CP-SP named locomotives
Table of Named Locomotives of the CP-SP World
Sorted by Locomotive Name
.
Table of Named Locomotives of the CP-SP World
Sorted by Railroad Company Initials.
Table of Named Locomotives of the CP-SP World
Sorted by Builder.
This may prove handy on some occasion.
The goal was to include every named locomotive that ended up in the 1891 roster – or would have were it still around. Only one SF&NP loco is included – and that because it was first on the SF&SJ. I hope this comes through as a word document – so you can resort it at your pleasure – say by company initials. Note, several locomotives are on here more than once – either under different initials/numbers or so one can find locos with multi-word names under any word (like: Gov. Stanford or Stanford, Gov.) Elephant has no road initials because it was not on a named/incorporated railroad while it bore that name (though the same locomotive is there three other places (as C.K. Garrison, Garrison C.K., and Pioneer). And there are a few locos for which builder and/or specs are as yet unknown (if anyone had this, please respond).
Abbreviations:
CalP – California Pacific
CC – California Central
CC/Y – California Central/Yuba RR
CN – California Northern
CP – Central Pacific
LA&I – Los Angeles & Independence
LA&SP – Los Angeles & San Pedro
O&C – Oregon & California
OC – Oregon Central
S&C – Stockton & Copperopolis
SC&PV – Santa Clara & Pajaro Valley
SF&A – San Francisco & Alameda
SF&NP – San Francisco & North Pacific
SF&O – San Francisco & Oakland
SF&SJ – San Francisco & Jan Jose
SP – Southern Pacific
SV – Sacramento Valley
VV&CL – Vaca Valley & Clear Lake
WP – Western Pacific
posted from CPRR Discussion Group at 8:42 AM
13 Comments:
From: "Wendell Huffman" wendellhuffman@hotmail.com
Date: September 30, 2005
Re: Locomotive rosters
... Some time ago I began compiling a roster of my own which reflects the various changes over the years – and which groups essentially identical locomotives together (something the CP never attempted in their rosters until 1891 and has not been attempted by subsequent scholars). The problem with all of the rosters is that they were made at a specific time for some specific (and likely now-forgotten) reason. In every case they were made in some office – sometimes with incomplete information – and only reflect to some unknown degree the actual state of the company's locomotive pool. The 1891 was essentially an instruction of how locomotives were to be renumbered; and we do not know how closely it was followed. Some of the locomotives listed may actually have been sold or scrapped before they were ever renumbered. Some may not have been renumbered for several years. I have found examples in nearly every company-published roster contrary to what other sources suggest were the actual facts. Thus my feeling that there is justification for some historian to create a "true" roster. This has been attempted at least six times before – once by George Stoddard, twice by David Joslyn, twice by Gerry Best, and once by Diebert & Strapac. For most locomotives it is straight forward. But there are a few mysteries that have never been resolved. One problem is that all of these rosters precede the Whyte classification system and in some cases there remains a question of what the roster is describing (they give only number of drivers – not actual wheel arrangement). Of two of the rosters I mention above, both the 1864 and 1868 roster list locomotives which were ordered or otherwise anticipated, but which were in fact never on the property. Thus, nearly every roster requires some commentary. ...
—W.
Also see: Early CPRR Locomotive Rosters.
From: "Wendell Huffman" wendellhuffman@hotmail.com
Subject: CPRR 1864 locomotive roster comment
I find the two "on order" 6-driver locos from Danforth interesting. They sound like the engines we know as the Danforth 2-6-0s, but the first two of those (8 Nevada and 9 Utah) were not even invoiced until July 1865. It IS possible that it took that long to build those engines, and indeed, Montague may have included them in the roster even before Huntington had finalized the contract on them. But, I wonder if these two engines reported in October 1864 were ever delivered to the CP. There is an odd story from some secondary book of years ago to the effect that the USMRR snagged a couple of CP engines. I wonder if these are them. I have never followed up on this question, but a good place to start would be to see whether any Danforth 2-6-0s were ever even counted among the USMRR locomotives.
—W.
Also see additional CPRR locomotive rosters.
After looking over the alphabetically arranged list, I wonder why the Central Pacific and the other railroads had/used so many locomotives with only 2 driving wheels? I can understand C.P.Huntington and T.D.Judah, because they were probably the first locomotives ordered and the C.P little experience with motive power (and they were probably cheaper), but many of the locomotives have incredibly outdated wheel arrangements, such as 4-2-0's, 2-2-0's, and 2-2-4's. even if they are tank engines. Also, why does the list not include any of the Central Pacific's 4-8-0's like Mastodon, since it does include El Gobernador.
Also, C.P.Huntington was listed once as a 4-2-4Y? What does Y stand for, or is that a typo?
From: kylewyatt@aol.com
To answer the questions, first, the Central Pacific stopped naming locomotives after 1869, with the specific exception of El Gobernador. Mastadon was a type of locomotive (like a Pacfiic or a Consolidation), not an individual named locomotive.
