The 2-8-8-4, is there any difference between a Yellowstone and EM-1

Thanks, I had missed this thread when it was started. 

B&O had never been a railroad that I ever gave much thought. But a little practical history of the partnership of B&O and Baldwin in building the EM-1 was greatly appreciated. A purpose built locomotive always has my interest. 

Are the B&O EM-1 (O-scale) models noticeably smaller than the larger Yellowstones?

TM Terry posted:

Thanks, I had missed this thread when it was started. 

B&O had never been a railroad that I ever gave much thought. But a little practical history of the partnership of B&O and Baldwin in building the EM-1 was greatly appreciated. A purpose built locomotive always has my interest. 

Are the B&O EM-1 models noticeably smaller than the larger Yellowstones?

Yes, the EM-1's were the smallest North American 2-8-8-4 type.   But remember that they had to fit the clearances of the B&O. 

Stuart

TM Terry posted:

Thanks, I had missed this thread when it was started. 

B&O had never been a railroad that I ever gave much thought. But a little practical history of the partnership of B&O and Baldwin in building the EM-1 was greatly appreciated. A purpose built locomotive always has my interest. 

Are the B&O EM-1 models noticeably smaller than the larger Yellowstones?

The B&O, by virtue of being  one of the earliest railroads was cursed with one of the smallest clearance diagrams of any railroad in the US.  The Hudson division tunnels on the New York Central imposed similar constraints on the size of  its locomotives. The EM-1 was all the locomotive that the B&O's fixed plant would allow.

I remember a photo somewhere of power from various roads lined up at an engine terminal somewhere (Cincinnati Union Station, I think). The NYC J1 Hudson and the B&O P7 Pacific were nearly a foot shorter in height than all of the other railroads' locomotives.

Ed Mullan posted:

I watched them all from Piedmont High School, during study hall, senior English, and civics class!

 Ed

Well, Ed, we're all glad to know that you did not squander that opportunity.  You get an A from me.

I sure did not. Also loved to watch them when I wasn't in school. From Luke, Md., I can them back of the paper mill, smoke coming from brake shoes, and on a nice hot summer day, the all welded tender showing sweat on the water line in the tender. Also hanging around new 7613 at Piedmont, at the water spot. She had been broken in as a helper to Altamont, up the 17 mile grade, as were all the others!

Down the street from our home was Frank Jackson, a short red haired fella, a B&O engineer who had run all the EM-1's at one time or another. He declared that 7614 was the best steamer of the EM-1 fleet, and was always glad to catch her on a run to Grafton.

It would be so nice to be able to post images that we have in our minds of those days...gosh.

For me it would be the EM-1's, and I bet for Number 90  it would be four shiny SF F's on one of the Santa Fe's great passenger trains.

Ed

Let's not forget how many names there were for the 4-8-4.  Northern, Pocono, Potomac, Greenbrier, Niagara (nee-AHG-rah in Mexico), T-1, did New Haven and B&M have other names?

Jeff B. Haertlein posted:

A 2-10-2 is often referred to as a Texas type.

 

Never heard that before. The 2-10-4 is a Texas type.