Dear Bill and all:
The PRR was not as conservative as some may think. Who was it who built the
first big simple Mallet articulated? HC1s 2-8+8-0 #3700 (Juniata, 1919) was a
monster for its time and temporarily held the title of "biggest locomotive in
the world." It was intended as a road engine for the Allegheny grades east of
Pittsburgh. But its 147,640 lbs. tractive effort was too much for the drawbars
of the day. There were some design problems that could have been ironed out,
but PRR decided the expense of maintaining four cylinders and the articulated
joints was unnecessary when the two-cylinder I-1s could satisfactorily move the
freight.
PRR was certainly more innovative before WW1, even to importing deGlehn
(France) and Webb (England) compounds for trial in passenger service. That it
built hundreds of K-4, L-1 and I-1, as well as upgrading its later H-series
2-8-0s so soon after the war made new designs superfluous for 10 years, after
which the costs of electrification combined with the Dirty Thirties reduced the
need as well as available cash for new power. PRR expressed intentions of
electrifying west of Harrisburg, too, so why look into new steam power? To
meet the high-speed freight challenge, they had GG1s east of Harrisburg and
developed the superb M-1 Mountains for flatter territory to the west.
The K-4s simply got old. It's front end, particularly, held it back when
speeds and loads continued to increase. Under heavy load at speeds over about
60 mph, it would choke on its own back-pressure. PRR remedied this by
redesign, plus experimentation with poppet valves. The rebuilds, K-4sa, with
new front ends, were a successful adaptation and kept these still
relatively-new locomotives on the road.
War was Heck for a lot of railroads. The ATSF 2900s would never have been
built had the War Production Board allotted the Santa Fe more Diesels -- ATSF
didn't want the 2900s, so it's no surprise they were leased out when possible.
As for the conservative PRR, before the U.S. joined WW2, the Pennsy had already
produced the S-1 6-4-4-6 #6100. It represented "American Railroads" at the
1939 World's Fair. Hardly an honour one would expect from the "conservative"
PRR.
The "Big Swoosh", S-2 6-8-6 turbine #6200 followed in September 1944 (the WPB
did not put a halt to research & development).
Then, unfortunately, the PRR found out what the B&O had already learned in 1937
-- Baldwin's much-heralded duplex drive idea was, to put it kindly, a
developmental dead end. [If you check it out, Baldwin was responsible for most
of the failed steam loco designs in North America in the 20th Century. But
that's a separate essay.]
The best statement I have ever read about the duplexii was written by Brian
Reed in Loco Profile #24. "If the investment of some $23 million in 76
extremely large locomotives with working lives of four to seven years full of
frustration, disappointment, maintenance work, and exasperating performance can
be deemed economic, then the Pennsylvania's T-1 and Q-2 'production' duplex
steam locomotives were successful; but not otherwise. They could well be
regarded as the counterpart of the English Bulleid Pacifics, and the two
grouped as the most expensive steam locomotive failures in the two continents
during the 20th Century."
The electrification program also belies PRR's reputation for conservatism.
But, you folks already know all about that.
The PRR and NYC both were "mighty" in their day and deserve to be called so.
They continued forward doing what had been successful only to find out it
didn't work any more. Only in retrospect, can the word "mighty" be replaced
with the word "doomed."
regards ... pqr
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Lane
To: S Scale List
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 8:54 AM
Subject: {S-Scale List} The Mighty________ (You fill in the blank)
Hi All,
Ed has Co-opted my "Mighty" phrase for his NYC affliction. I guess that
could be a slight form of flattery! Here in the company of friends we all
have our own flavor of what road we follow for whatever reason. For most I
would suspect it is because it was the road that they were closest to when
growing up, or became interested in trains.
I will openly admit that the PRR was frugal at times and very conservative
as well. Many of the key locomotive classes were 20+ years old at a time
when other roads were still researching and experimenting with new steam
locomotives of their own. The PRR was forced to put stokers on their
locomotives. It was cheaper and easier to put another fireman in the cab. If
he died or quit, get another one. A stoker was a capitol expense that could
break down or need maintenance.
The PRR was constantly improving their locomotives with shopping and newer
appliances, but mostly they were still the same old 20+ year old locomotives
by the 40s & 50s. (That was my first awakening at age 16 looking though
Pennsy Power - realizing that the main PRR classes originated in the 20s and
30s) The PRR T1 was probably the largest group of steam locos that PRR
built later in an attempt to refine and modernize their steam power. Their
success has been highly disputed on both sides. They were dropped from the
rosters rather early in comparison to the age of other classes. I have heard
that they sat dead for a few years until the trusts were paid for as they
could not scrap them before that.
I am not overly familiar with what other roads did at that time, (later 40s
to early 50s) but I know N&W refused to give up the steam fight until very
late. Most of us know of the circumstances that came to be to produce the
PRR J1. I have wondered if the war restrictions were not in place if the J1
is what would have gotten built instead of the PRR's steadfast self reliance
mentality. If I could wave a magic wand and see ANY PRR steam locomotive
alive and well in 2008, the J1 would not even be in my top 5. The #1 would
probably be the I1 followed by the M1 or K4.
The Santa Fe locomotives (The 2900s?) that were leased on the PRR are
coincidentally the loco that American Models made. They WERE supposedly
liked by the PRR crews because they were significantly more modern then many
other PRR classes. There was quite the article on them in the PRR T &HS
Keystone a while back.
So, MIGHTY is what we all think it is and get to shoot friendly occasional
jabs at each other....
Finally, the original premise I posted a few days back WAS - S Scale
locomotives made in BRASS by mainstream builders for specific road (IE, you
could not correctly paint a K4 for Santa Fe) The USRA locos had multiples
correct roads with some detail changes so they DON'T count in my premise.
Now that I have clarified things a bit, I still stand that the PRR has had
more items specifically built in S brass then ANY other road. NYC, C&O, and
SP would be somewhere behind but in what order I don't know. (Think of ALL
the diesels with antennas installed by the builders before you say I am
wrong)
Let the replies fly! And enough of ENOUGH MR Lane! Change the subject line!
Thank You,
Bill Lane
Modeling the Mighty Pennsy & PRSL in 1957 in S Scale since 1988
See my finished models at:
http://www.lanestrains.com
Winner of the 2007 Josh Seltzer NASG Website Award
Look at what has been made in PRR in S Scale!
Custom Train Parts Design
http://www.lanestrains.com/SolidWorks_Modeling.htm
PRR Builders Photos Bought, Sold & Traded
(Trading is MUCH preferred)
http://www.lanestrains.com/PRRphotos.xls
***Join the PRR T&HS***
The other members are not ALL like me!
http://www.prrths.com
http://www.lanestrains.com/PRRTHS_Application.pdf
Join the Pennsylvania Reading Seashore Lines Historical Society
It's FREE to join! http://www.prslhs.com
Preserving The Memory Of The PRSL
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
