Wheel configurations: whats in a name?

[sjp23480]

Not sure what made me think of this but I am hoping RMWeb can help with a bit of a random question.  I have taken a look here and on the web, but can't find any explanations.  So, here goes.

 

Does anyone know the origin of the names for loco wheel configurations, so why is a 4-6-2 a Pacific, a 2-8-2 a Mikado, a 2-6-4 an Adriatic, a 2-6-0 a Mogul, a 4-4-2 an Atlantic and so on?

 

I am aware of the Whyte Notation but have struggled to find how these names, among others, came to be associated with these wheel configurations.

 

Curiously yours,

Steve

[Old Gringo]

Hi Steve,

 

From 'The Railway Dictionary' by Alan Jackson, published by Alan Sutton, 1992;

 

Atlantic, "US term, later British for a 4-4-2 wheel arrangement, from the Atlantic City RR, which ordered the first one." (page 10)

 

Mikado, "US term, for a 2-8-2, also used in the UK, derived from the destination of the first ones built (by Baldwin for Japan) - see also Macarthur." (p.181 & p.169)

 

Mogul, "term for a 2-6-0, used in US and UK" (p.183)

There is a photo of an early GER 2-6-0, designed by William Adams and built by Neilson in 1878, with the name Mogul on the splasher, but whether this is the origination of the term remains unclear. Ref: p.97, 'Steam Locomotive Nicknames, Thomas Middlemass, Silver Link Publishing, 1991).

 

Pacific, "US and later British term for a 4-6-2 locomotive, from the first railway ordering this type - The Missouri Pacific RR." (p.208) 

Please see later corrections, from David (Penrith Beacon, post 19) and myself post 1 / page 2.

 

Adriatic is listed as a US term by Jackson, but no information given from where the term originated. 

Edit: According to David Ross (in 'Steam Locomotive - The Willing Servant', p.163), Karl Golsdorf "introduced the 2-6-4 wheel arrangement to the world in 1908 ... and ... the configuration was sometimes referred to as the Adriatic".  Golsdorf (1861-1916) was the CME of the Austrian State Railway from 1891 and his locomotives would have worked all over the Austro-Hungarian Empire and therefore (?) along the Adriatic coastline.

 

There are a lot more descriptive names, mainly originating in the U.S.A.;

I've discovered around 40 so far! 

[The Stationmaster]

Mountain (4-8-2) was also a name of US origin I understand - originally being applied to some engines which were ordered for use on a heavily graded section of route (on the C&O I think).  

 

The name Allegheny applied to the 2-6-6-6 wheel arrangement can far more definitely be traced to the C&O which in 1941 ordered engines of this arrangement to work coal trains in the Allegheny mountains eventually finishing up with 60 of them forming the road's class H-8.

[Wickham Green too]

Anyone got any thoughts on 'Consolidation' .......... not a name we often used this side of the pond ( er ..... if ever ) though we had plenty of them !

[Old Gringo]

On 23/05/2021 at 15:46, Wickham Green too said:

Anyone got any thoughts on 'Consolidation' .......... not a name we often used this side of the pond ( er ..... if ever ) though we had plenty of them !

 

Consolidation the name for a 2-8-0 locomotive, first built by Baldwin in 1866 to a design by Alexander Mitchell in 1865.  Built by Baldwin for the Lehigh Valley RR. which was involved in a 'consolidation' agreement around that time with the Lehigh & Mahanoy RR. (p.43 Withuhn and p.108 Ross).

 

Refs: American Steam Locomotives, design and Development 1880-1960, William Withuhn, 2019. 

Steam Locomotive, The Willing Servant, David Ross, 2004. 

