What method was used to number steam locomotives? every railway seems to have a different set of “classification” numbers, some had 3, some 4, even small railroads with 5 engines had 4 numbers on their locos, When growing up in a large C.P.R. town we always (as did train crews) referred to the locos by their numbers, never their names,(Northern, Mikado,etc) any one out their familiar with the numbering system ?
Larger railroads will number engines in a series for each type of engines they own. As new engines are purchased and old engines are retired it is likely that a new type of locomtive will get numbered in the series of a retired locomotive. This applies to both steam and diesel. The numbering systems evolved over time as new locmotives are purchased.
The series of numbers is used as a form of ‘short hand’ for those who have to work with the locomotioves to understand what they are working with, without having to ‘see’ the actual engine.
There are no common numbering conventions between carriers - each has their own system of numbering locomotives.
There really is no method to the madness. Sometimes the same engines would be renumbered during different management regimes. CP went through two total renumbering’s of both its’ engines and rolling stock in the early 1910’s. The result of that is the numbering system you and I grew up with.
It was sort of[:D] based on age, and power of the the engines. 4-4-0’s ended up in the two digit and 100 series. 4-6-0’s ran from the 300’s to the 1100’s. Pacifics were mostly in the 2000’s, but there is no consistency with age or power of the engines. Consolidations were in the mid 3000’s, yet CP’s Northerns were numbered in the 3100 series. Mikados, for the most part,were numbered by age and increasing horsepower, running from the 5100’s to the 5400’s. Ten coupled engines were numbered by increasing HP, 2-10-0’s were 5700’s, 2-10-2’s were 5800’s and the 2-10-4 Selkirks were 5900’s.
And yet, the last new engines CP bought were Pacifics in the 1200 series. HP does seem to have more to do with numbering than age, but of course for the most part newer engines were always bigger.
What is a poor railfan to do?
Bruce
Renumbering often had something to do with a new incoming class of locomotive. I’m not sure why, but NYC’s 8200 RS3’s got renumbered to 5200’s.
Remember that 844 became 8444 because the number 844 fell into the middle of a new purchase of locomotives, GP30’s, as I recall.
Small railroads sometimes numbered their locomotives by year they were acquired. Thus a steam locomotive obtained in 1925 would be numbered 1925. Twenty-five years later, when this little shortline finally gets a Diesel, it would have been numbered 1950. If they bought two at once, the other might be numbered 1951.
In VERY general terms most railroads started with #1 and counted up in sequential fashion. At some point in the 1880s or 1890’s they developed some sort of classification, generally based on wheel arrangement A = 0-6-0 B = 4-4-0 etc. Since there was a lot of variety of specifications within each wheel arrangement, many added a number to the letter A1, A2 etc. About the same time many carriers renumbered the fleet assigning blocks of numbers to different wheel arrangements 1-99 to switchers 100-299 to 4-4-0 etc. Some of the larger roads went through two or three interations, and each carrier’s system evolved differently and into a different final nomenclature.
To understand a larger carrier’s system you need a book.
Mac