Those look like Baldwin domes to me. The other manufacturers mentioned have distinctly different domes, especially Vulcan and Porter.

Bernie Perch

You could be right Bernie, she does indeed have the look of her smaller narrow gauge cousins in Hawaii (or disney world), in fact upon taking a closer look at her and comparing her to an old Disney locomotive that used to operate at Fort Wilderness you see a lo of similarities. The domes of the locomotive and if you look real close you can see what appears to be the top of the smoke stack underneath the cab it looks similar to the old Baldwin locomotives Disney used. Disney of course did a lot of safety upgrades before the old Hawaiian locomotives where used but I do believe besides some paint the locomotives remained the same.

Disney didn't use "old Baldwin locomotives" on the Fort Wilderness Railroad, nor were they "old Hawaiian locomotives". They were built new by Disney.

sorry, you are correct the Locomotives used by Disney were based off of 1880's Baldwin 0-4-2 saddle tank locomotive commonly used in Hawaii to transport sugar cane. Disney's 2-4-2 engines were made by MAPO 1972 for the use in WDW, Disney added a pony truck, over sized headlight and a squared off saddle (most Forney locomotives had rounded saddle tanks) I got the locomotives history used in WDW mixed up with the locomotive owned by Ward Kimball (Walt Disney's imagineer and railroading friend) , Chloe. Chloe was a Balwin locomotive used in the plantations of Hawaii.
http://www.oerm.org/collection/3-foot-g ... lats/chloe

Looking over the details of this engine(those that are present anyway) I would with near certainty say this is a Baldwin product, and I would say the Quarry story is certainly plausible. Note the balloon stack hiding behind the engine in the original photo. Some of my reasoning for it being a Baldwin:

1. Dome Shape
2. Crosshead design
3. Cylinder design
4. Bell between stack and first dome

Reasoning to believe the Quarry Story:

1: Bent brackets
2: Stack broken off
3: Broken/Missing Sand domes
4: Appears Rear frame is bent
5: Obvious missing cab may or may not have to do with Quarry accident.

However, I believe this was originally built as an export locomotive(possibly narrow gauge). It has all the proportions of a Baldwin export model from the 1890's-1920. It may either be a late build, or a rebuild(to regauge) based on the crescent counterweights on the drivers. This also lends to the story that it is a quarry locomotive because many small operations bought either secondhand, or unpurchased orders that were meant for export. Finally here is a very rough composite of what I think the locomotive originally looked like. I'm on vacation so I used paint instead of photoshop.....

Looks like a balloon stack laying on the ground behind it.

Also looks like the remnants of the cab are turned 180 degrees and pushed up against the backhead.

Whatever it is, its a mess and surprised it has lasted.

So the owner hides this locomotive for what reason? All the jewelry is gone, there isn't much there but a hulk. This is supposedly to "protect" the locomotive.

But the owner leaves it parked outside for over thirty years apparently buried in such a way that the locomotive probably doesn't dry out in between rainfalls and cannot be accessed to apply rust preventative or a coat of paint. So the "protection" from railfans involves destroying it by corrosion?

I just love human logic!

I think this engine was discussed in an earlier thread including a google earth photo of "something" under a tarp near Baltimore.

Wesley

looks like a smaller engine than the #5, and probably just an 0-4-0, the cab could still just out and look far back but be balanced.

Sized probably right for quarry use sounds right its been toss tumbled.

Probably why its been off the preservation radar. Looks like a sorta balloon stack laying in back, that would date it pretty early. Give it 1905-1915 range.

A cosmetic fix may be best for it but we're glad for the find anyways.

I would suggest that the owner is less protecting the locomotive than he is protecting the property upon which it sits from people doing stupid things. It's not exactly a "safe" location, and it's not exactly a "good part of town," either.

I admit there's "not a lot of 'there' there," as the saying goes. The only thing I'm really interested in is documenting the existence of said loco for the "all-time indexes" online and in hard-copy. And who knows, maybe someday someone can find a good use or place for this thing and restore it....

We have a possible lead.

The 1967 U.S. Steam Locomotive Directory by Victor Koenigsberg (the predecessor in style and format to the J. David Conrad books) listed an 0-4-0T also at the same A.H. Smith quarry in "Branchville" (Greenbelt/College Park) as the former US Navy #7 0-4-2T. The only data listed is the wheel arrangement, location, and "stored unserviceable" (as was the 0-4-2T).

Hmmmmmmmm.

The dome designs clearly make it a tank engine.

Two things.... 1) it did not have a saddle tank, (as Dave pointed out) the dome bases fit the boiler radius and not that of a hypothetical tank 2) it was either an 0-4-2 0r 0-4-4 as is evident by the fact of there being an equalizer between the two driving axles. An 0-4-0 would have the rear springs going to dead blocks and the front would have dead blocks at rear and be cross equilized at front.

Either way, what a doozy of a boiler..... lap seam and no dome liner. The 30 in savannah had the same lack of liner issue which was rectified during the rebuild.

Cheers, Jason

I think Alcoguy is on to something. As he and others noted, the engine had equalizers between the drivers, something that wouldn't be present on an 0-4-0. And that "remnant of a cab" is actually a typical water tank-fuel bunker, like a 19th-early 20th century tender, or like the rear tank and bunker of a two-truck geared engine or a Forney. That could explain the lack of a saddle tank.

Wonder how old it really is? And the condition it's in! Lots of missing parts, including at least the rods on one side, and at least one broken cylinder head, not to mention a lap-seam boiler! Whew, what a project that one would be!

Is there a builder's photo available of US Navy No. 7, which this engine might be? It would be interesting if the size looked about right.

Might this locomotive be one rescued from Kennedy Playground in Washington DC? There was an 0-4-0T in the park in addition to the Santa Cruz engine later restored by the Smithsonian.

Wesley

http://steamlocomotive.info/vlocomotive.cfm?Display=306