[sjp23480]

3 hours ago, Old Gringo said:

Hi Steve,

 

From 'The Railway Dictionary' by Alan Jackson, published by Alan Sutton, 1992;

 

Atlantic, "US term, later British for a 4-4-2 wheel arrangement, from the Atlantic City RR, which ordered the first one." (page 10)

 

Mikado, "US term, for a 2-8-2, also used in the UK, derived from the destination of the first ones built (Japan) - see also Macarthur." (p.181 & p.169)

 

Mogul, "term for a 2-6-0, used in US and UK" (p.183) There is a photo of an early GER 2-6-0, designed by William Adams and built by Neilson in 1878, with the name Mogul on the splasher, but whether this is the origination of the term remains unclear. Ref: p.97, 'Steam Locomotive Nicknames, Thomas Middlemass, Silver Link Publishing, 1991).

 

Pacific, "US and later British term for a 4-6-2 locomotive, from the first railway ordering this type - The Missouri Pacific RR." (p.208)

 

Adriatic is listed as a US term by Jackson, but no information given from where the term originated.  Edit: According to David Ross (in 'Steam Locomotive - The Willing Servant', p.163), Karl Golsdorf "introduced the 2-6-4 wheel arrangement to the world in 1908 ... and ... the configuration was sometimes referred to as the Adriatic".  Golsdorf (1861-1916) was the CME of the Austrian State Railway from 1891 and his locomotives would have worked all over the Austro-Hungarian Empire and therefore (?) along the Adriatic coastline.

 

There are a lot more descriptive names, mainly originating in the U.S.A., I've discovered around 40 so far! 

 

Strange how many of the names originated in America!

[The Johnster]

2 hours ago, Old Gringo said:

There are a lot more descriptive names,

Not on a family forum, though!

 

Railwaymens' and enthusiasts' names for locos are a complete subject in their own right and there is possibly a book or at least a magazine article in them; they differ between railwaymen's and enthusiasts', and geographically within those categories, sometimes to specific sheds.

 

We are so familiar with the Whyte notation that we think effortlessly in it's terms. and probably fail to appreciate how much easier it has made describing steam (and some diesel and electric) locomotives.  4-6-2 is much less inconvenient than '6-coupled with leading bogie and trailing truck'.  It doesn't tell us all we might need to know about the loco, but neither did the previous system; we do not know for example, with a 4-2-2, if the wheels are all in a single frame like Iron Duke, or if there is a leading bogie like on a Dean Single, or if the trailing axle is held in the frame or is a pivoted or radial truck.

 

The names are something that I've always considered to be subsidiary to the numerical description, and some have not 'taken off' in the UK.  Pacific, Atlantic, Prairie, and Mogul have, but few of the others; one does not hear of 28xx or Stanier 8Fs as 'Consolidations', for example.  Some arrangements were rare or unknown in the UK, and there were few Mikados, the only Mountains were on the RH&DR, and the nearest thing we had to a Hudson was a 4-6-2-2. 

 

Many of these names originated from vernacular railroadmens' usage at the time that Whyte devised the notation, and are thus less applicable to the UK scene at that time,  The overwhelming majority of UK railways were mostly worked by 0-6-0s and 4-4-0s, and a smattering of things rare in the US, like 0-4-2s and 0-4-4s.  The outside cylinder 4-4-0 was, IIRC, described by Whyte as the 'American', not unreasonably given the traditional popularity of the type there.  But the British equivalent was, with some exceptions, an inside cylinder machine of very different construction, and Whyte might have thought of them as a 'British' but AFAIK this term was never used.  The Mogul, Prairie, Atlantic and Pacific descriptions were already established over there before they appeared here, and adopted readily, but the already established over here locos, 4-4-0s and 0-6-0s, already had their own vernacular names and were resistant to the American terminology.

 

Whyte notation is not perfect, but has survived because it is convenient and can be used for the majority of steam and other similarly constructed locos, and it has become an international standard still in general use despite modern replacements which may or may not be more logical but tend to be more complex as well.  'Greater Britain' is described as 2-2-2-2 in Whyte, but there is no indication of which axles are driven or their position relative to the others in the frame; it is not until the term 'double single' (which is a tautology) is used that matters resolve themselves.  In the case of 60700, there is no indication in the Whyte notation that the locomotive does not have 4 leading unpowered wheels, 6 coupled, a single driven axle, and a trailing truck.  Admittedly this is an unlikely setup, but when you look at Cramptons and some of the 19th century French and Belgian experiments, it becomes less than impossible!

