Steam & Excursion > Stats and few questions for UP 9000

Info removed
 



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/18 14:43 by wigwag.

Of the two weights you quote, the lowest would be engine only; the highest would be the engine and tender.

A fantastic locomotive! Only wish I could have see her running.

Posted from iPhone

Train was likely the COLA..

Bob Krieger
Cheyenne, WY

Bob3985 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Train was likely the COLA..

​Do you know roughly the time it was scheduled to depart SB in 1956?

wigwag Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have some stats regarding UP's sole surviving
> 4-12-2. If anyone can add/clarify/correct
> anything, it will be greatly appreciated.
>
> Total weight: 495,000 lbs or 782,000 lbs. (reports
> differ)
>
> Length: 102 ft. 7 in.
>
> Wheel diameter: 67 in.
>
> Fuel: Coal
>
> Coal Capy: 42,000 or 44,000 lbs. (reports differ)
>
> Water Capy: 18,000 gals
>
> ​HP: 4750
>
> Max Tractive Effort: 96,650 or 97,664. (reports
> differ)
>
> Top Speed: 50 mph.
>
> Builder: Alco.
>
> Date: 1926.
>
> Boiler Pressure: 220 lbs psi.
>
> ​How correct does this look?
>
> Also, when the UP 9000 was being serviced at San
> Bernardino on its trek to Pomona for permanent
> display, a westbound UP passenger train arrived &
> departed. Can anyone tell what passenger train
> this is? I dont know what time of day it was
> since the haze of May, 1956 made it difficult to
> determine the time by the shadows, but I'm
> guessing it was mid-day.
>
> Thanks,
> WW
>
>  


I'm attaching the UP diagram for both the UP 9000-9014 and the 9015-9029.  The engine data on the 9000-9014 diagram should be correct, but the 9000 was apparently upgraded with an 18,000 gallon tender somewhere along the way, so the tender data from the 9015-9029 diagram applies.

Locomotive weight in working order = 495,000 lbs
Driver weight in working order = 367,500 lbs
Locomotive & Tender weight in working order = 805,500 lbs
Max Tractive Effort = 96,650 lbs

Coal Capacity = 44,000 lbs (for the 18,000 gallon tender the engine is now equipped with, as built coal capacity was 42,000 lbs with a 15,000 gallon tender).

Noted UP historian William Kratville published an indicated horsepower curve for the UP 9000 class in his book "Motive Power of the Union Pacific" showing approximately 4,950 IHP @ 43mph.

As to maximum speed, in his book "The Mighty 800", Kratville wrote that, in conversations with Alco during the design of the FEF1 800 class Northerns, "(UP) pointed to its own ungainly 4-12-2s daily hitting seventy to make up time, and with 67" drivers!".

The UP 9000 class were fascinating and unique beasts!

Scott Griggs
Louisville, KY




 

---

---

wigwag Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bob3985 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Train was likely the COLA..
>
> ​Do you know roughly the time it was
> scheduled to depart SB in 1956?

My 1958 ORG shows COLA leaving San Bernadino at 7:50AM.
Train 9, City of St Louis departed SB at 12:05PM.

Charlie

Thanks Charlie. Probably COSL then.

Bob Krieger
Cheyenne, WY

Interesting thread.  Neat locomotives.  Imagine what it would have sounded like trackside with a 9000 passing at 70 mph rocking three cylinders!

-Alan

I believe that audio recordings of the engine exist online.

Ed

Ironman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Imagine
> what it would have sounded like trackside with a
> 9000 passing at 70 mph rocking three cylinders!
>
> -Alan

At 70 MPH, I'm fairly sure that something would have been broken and/or thrown off.  However, there are sound recordings of one on the main line in Nebraska, at a respectable speed.

Yes, I would guess the City of St. Louis as well.


 ity Bob3985 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks Charlie. Probably COSL then.

Evidently, Alco recommended a top speed of around 35 or 40 from what I read.  Union Pacific ignored the recommendation and beat the crap out of them.

I read the second volume of Kratville's pair on the 9000's, and found it interesting how some in the upper management of U.P. did NOT like the locomotives.  As such, they refused to spend the money on some fairly simple improvements to the Gresley valve gear that would have tweaked performance a little and saved a lot in maintenance costs.  The reason was to make them targets for replacement, but traffic was such that there were never enough articulateds to send the 9000's to the scrap yard.

The end result was U.P. ended up spending more in upkeep than they had to, in an attempt to justify getting rid of a class they had to keep until the advent of dieselization.  Well, THAT made a whole lot of sense!

I found that to be an interesting story.

Mary McPherson
Dongola, IL
Diverging Clear Productions

MaryMcPherson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Evidently, Alco recommended a top speed of around
> 35 or 40 from what I read.  Union Pacific ignored
> the recommendation and beat the crap out of them.

