Big Boy Weighs More Than a 747? It'll never get off the ground! 
The USA Today description comes up a little short. Actually, the Big Boy is longer than three city buses, and weighs more than the weight of the largest 747 model fully loaded and the largest 737 model fully loaded combined. 
The 747 has a wider wingspan, however.
Well, from what I see on Wiki, a fully loaded 747 tops out at 970,000 pounds. The locomotive (sans tender) is ABOUT 760,000 pounds. And bus length comparison depends, again, on whether you are including the tender. Locomotive itself is almost exactly two (non-articulated) buses, and with tender a little more than three. The article didn't say locomotive and tender.
David
Here's a neat graphic from Railway Age:
Silly to argue such semantics, I suppose, but most people in referring to a steam locomotive are talking about the engine and its tender, the tender being an integral part of a steam locomotive without which the engine can't move, many of which were specifically mated to their engine. Certainly journalists descibing a steam locomotive would be referring to the whole thing, tender included, and not differentiating the engine from its tender. When USA Today said in their article that "the locomotive rolled out of a Union Pacific restoration shop" they were referring to the engine and tender together, and not meaning that the engine rolled out by itself!
The size of the 747 is impressive, however, it should be remembered that airplanes are not solid objects, but rather are largely hollow tubes. The operating empty weight of a 747-8 passenger version is "just" 485,000 pounds. Perhaps some would argue that's a better apples-to-apples comparison, at least when talking about the Big Boy weighing more than a 747.
Well, enough of this silliness!
