B&HS 250

scrmcurator · **Posted:** Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:43 pm

johnacraft wrote:

scrmcurator wrote:

Actually, if you want an ugly, practically useless locomotive, imagine a 2-6-4. There's a reason none were built for service in the US!

Sandy's right - there was at least one class of 2-6-4s in the US - somewhere in the northeast, my memory fails me.

They were referred to as Baltics.

You need to get out more, Matt - those British Standards are rather handsome flying down the main line at full cry. Especially doubleheaded.

And since there are at least three in service in the UK on preserved lines, I wouldn't call them "useless."

JAC

I'm not big on UK steam -- they decorate their stuff too much for my taste. I'm not real fond of the very early American locos for the same reason. Give me something American from about 1885 to 1930. One of my favorite locos to watch was PRR #1223. Just right for a rod engine.

Now that you mention it, I vaguely recall something about a 2-6-4 in either the States or maybe Canada as well. Could CN have had something like that? They did have those weird 4-6-4T commuter locos like the one preserved at Steamtown.

David Dewey · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:47 am

And she's a lot less slippery than her "sister" McCloud 18 (which I guess is now V&T 18.
Ah, I don't want to think about the death of the McCloud, too sad.
S'
David D.[/img]