[The Johnster]

28 minutes ago, sjp23480 said:

 

Strange how many of the names originated in America!

Whyte, whose notation it is and who originated the whole kit and caboodle, was American, so inevitably used American terminology to describe his notation.  He was editor of American Engineer and Railroad Journal, and first published the notation in an editorial in 1900.  The idea was rapidly taken up and in use here within a decade.  Wikipedia, bless it, has a list of names for different wheel arrangements, most of which I have never heard of in 65 years of being an enthusiast and nearly a decade working on the railway.

[Old Gringo]

Hi Johnster,

 

There is a book on nicknames:

 

Steam Locomotive Nicknames - An Illustrated dictionary from Aberdare to Zeppelin, by Thomas Middlemass, Silver Link Publishing, 1991, ISBN 0-947971-70-X.  Inside is a collection of 450 examples, just a few of which are un-printable on a 'family forum'! (Marsh's Class 11 4-4-2Ts being one example).

 

The system was devised by Frederick Whyte (1865 - 1941) around 1900, whilst he was employed on the New York Central RR.  Although it might not cater for every possibility, it has proved a simple method for describing almost every steam locomotive wheel arrangement all over the world. (Ref: Biographical Dictionary of Railway Engineers, Marshall, 2nd Ed. 2003, R&CHS, p.193).

 

All the very best,

John

[BernardTPM]

21 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

NWhyte notation is not perfect, but has survived because it is convenient and can be used for the majority of steam and other similarly constructed locos, and it has become an international standard still in general use despite modern replacements which may or may not be more logical but tend to be more complex as well.  'Greater Britain' is described as 2-2-2-2 in Whyte, but there is no indication of which axles are driven or their position relative to the others in the frame

2-2-2-2 could only be a double single. If any of the other axles weren't driven they'd be counted with the front or rear number, so 4-2-2 or 2-2-4. True though that it doesn't indicate how the leading or trailing wheels are held in place - rigid, bogie, pony, radial or a combination thereof.

W1 is a 4-6-4. Of course, that doesn't tell you that the trailing wheels at the back aren't a single bogie.

Edited May 23, 2021 by BernardTPM

[F-UnitMad]

53 minutes ago, sjp23480 said:

 

Strange how many of the names originated in America!

Why? 

[sjp23480]

1 minute ago, F-UnitMad said:

Why? 

Because :-)

[pH]

2 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Anyone got any thoughts on 'Consolidation' .......... not a name we often used this side of the pond ( er ..... if ever ) though we had plenty of them !

 

55 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

The names are something that I've always considered to be subsidiary to the numerical description, and some have not 'taken off' in the UK.  Pacific, Atlantic, Prairie, and Mogul have, but few of the others; one does not hear of 28xx or Stanier 8Fs as 'Consolidations', for example. !

I have, once, seen the Great Central 8K class referred to as ‘Consolidations’ in print in a UK publication.

[The Johnster]

In the States at that time, 4-6-0s were usually referred to as '10 wheelers', becasue they had, um, 10 wheels, but this does not account for Consolidations, Atlantics, Prairies, or other such locos.

[pH]

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

Railwaymens' and enthusiasts' names for locos are a complete subject in their own right and there is possibly a book or at least a magazine article in them; they differ between railwaymen's and enthusiasts'

.. 

Many of these names originated from vernacular railroadmens' usage at the time that Whyte devised the notation ...

The 2-10-4 wheel arrangement was known as the ‘Selkirk’ in Canada (generally as the ‘Texas’ in the US). There was only one class of Selkirk, built by the CPR for use in the western mountains. The class was named as a result of a competition amongst CPR staff - one of the mountain ranges they were used to cross was the Selkirks.

