I'd probably try and get one of the Pennsy Atlantics to do it. If one of them has done it before, then one of them could break the British record.

I believe we've been concentrating our thoughts in the wrong direction. 4-8-4's are not the way to go fast. The truly fast locomotives (reasonably well documented, not fish stories) in the past had the fewest coupled axles: Milw 4-4-2's, PRR T1 4-4-4-4 and Milw F7 4-6-4. Even the old timers followed that pattern, e.g., PRR's E7 (7002), PRR E6, and RDG 4-4-2's. There may be others but these come to mind quickly.

Why not a 4-8-4? They are too big for the job. Cylinders are too large, recip parts too heavy, and huge quantities of steam just won't get into and out of the cylinders fast enough. Their internal resistance is too high, and they expend way too much power just moving themselves at very high speeds. We are talking about a sustained (if briefly) speed of 130 mph, correct?

But we don't have to do it with 15 cars either. What kind of tonnage must be moved to break the record, if there's any specification?

Why 4-6-4's? They are just about the right size for the job with 7-8 cars. They have relatively small cylinders, and lighter recip parts. Smaller quantities of steam can get into the cylinders and out again fast enough. With less machinery their internal resistance is lower. They are also lighter than 4-8-4's and expend less power moving themselves.

IMO there are only two possible candidates surviving - first CB&Q S4 4-6-4 3002 (rebuilt as a Zephyr stand-in, full roller bearing everything) and maybe second ATSF 3463 (modern in all respects except for solid bearing rods). This opinion only considers design parameters and potential, not existing condition.

What do you think?

I'd agree. One of the surviving hudsons could possibly break the record. But at the end of the day, I'm putting my money on the Pennsy atlantics.

Of course there's CN K-5a Hudson #5703 (disguised as #5700) at ECRM in St Thomas, Ontario. She's much more than a pretty face.

Old steam railroaders were forever telling me about these engines making up time with light trains east of Brockville, Ontario, at speeds of 120 mph or a bit more. Sadly, few of these gentlemen remain with us.

Got a few million dollars to spend on an adrenalin rush?

Steve Hunter
Cardinal, Ontario

I wish i did. To bad i don't know how to contact Sir Richard Branson... Him and Steve Fossett broke plenty of records (and had the needed cash). If only Ross teamed up with Branson...

Actually, this post brings a few interesting preservation-related points to light.

The problem with the engineers who claim speeds in excess of 120mph here in the U.S. and PRR 7002's record is that there is a lack of verification. Both LNER 4468 (Mallard) and LNER 4472 (Flying Scotsman) had dynamometer cars on their record breaking run. This means there is a verifiable record of the speed accomplishments. If I remember correctly, the British had very accurately-spaced mile post markers on many of their rights of way, along with half mile and quarter mile markers, making timing by stopwatch more accurate.

BR 6007 Sir Nigel Gresley, a classmate of Mallard holds the British post-war speed record. On May 23, 1959, she was recorded at 112mph going down Stoke Bank with a special.

The other interesting salient point that one should point out is, that even with the dynamometer car, the Mallard's record is somewhat in doubt. Allegedly, if you review the dynamometer car tape, she reached the record speed for only a fraction of a second. Some have theorized that this was an error in the recording equipment and that 4468 likely "only" only reached a speed of 125 mph on that day, which would be a tie with a German 4-6-4. It turns out that the 126mph claim didn't surface until after World War II. Previous LNER promotional literature touted a speed of 125mph.

All of that being said, I do not know why you would want to do such a stunt today, even if you could find a host railroad and get the Feds in line. Back in the mid-1990s, British Railways 4-6-2 60532 Blue Peter suffered an uncontrolled wheel slip, which caused the wheels to turn at a speed in excess of 120mph, and destroyed the motion. Luckily nobody was seriously hurt and the damage was repaired. Still, imagine the setback to steam railway preservation if something serious happened while trying to break the record? Even if such an incident did not bring the wrath of the regulatory bodies, then one has to ask if staging such an incident is being a good, responsible custodian of the artifact. It isn't.
The other issue is one of engineering. I believe this topic was covered here a number of years ago, but essentially, higher speeds than 125-126mph are the limit of the current system of steam admission, valve gear, etc. The Germans tried a couple of different ideas, and Franklin poppet valves are a likely solution.

The only scenario I can imagine where such a experiment/ stunt could happen would be under the following conditions:

- at a tightly controlled, high speed facility such as the Pueblo DOT test track. No commercial railroad in its right mind would tie up a mainline, flag all the crossings, spike the switches, and share in any of the potential liability from an effort such as this.
- Funded exclusively by an extremely wealthy individual or consortium- not using any museum money or money from heritage funding programs.
- Under the veil of "scientific experimentation", say to explore the capabilities of "old steam" and the possibilities for future generations of steam passenger power. And yes, it should generate a wealth of real, verifiable, data about the operation of a "state of the art old steam" locomotive at high speed.
- The locomotive would be fully restored at no charge to the owning institution, and would be returned in immaculate condition- no matter what happens, it will be fully repaired prior to return.
- The owning institution would share heavily in the publicity arising from the experiment

Definitely the sort of project one would associate with Sir Richard Branson or others with great wealth and even greater curiosity and enthusiasm!

