How many steam locomotives in America?

Where can I find some sources about the overall amount (roughly) of steam locomotives used on US tracks.

And how many of those engines were a single frame tank locomotives (no tenders). They were not very popular in US in comparison to European tracks.

Thank you for any information

If I remember, there were about 40000 steam locomotives operating in the 1940s, later replaced by around 25000 diesels.

railfilm wrote:Where can I find some sources about the overall amount (roughly) of steam locomotives used on US tracks.

And how many of those engines were a single frame tank locomotives (no tenders). They were not very popular in US in comparison to European tracks.

Thank you for any information

The Central Railroad of New Jersey had several tank engines used for short commuter shuttle type of service. No separate tender.

Distances tend to be greater in the U.S. than in Britain (D'oh!), which I've always assumed had SOMETHING to do with American railroads' comparatively small number of tank locomotives. Industrial users had a fair number (including articulated Mallet tanks). I think the big railroads may often have had a few small tank switchers for use as shop switchers, etc: non-revenue applications, so possibly not numbered in the same series with their "public face" locomotives. ... Of tank switching engines used by major railroads in revenue seervice, probably the best known are the B&O's 0-4-0 saddle tank switchers, used in Baltimore: they were the prototype of a very popular HO model.
--
Commuter runs, with their limited distance, are an obvious application for a tank engine. The New York Central had a variety of cummuter tank engines roughly similar in configuration to the CNJ locomotive in Ken W2KB's photo (some lettered for the Boston & Albany subsidiary, used in Boston-area commuter service), with at least a couple of different wheel arrangements: the biggest were 4-6-6. I don't know how many other American railroads had similar power. (Illinois Central had tank engines for its Chicago commuter service, I think, before electrification. And tiny ones were used on the New York Elevated mass transit lines before they were electrified.)
--
And I think some of the steam locomotives of the 2-foot gauge railroads in Maine were tank engines.
--
Sorry for unsystematic list: I'm trying to remember things.

Thank you very much for your reply.

It is interesting, that what a huge literature is there about the standard locomotives, almost each type has its class, name etc. In the same time there is only a very little information about these engines.

Was there any special classification?
How can we know today from the number that it was a tank engine?

Forneys were very common in the USA at one time. Before the elevateds were electrified the cars were hauled by locomotives. Virtually all of the of the Forney type. Most of these were scrapped when the elevateds electrified but some found homes on shortlines, industries, or logging roads. Also the Maine 2 foot gauge lines were mostly Forneys.

rdganthracite wrote:Forneys were very common in the USA at one time. Before the elevateds were electrified the cars were hauled by locomotives. Virtually all of the of the Forney type. Most of these were scrapped when the elevateds electrified but some found homes on shortlines, industries, or logging roads. Also the Maine 2 foot gauge lines were mostly Forneys.

Hi,

thank you.

Of course I know most of those special engines like Forney, Shay, Heislers, etc.

I only wanted to gain some idea how many of the classical, less familiar tank locomotives excluding those special and geared lcomotives were used in comparison to the "normal" locomotives.

Was there any special classification?
How can we know today from the number that it was a tank engine?

Remember, there was no standardization at all of locomotive classification systems and numbering (still isn't, actually).

In addition to the NYC tank engines mentioned previously for suburban service in the B&A, another NYC subsidiary, the Kanawha & Michigan, a had some that were used in mine service in West Virginia. A photo is here: http://www.railarchive.net/nyccollection/km9501.htm . Also, the Canadian National had 4-6-4T tank engines for Montreal suburban service, two of which still exist (with one under restoration) at the railway museum in Delson, Quebec. A third member of this class is at Steamtown (see image below). I am sure there were others on both USA and Canadian railroads.

An article in the July 1949 issue of Railroad Magazine states that at that time there were 36,000 steam locomotives operating (presumably this was the number operating in the USA), and very likely by 1949 this was considerably down from the peak number, so it sounds like the 40,000 total cited above for the early 1940s would be a good estimate.

Thank you!.

As I see, there where only a very limited number of types (with more than 3 axles) used on main roads.
Additionally their number was also very small (from the Canadian class 47 just 6 pieces).
Was there any class what was represented with bigger amount. I want to find out which class was the most popular used in bigger quantities (let us say over 100 pcs).
Is there any tank locomotive from this kind preserved in USA (beside the one in Canada)?

Thank you for your help!

I don't think there was any tank engine for road service made in those quantities. Maybe some standard designs of 0-4-0 and 0-6-0 tank engines in various industries.

You have to remember, distances are greater in North America than in Europe, and there were probably never as many passenger trains. A typical branchline passenger or mixed train, instead of a 0-6-0T (like the famous Great Western pannier tanks), 2-6-2T or 2-6-4T, would probably have a 4-6-0, 4-4-0, 2-6-0 or 2-8-0. And most commuter services were handled by downgraded express power (as time went by, 4-6-0s, then 4-6-2s; also 4-6-4s, 4-8-2s and 4-8-4s in the transition era) rather than purpose-built short-range engines.

Hi Triplex


it was also my feeling. I could not find in my extended library nor on the WEB any US tank engine, really designed for the main line traffic. I just wanted to be sure that I did not miss something in the history of US locomotives.

Something else to the Class 47 machines. In the description there is something what is interesting:

The rear frame, on which the tank was carried, was of steel, cast in one piece with the truck center plate, draft gear housing, rear bumper and tank supports.

Does it mean that the rear water tank was separated from the locomotive frame, coupled only with the rear truck, or was it something very sophisticated? Could it move in any direction against the main frame or was it a rigid connection between the two frames - only manufactured separately from two pieces?

Who has information about this locomotive?

http://img.freebase.com/api/trans/raw/w ... id/3291900

Thank you for any information or source.

That again, was used for commuter trains most likely out of NYC before Electrification. Tank engines were just too small for anything besides light switching in America, where we have longer distances and heavier equipment something like a BR 2MT 2-6-4T, while a staple of Britain's mainlines in the BR era would have been completely futile on American mainlines.