[F-UnitMad]

1 hour ago, sjp23480 said:

Because :-)

Sounds like my teenager's line of reasoning.  

 

As others have pointed out, some of the names were for types much larger than anything that ever ran in Britain, so it shouldn't be a surprise that the names originated where the types were used.

[Wickham Green too]

Whereas our staple fare of 0-6-0s and 4-4-0s  were knowns as .............. er ....... 0-6-0s and 4-4-0s ( once the Whyte Notation had come into use )

[Nearholmer]

1 hour ago, Old Gringo said:

it has proved a simple universal method for describing almost every steam locomotive wheel arrangement all over the world.

 

Very widespread, yes; universal, no. It isn't common across much of Europe, anywhere with strong French or German influence, and I can't even guess how the Russian and Chinese systems work. For "modern traction", variants of the European system seem more common descriptors, but they don't seem to have nicknames, even American ones.

[PenrithBeacon]

5 hours ago, Old Gringo said:

...

 

Pacific, "US and later British term for a 4-6-2 locomotive, from the first railway ordering this type - The Missouri Pacific RR." (p.208)

 

...

The first 4-6-2 was designed and made in New Zealand and still exists there. The name Pacific was later applied by the MPRR

[Pacific231G]

3 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Anyone got any thoughts on 'Consolidation' .......... not a name we often used this side of the pond ( er ..... if ever ) though we had plenty of them !

Interesting though that, for steam locos, the French use of those terms of mostly American origin almost universally including very English names like "ten-wheelers"  even though the Fr. wheel arrangement classification is based on axles (Honegger's symphony "Pacific 231" is definitely a tautology!)  There were exceptions, Prendre le Crampton was for a long time a term for "take the (express)  train" and there were far more locos following Thomas Crampton's paent in France than in Britain.

Because I've grown so familar with them, it never occured to me that Consolidation wasn't a term much used for a 2-8-0 here. The SNCF 141P and 141Rs were always referred to as Mikados and the 241Ps as Mountains.  French (or at least PLM and SNCF) practice was to incorporate the wheel arrangement expressed in axles into the series (class) number. eg 140C, 131TB, 

 

Thinking about it, in Britain, it was probably only Pacific and Prairie that I heard widely used in Britain though I think Atlantics and Baltics were also quite often used. Was Decapod a known term in Britain? There's some question about whether it should only refer to an 0-10-0 or to an yten coupled loco.

It may be that, particularly for goods locos, we tended to use the BR power classifications a bit more such as 3F, 8F, 9F and some of the MTs .

[Nearholmer]

So, do we have any "home grown" names for wheel arrangements, as opposed to classes? And, what descriptos were used in Britain pre-Whyte? Long mouthfuls like "six wheeled goods engine" and "four-coupled express engine" (which would encompass multiple wheel arrangements), I suspect.

[Wickham Green too]

45 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

...... Was Decapod a known term in Britain? There's some question about whether it should only refer to an 0-10-0 or to any ten coupled loco.

It may be that, particularly for goods locos, we tended to use the BR power classifications a bit more such as 3F, 8F, 9F and some of the MTs .

I think we've only ever had two locos known as 'Decapod' - the two 0-10-0s.

3F, 8F, 9F and some of the MTs were, of course, LMS designations adopted by BR - and rarely used to describe locos of the other Big Three though all nationalised locos were similarly classified.

I suppose 'Radials' could be considered a British wheel arrangement term - though probably only on the 'Brighton' ........ it meant different things elsewhere.

[Dagworth]

49 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

I think we've only ever had two locos known as 'Decapod' - the two 0-10-0s

Two locos and a research vehicle 

 

http://www.traintesting.com/decapod.htm

[russ p]

16 minutes ago, Dagworth said:

Two locos and a research vehicle 

 

http://www.traintesting.com/decapod.htm

 

Weren't the two locos the same one rebuilt? 

[BernardTPM]

The GER Decapod was rebuilt as a tender 0-8-0.