While such an event would not be "preservation", it would generate tremendous interest in the things we, as preservationists, do.

Steve Hunter
Cardinal, Ontario

Wow... Pueblo.

Uh....There's a distinct lack of oxygen at this altitude! Or is it me?

We now need cubic yards of money and a sponsor. I've got it....film a new non-CG 'Silver Bullet' Coors Light commercial!

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/514NySyn78L.jpg

Hmmmm. 2926 in "Silver Bullet".... Remember the only reason ATSF didn't streamline them is the axle loadings got out of hand. Not so much of a problem there!

Especially if a siderod lets loose at 100mph causing a spetacular crash that is recorded by the press there and broadcast over and over again by the media, and destroys the artifact. Then, some Congressman/woman would introduce legislation to ban steam locomotives to prevent an incident like this from ever happening again. Why expose yourself to that much risk for a stunt?

Let me ask you this, say you are on the board of directors of an organization/institution that has a steam locomotive, and someone approaches you and asks to borrow it, restore it, run it at such a stunt, and then return it in immaculate condition, would you? Richard Branson or not, I think you would be not upholding your fudicuiary duties to care for the collection by exposing it to such an large risk. Esepcially if something goes wrong, you better have an e&o policy, and prepare yourself for a suit from your membership.

Maybe the answer is, rather than reproducing an NYC Hudson, to build a PRR T-1; which I find a more fascinating and enigmatic piece of motive power. Since it is new, there's no danger of it falling apart (well if it was done right to start........). Now, if you want to go nuts with hi-tech technologies--that could be mighty interesting indeed.

Funny' how with all the welded rail and some really nice mainline trackage out there, that we can't come close to making the speed capabilities we had 70 years ago.....

Michael Seitz
Missoula MT

"Especially if a siderod lets loose at 100mph"

A long-deceased acquaintance, a locomotive engineer, was aboard a train being pulled across Nebraska or Kansas (I forget which now) by a Burlington 4-6-4 during World War II when this very thing happened. He said the broken stub of the rod jacked the engine onto its side at about 80 mph, and the resulting wreck was something else.

I would hate to see this happen to a historic locomotive, or a reproduction, for that matter.

LOL, this is why any such venture would have to be in a very controlled environment, completely away from the public, and treated as a scientific exercise with a very solid contractual obligation to repair anything and everything that might go wrong. It would have to be understood that things could go very wrong, even if the engine had regularly run at speeds approaching the record during its working life, and extreme precautions taken to minimize risk and protect the "test pilot" crew.

If my organization owned a suitable candidate and we were asked my answer would (of course) be "thanks but no thanks"... but a 99 year old ten wheeler is definitely not what would be needed.

There's no telling what some other group or individual with posession of a suitable candidate might do.

The chances of anybody actually putting together such a stunt/ experiment is probably much smaller than the chances of that oft- discussed hypothetical new- build NYC Hudson ever appearing on the scene, so I don't think we have any worries.

Steve Hunter
Cardinal, Ontario

If a PRR T-1 existed I'd go with that. But none do. So I would probably make the attempt using a CB&Q Hudson. If feasible use Big Alice.

But consider this: A CP Jubilee 4-4-4. Two survive. I have not looked up the stats so maybe the drivers are too small to make it a viable candidate. But if the stats are good it's worth noting that the things said in favor of a T-1 or an Atlantic also apply to the Jubilee. And one assumes that the 4 wheel trailing truck indicates a much more powerful boiler than an Atlantic. Compared to a T-1 we don't need a 2nd driving unit to pull the more moderately sized train contemplated and we also don't care about acceleration since they can take all the time and distance they need to get up to speed before hitting the stretch where the speed attempt will be made.

Steve

This may be a good point in the conversation to point out that recently, a new land speed record for steam cars was set at 148.166 mph; breaking the record set by Fred Marriott of 127.659 MPH back in 1906.

It took place in 2009, and the equipment used was not a gussied up Stanley Steamer or other antique steam car. Rather, it was a steam car built just for the record breaking attempt; and they did it on the Bonneville Salt Flats, the place where such record attempts are usually made.

http://www.steamcar.co.uk/lsr_history.html

So, I think a modern day attempt to break the Mallard's record could be achieved; but following their example, it would be a steam locomotive built just for the record breaking attempt, and conducted at the Colorado testing facility; an appropiate facility for such an attempt.

It would address many of the issues brought up already:

* It will be a new build, not an antique machine subject to possible unforeseen mechanical failure.

* As such, it could be done in the context of a serious scientific attempt to explore the capabilities of "old steam" and the possibilities for future generations of steam passenger power, and collect meaningful data. Given that it could burn a non-petroleum based fuel, such an attempt may take on new significance.

* Built from scratch, it could address the limits imposed on previous machines due to valve design and other design limitations.

* We would not be endangering an existing historical artifact.

* We would come across looking better than what might otherwise be construed as a bunch of old men trying to go faster with their "toy trains."

Yes, it would probably run into the millions; but I think by the time you tear down an existing locomotive, check all of the moving parts to ensure that none are going to give way at such high speeds, do the usual rebuild work, and put it back together, the cost difference will probably be negligable.

While i'll admit that the accident that Blue Peter suffered is tragic for steam preservation everywhere, it would make more sense to put someone at the throttle that knows what they're doing.