Can two electrics have the same designation?

P for passenger, F for freight

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M..._class_EF-4_and_EP-4

 

Also, different roads could designate the equipment as they see fit.

If they're owned by different railroads, sure. For example- a T1 on the PRR was a 4-4-4-4, on the Reading a 4-8-4, and on the C&O a 2-10-4.

Depends on the designation, in the real world a passenger engine was sometimes four feet longer then a freight engine. The reason? Most likely a steam generator that needed more space inside the cab.

 

As for the person who mentioned the T-1's, one of them was a northern design, the other (Reading Lines) were rebuilt steam engines. the Pennsy T-1 had two steam cylinders per side or four total, that's why the 4-4-4-4 wheel set. Don't know about the C & O.

 

Lee Fritz

While that's true for the FP7 (4 extra feet) vs. F7, and the Baldwin "Baybyface" DR-4-4-15 (3 extra feet) it's not gospel. 

 

An EMD F3/F7/F9 could be outfitted with a steam generator. Fuel capacity or dynamic braking could be sacrificed for more feedwater capacity.

 

The Alco FPA2 also had space for a steam generator and was the same length an a FA2 without one. No FA1's were equipped with steam generators.

 

The FM C-Liner also could be outfitted with a steam generator with no difference in length, but the rear truck was an A-1-A six wheel truck to distribute the weight of the steam generator and feedwater storage.

 

Rusty

Yes, these are simply designators created by the railroads, the builders or both. They

have no universal meaning. (Camaro, Mustang, Challenger - all "pony cars"; that's

the 0-4-0 Dodge Challenger, not the 4-6-6-4...) 

 

In steam days, the "class" of a locomotive was decided by the railroad, which designed

or at least specified the nature of the beast. Straight electrics were then in this world, too. The loco builders had varying degrees of input on the design; often they were

handed blueprints and were told "build this". Of course, it was more complicated

than that, and they didn't do things blindly.

 

With diesels, which were stock designs, more or less, the "class" or type was assigned

by the builder (Alco, GM, etc): FA, F3, RS-1.... The diesel-electric has far more

in common with your automobile, technologically, than it ever had with steam locomotion. Between the couplers, they are mostly apples and oranges.

 

Some purchasing railroads - like the NYC - would assign these diesel locomotives their own class/type designations, and not use the "F7" or RS-3" terms, at least on paper. I do not know how typical this was across the industry.

Thanks for the replies and the insights; I learned a few things today.