As to the abundance of 2-drivered locos, first there are a LOT of duplications in that list, as locos were renumbered, renamed, and/or changed owners. In that list there are actually only 4 eastern-built locomotives: three Danforth 4-2-4T (Huntington, Judah, Oakland); and one Norris-Lancaster 4-2-0T (Wm. Penn). CP purchased the first two because they were cheap and available for quick delivery at a time when CP had little money and needed any kind of motive power quickly (and the Civil War was taking most locomotive production). The third one (Oakland) was inherited from the San Francisco & Oakland. The Judah and the Oakland were converted into 4-2-2 tender engines in the early 1870s. The Wm Penn came from the 1860s Western Pacific, who acquired it as a bonus with a group of 4-4-0s. It also soon acquired a tender as a 4-2-0.
There are also a number of small locos either built by Vulcan in San Francisco or built with parts from Vulcan, variously 2-2-0 tender and 2-2-4 steam car. All of these came second hand into the CP roster with the acquisition of the small railroads that originally owned them.
—Kyle
I see, although I thought that the 4-8-0 was known as a "Twelve-Wheeler" and that the first one built by the CP was named "Mastodon" (as noted by Wikipedia).
Also, I have read in several sources and seen a few pictures of the Central Pacific using 2-6-2t's for what was lsited as "communter service" (which I guess implies former Sacramento Valley RR trackage), but the website has a picture of one under the "Locomotives" link, yet none of them appear on the roster. I known the railroad had a least a few, having seen may pictures of different ones.
I also believe that the CP ordered them as 2-6-2t's, because their is a website listing black and white paintings/drawings of old locomotives produced by there builder, and one of the locomotives is a 2-6-2t with Central Pacific lettering and the distinctive, horse-feed shaped bunker that looks like it was directly built into the frame (like the 2-6-2t on the website).
From: "Arnold Menke" waspman@cableone.net
The Central Pacific built seven 2-6-2Ts in 1881-1882. They were used in Oakland commuter service until electrification (ca. 1910??). Some then became shop switchers or were sold to various companies. One still exists and I believe it is at CSRM in Sacramento.
—Arnold Menke
From: "Wendell Huffman" wwhuffma@clan.lib.nv.us
The Central Pacific had no locomotive named "Mastodon". The CP called those locomotives 12-wheelers. Don't believe everything you read in Wikipedia (or anywhere else, for that matter). The 2-6-2Ts were designed for and used [I want to say exclusively, but can't prove it] in suburban service between Oakland pier and Berkeley until that district was electrified [in the teens?]. The locomotives were designed for operation in either direction and were seldom, if ever, turned. Thus, I feel, they must be considered in the local ancestry of the cab-forwards.
—Wendell
From: kylewyatt@aol.com
Usage changed over time, but 1901 here are the definitions that SP was using in their roster.
Small 4-8-0 (later class TW-2 - TW-7) – Twelve Wheel
Large 4-8-0 (later class TW-1 and TW-8) – Twelve Wheel Mastodon
Small 2-8-0 (built by AJ Stevens in 1887-88) – Consolidation
Large 2-8-0 (built by Schenectady in 1899-1900) – Consolidation Mastodon
On the suburban tank 2-6-2Ts, sonly even were built in the CP shops in 1881-82 – CP 230 – 236. Only one, CP 233, survives, not at CSRM. These were built specifically for the Oakland, Alameda, and Berkeley commute lines, so there were not generally run on the Savramento Valley RR.
Hope this helps.
—Kyle
From: VANDTRR@cs.com
The Sacramento shops built the 2-6-2T used in commuter service. One still exists. It was exihibited in a park in Oakland for many year. Unfortunately it is now in pieces at the Pacific Locomotive Association's collection in Niles Canyon just east of Fremont California.
I believe that some of these locos were used in Oakland, CA commuter service moving people from the ferry terminal at the end of the Oakland wharf to both Oakland and Berkeley.
—CDS
From: kylewyatt@aol.com
The Sacramento shops built 7 2-6-2T locos in 1881-82 for use in commuter service in Oakland, Alameda and Berkeley. They remained in this service until electrification of the commuter lines in 1912. Some were then sent to Oregon for service on commuter lines out of Portland until those were electrified in 1913-14. Three were converted into SP shop switchers. The other four were sold off, including CP #233 (later SP #1903), which ended up at a cement plant in Oregon. In the late 1930 it was discovered by Bay Area railfans, its donation secured, and returned to Oakland. Eventually it was donated to the City of Oakland (in the late 1940s I believe) and placed on display in a park (well watered by lawn sprinklers). In the early 1970s Pacific Loco Assn acquired it, and over the years it underwent several partial restorations. In the early 2000s PLA transferred it to the California State Railraod Museum, and it now sits under cover in the erecting hall where it was constructed all those years ago.
—Kyle
"Nevada Northern Railway Locomotive #1 ... was built by the American Locomotive Company in June 1869 for the Central Pacific Railroad and was named the Juno. It was purchased by the Nevada Northern Railway on November 18, 1905 for passenger service, the cost was $4,018."
Post a Comment
<< Recent Messages