Working rail roads and their tracks.

[Fuddy1952]

As a kid my parents took me to NYC on one of these N&W steam trains, we had a Pullman sleeper car. I remember asking Dad at one point "what's the picket fence for?"..."those are telephone poles" he said.
The service, dining car, everything was excellent.

 

[Fuddy1952]

I was reading that engine and tender weighed almost a million pounds! 880k, something like that.
Steam power still to me is amazing.

 

[ArlyA]

I was reading that engine and tender weighed almost a million pounds! 880k, something like that.
Steam power still to me is amazing.

The Big Boy locomotive with its tender weighed about 604 tons and measured more than 132 feet in length. I believe this was the heaviest setup ever used in North America. It had a maximum power capacity of more than 6,000 horsepower and could haul a 3,600-ton train unassisted up the Wasatch Mountain grade.

 

[MossRoad]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norfolk_and_Western_2156

It is the strongest-pulling extant steam locomotive in the world​

​

Historic significance[edit]​

Norfolk & Western 2156 is the sole survivor of the railroad's Y5, Y6, Y6a and Y6b classes (in final form referred to as the "Improved Y5/Y6 class"). These locomotives developed 152,206 lbs of tractive effort when built, with later modifications bringing them closer to 170,000 lbs. By comparison, the Union Pacific Big Boy locomotives developed 135,375 pounds-force (602.2 kN) of tractive effort. The only successful steam locomotives that developed somewhat more tractive effort, the Virginian AE class 2-10-10-2s, pulled trains at about 8 mph (13 km/h), while the N&W Y6's regularly pulled trains 50 mph (80 km/h), and some anecdotal evidence exists that they pulled trains up to 63 mph

 

[MossRoad]

 

[3 Horse Ranch]

While I am not at all a fan of Greta, and enjoyed watching Sky News respond to her little tantrum, I am sure glad freight is moved by somewhat cleaner locomotives now. Coal and later fuel oil, were cheap and readily available 70 years ago and made sense then, but I can't imagine what the air would look like along a major rail artery with the number of trains and the amount of freight that is hauled today.

 

[Cub 7274]

There was more freight hauled years ago that there is now
The railways were relevant back then and basically the only form of transportation.. not anymore there's more rails to trails than rails

 

[3 Horse Ranch]

There was more freight hauled years ago that there is now
The railways were relevant back then and basically the only form of transportation.. not anymore there's more rails to trails than rails

That might be true where you are but on the BNSF near where I lived there are more and longer trains than there were before. Oil trains, coal trains, container trains, mixed freight all more often and longer. It's hard to believe that a population that was half of what it is now, and a population that was way less materialistic required more freight trains than are operating now despite the exponential growth in trucking.

 

[ArlyA]

There was more freight hauled years ago that there is now
The railways were relevant back then and basically the only form of transportation.. not anymore there's more rails to trails than rails

There is less mileage of rails but more tonnage on heavier lines. I resided in a little town that had a full train* every 20 minutes. No cycling on that grade.....

* double main line. Full trian is 1 and a 1/4 miles long.

 

[the old grind]

Continued expansion of the interstate system has allowed more competition from trucking. Consolidation of large industry still uses rail service for high-volume, high-efficiency transport. Fewer smaller businessies (buzineseese?) are easily served on public roads vs tracks that must be maintained.

This has been evolution vs revolution and btw coincidental to the end of the steam era. Coal trains are fewer and that was once a prime cargo that natural gas, solar and wind power have replaced.