Well, I don't know about operating them to 50+ MPH actually "beat the crap out of them". Some of the old head Engineers/Firemen I talked with, back in the mid 1960s, indicated that they liked the 9000s, and they could REALLY handle a train!

The way I understand it, the Alco speed limit recommendation for the 9000 class (and other steam locomotives built during the transition period from the drag freight era to the superpower era) were based on what turned out to be incorrect theories about maximum piston speed.  Alco thought the lubrication in the cylinders would burn up if these mean piston speeds were exceeded.  It seems like it took some operational evidence from the railroads to convince Alco that this theory was unsound.  If I femember correctly, 1350 feet per minute was thought to be the maximum piston speed.  This amounts to a 50 mph top speed for a locomotive with 67" drivers and a 32" stroke (in other words, the design of the UP 4-12-2) and "only" 58 mph for a locomotive with the same stroke and 77" drivers (which was the design of the UP FEF1 class).  Of course, ultimately the FEF1's proved themselves to be >100 mph machines (2400 fpm piston speeds).

Scott Griggs
Louisville, KY



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/23/17 10:58 by sgriggs.

In the mid-50's I lived in Ontario, California -- one block from the Union Pacific mainline, and three blocks from the Southern Pacific mainline. I was quite young -- but have vivid memories of the various trains that went by. 

In the mid-50's UP had completely converted to diesels -- at least on the trains that they ran by my house. However, SP still had steam on occasion; one time I can remember a triple-header freight train. 

One day, however -- which would probably have been in 1955 or 1956 -- I distinctly remember seeing a very large steam locomotive on the Union Pacific, and it made a big enough impression on me that I mentioned it to my mother. I seem to recall, however, that it was being towed backwards towards Los Angeles. I've wondered if maybe what I saw was the UP 9000 -- although I seem to recall that it went under it's own power all the way the SP shops in LA where the fire was dropped for the last time. 

Anybody know exactly the details of the move. . . and if I didn't see the UP 9000, what steam locomotive might have fit the description of being towed backwards toward LA in 55 or 56? 

I have always found the 9000 class locomotives interesting. On paper it is close to the performance of the early (small) challengers. Plus running them in to the 1950s Union Pacific got their money's worth. My questions are "what ifs" but where could a 9000 run if returned to service? Could it be converted to oil? Would it be modern enough to run on todays Union Pacific?

Posted from Android



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/23/17 12:58 by badtanker1987.

HotWater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, I don't know about operating them to 50+ MPH
> actually "beat the crap out of them". Some of the
> old head Engineers/Firemen I talked with, back in
> the mid 1960s, indicated that they liked the
> 9000s, and they could REALLY handle a train!

The bearings on the Gresley gear were prone to wearing, throwing the timing off.  This led to increased wear in the center cylinder running gear between the frames, which was a pain in the behind to access.  Some shop foremen would kick the can down the road, and let the next guys handle it.  The wear would increase, with the higher speed running exacerbating the problem.  Finally the pounding would get to the point it couldn't be ignored any more.

Converting the bearings of the Gresley gear to roller bearings would have mostly solved the problem, but the upper management refused to spend the money on a class of power the was not in vogue.  I forget if it was Jabelmann or Fetters that was the one that made the call (it's been long enough since I read Kratville's work).  The desire was to show a more marked improvement from the 9000's to the Challengers, so the bean counters at the corporate offices would agree to replace the 9000's with more Challengers.  It didn't work.  As capable as the 9000's were, they were hamstrung to a degree because they would have been made even better if not for decisions up top.  This is what I meant by U.P. beating the crap out of them.

If I had access to the mythical Wayback Machine, a visit to the Kansas and Nebraska Divisions would be on the list of places to visit to see those engines in action.  Whenever I get the Flux Capacitor working, I'll post video here.

Mary McPherson
Dongola, IL
Diverging Clear Productions

Auburn_Ed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I believe that audio recordings of the engine
> exist online.
>
> Ed

The old Folkways Records "Sounds Of Steam Locomotives" series has recordings of the 9000's.  Volume 1 has a recording of one of them passing at speed, while Volume 4 (The Stack Music Sampler) has recordings of one running light in a yard, coupling to a train, and getting the train underway.  Another cut on the same album has a 9000 as the road unit with a 2-10-2 helper climbing a grade on the Kansas Division.  The racket made by the combination of two and three-cylinder power working in tandem is quite unique in the recordings I have found.

The entire series is available as digital downloads at both iTunes and Amazon.

Mary McPherson
Dongola, IL
Diverging Clear Productions

UP lost the 9018 in a boiler explosion near Upland, Ks in 1948. To this day, its the last boiler explosion ever experienced by the UP. Not sure what went wrong there. Probably not gear related.