacity. For American locomotives the standard varied somewhat between each railroad company. I have also read that the weighing of American locomotives, at least during the steam era, was a rather secretive affair because the railroad companies based the pays of their engine crews on engine weight, as well as on mileage and time.

Bigger than the Big Boy, I managed to get hold of a web page that explain every thing regarding steam locomotives. The biggest, largest , biggest pullingpower and heaviest.

According to this research, the Big Boy is only competitive in a few of the above-mentioned catagories ranked number 10. In some of the other cases the Big Boy does not even appear on the list.


If anyone is interested in more information, please insert your e-mail on the web page and I will forward you the web page reference.


Big Boy Regards

Theunis Wessels

Theunis,


As I think this is generally interesting, if you post another comment with the URL, I can go back and edit it to make it a link.


I'd like to see the list, and I think others might too.


John

That's what comes of not reading my EMail first. Theunis sent me the URL which is:


<A Href="http://www.arc.umn.edu/~wes/misc/largest.html">http://www.arc.umn.edu/~wes/misc/largest.html</A>


It is quite interesting actually.