"CHALLENGER" Thread!

[Conrail Quality]

Okay, quit hijacking my thread please, if your not here to talk about the "Big Boy" or the "Challenger", please leave.

Alex

Okay, then. I was researching info for my post when you posted that.

[Atlantic Central]

Conrail Quality,

"If the catenary had been maintained" - At what cost? Catenary is expensive to install and expensive to maintain - again, traffic/tonage has to be very high to justify those expenses. The Milwaukee is a fairly unique example - I would call it neither urban or rural - but suburban, and it may well be a tie in that case.

But for the roads like the Great Northern and the Virginian, it was a money pit.

Sheldon

[SteamGene]

Rains Trains,
Nobody has hijacked your thread.  Each comment is a logical progression from your initial post.  All the comments merely point to the simple fact that both of those UP designs were hyped very successfully, but were not, in fact, as good as other locomotives.  In steam they come in behind the 2-6-6-6, both in performance and in numbers. I'll let the electrons spin their own tales. 
Gene

[rains train]

Yes, you are. Now, if your not going to talk about the "Challenger" or the "Big Boy" in a good way, then.....LEAVE

Alex

[r.cprmier]

Metro North did electrify all the way to Boston about eight or so years ago, boosted  the voltage to about 20KV (I have been told), and they have quite a neat system of overhead.  Instead of anchor bridges, they have tensioners and counterweights every so often.  One day I would like to take the train up to Boston, maybe to catch a Red Sox game or something.
  None of that or anything else said here has hurt you or your writing.

Rich

[Conrail Quality]

Conrail Quality,

"If the catenary had been maintained" - At what cost? Catenary is expensive to install and expensive to maintain - again, traffic/tonage has to be very high to justify those expenses. The Milwaukee is a fairly unique example - I would call it neither urban or rural - but suburban, and it may well be a tie in that case.

But for the roads like the Great Northern and the Virginian, it was a money pit.

Sheldon

Sheldon,

I'll agree with you about the Great Northern. But that was a case of electrify or asphixiate, so obviously GN chose the former. Still, it tells much the GN chose to use diesels as soon as possible. I've often thought it would have been better in the long run if GN had used third rail istead of catanary, since dual-modes like the FL-9 could have had the 'best of both worlds', requiring no engine change while not having to worry about venilation. That's another topic, though.

As for the Virginian, I have to disagree. While I do not have the luxury of statistics, the Virginian mangement certainly did. If the elctrification was indeed a 'money pit', then why would they spend millions on state-of-the-art electric locomotives (the E33's) in 1956, when diesels had already proven their efficiency?

I also disagree about the Milwaukee being a 'suburban' railroad. While some of their Chicago-area lines would fit this description, those were not the lines the Milwaukee electrified. They chose the lines over the Cascades and Rockies, going through mostly isolated little towns. Why do you consider it "suburban"?


Timothy
Conrail Quality

[rains train]

Mr. Bachmann, please delete this thread for hijacking so I can start a new one. Thanks.

Alex

[Conrail Quality]

Mr. Bachmann, please delete this thread for hijacking so I can start a new one. Thanks.

Alex

Why should he delete the thread?  You are simply ignoring the way normal human conversation works. People do not talk with one defined topic to talk about; they talk about something, which in turn leads to something else, and so on. I also notice that earlier you said: "Now, if your not going to talk about the "Challenger" or the "Big Boy" in a good way". So you're saying that we have to only talk about one narrow topic with only one particular view point? If you're talking with someone, and the conversation drifts, do you tell everyone that they have to return to the original topic? You are just being completely unrealilistic.

Timothy
Conrail Quality

[rains train]

Yup, so leave.

Alex

[rains train]

Na, only kidding, just try to keep the "challenger" or "big boy" as the main topic.

Alex

[SteamGene]

Okay.  The UP Challenger and Big Boy designs were very well hyped by UP.  The 4-6-6-4 design had copies on at least two other railroads.  Neither, however, was superior to the C&O H-8 2-6-6-6.  Any investigation at all will prove that. 
Gene

[Guilford Guy]

Everyone has the idea of Bigger is Better, at least some point in their life, usually when they are younger. Almost every young foamer begs for a big boy, but it really isn't that amazing, and IMHO it looks rather ugly compared to smaller steam, and passenger steam.

[rains train]

Ya GG, you wish! 

Alex
(maybe it's just you  )

[SteamGene]

gg,
Beauty is subjective so I didn't want to mention the frying pan bottom design of the C/BB smoke box fronts, or some of the other artistic goofs.  The H-8, OTOH, has an almost Gothic cathedral design, functional, yet harmonious. 
Gene

[rains train]

Oooooooh.

Alex
(lol)