PRR Duplexes and Experimental Engines Discussion ( S1, S2, T1 etc.)

14032 views
360 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 3,389 posts
Posted by Miningman on Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:01 PM

Well regardless,  Happy Thanksgiving to you and all South of the 49th.

What did the turkey say to the computer?

.....google, google google 

 

 

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 634 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Thursday, November 22, 2018 8:47 AM

Oh MY......a tossed stone raises a thousand ripples! I didn't expect a post of an "ancient" T1 pic would cause so many inconveniences. I hope it didn't damage you guys friendship!Indifferent

I love PRR's DGLE and F.O.M livery; the Keystone plate; how they placed the headlight; how they insisted to use the Belpaire firebox and refused to use steam booster engine and smoke deflector; I love how they designed the smokebox door; I am fascinated by the beauty of S1, S2, Q1, Q2, T1, and Streamlined K4s; I admire they made the most powerful Mountain Class 4-8-2; I love they hand-picked Raymond Loewy but not other industrial designers; I love their network and how they named their limiteds; I love how they gave steam-powered locomotives the very last chance... I just don't like how they treat S1 and T1s. They weren't perfect but really deserved better treatment. Coffee

  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 3,389 posts
Posted by Miningman on Thursday, November 22, 2018 5:42 PM

If you scroll down these 2 links that NDG just posted on the NYC thread you will see beautifully kept locomotives, picture after picture all clean and shiny. Some just off a run, some heading out, some in the middle of a hard run...look at Jubilee 2929 pulling 60 cars! ... and that's hand fired and actually despised by crews, but the pride and discipline is showing.  Jubilee 2920 going through cow flop Saskatchewan, dusty, rural, light branch line track, but looking good in the neighbourhood. 

Many of these pics are at the end of steam '58-'59 when everyone knew  their time was up and they were just using them up. The CPR and many if not most roads never allowed appearances to go to pieces. 

The only exception would be Jubilee 2911 which was the only one painted up in freight colours of all black and it is dirty after a run, but nothing that was not part of a deferred the heck with it and a general philosophy of not caring about who they were. 

I would also have to say that the Diesel era continued a shabby practice after a short period of not doing so, all the way into the Penn Central era and early Conrail. Many of the E's and F's were a total disgrace. 

http://www.trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/photos/cpr_steam/jubilee.htm

http://www.trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/photos/cpr_steam/royal.htm

 

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 634 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Friday, November 23, 2018 7:30 AM

-Accidentally deleted my post- Sorry, please remove.

  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 3,389 posts
Posted by Miningman on Wednesday, November 28, 2018 12:31 AM

 

Summary: The S1, S2, T1's, Q1, Q2's, 1947+ PRR... throw in the Niagara as well, NYC

 

 

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 634 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Wednesday, November 28, 2018 10:23 AM

Miningman

Summary: The S1, S2, T1's, Q1, Q2's, 1947+ PRR... throw in the Niagara as well, NYC

 

Oh my dear Miningman, the list should be much much longer:

 

  • Test report of PRR  S1, S2, T1's, Q1, Q2's from 1939-1950,

 

  • 8mm films of their first-day road testing, first day in revenue services, on the test plant, publicity events etc.

 

  • Tons of photos of them taken by PRR officials. 

 

  • Full set of their blueprints, conceptional drawings, renderings etc.

 

  • The scale model of PRR S2 made by Pennsy for problem-solving as well as all scale models made by Pennsy. 

 

  • Raymond Loewy's drawing of the original "Triplex" engine.

 

  • Raymond Loewy's conceptual drawings of the streamlined S2.

 

  • Documents of all never built, abandoned proposals of Pennsy

All these things were either still store in Hagley, missing or being destroyed during the merge of PC and Amtrak's take over. (GG1's model was saved by a staff during PC merge) 

(non copyrighted pictures from rrmuseumpa.org)

  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 3,389 posts
Posted by Miningman on Wednesday, November 28, 2018 9:02 PM

Anyone notice how that dumpster fire is chugging away just like a steam locomotive. Observe far right end chugging away even few seconds. 

The entire Duplexii, Steam Turbine, Modern Steam Era was a dumpster fire. 

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 634 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Thursday, November 29, 2018 1:34 AM

Miningman

Anyone notice how that dumpster fire is chugging away just like a steam locomotive. Observe far right end chugging away even few seconds. 

The entire Duplexii, Steam Turbine, Modern Steam Era was a dumpster fire. 


IdeaTOP DEFINITIONIdea

Dumpster Fire

1. A complete disaster. 

2. Something very difficult that nobody wants to deal with.

eg. This project is a complete dumpster fire!

In entertainment or sports, a laughably poor performance usually caused by: 

1. Lack of planning, preparation or talent. 

2. Random events that effectively sabotage the effort (i.e., technical problems). 

eg. Dumpster Fire is the kindest thing I can say about Oakland's game against San Diego.


OK I get what you mean now Miningman! CoffeeSmile, Wink & Grin  
Yes, I think dumpster fire is an appropriate word to describe all of them. 
S1: Powerful and fast enough but designed only for the World Fair, too large and troublesome for revenue service. Perfect engine for a HSR which never happened. StarStill my dream car.
T1: Top tier world class dumpster fire, Using gear with design flaws, firebox grate area was too small; the whole project was building upon a misinterpretation of the test of PRR#5399, hated by some PRR high-ranking officials. Failed to challenge any EMD product after 1945.Star I still love them.
Q1: Abandoned by the management before built due to better performance available from PRR Class J1, PRR wasted her potential as a dual function engine. Racked up only 65,000 miles in total. StarOne of my favorites duplexes!
Q2: The most successful duplex, very powerful and fast for freight service but overall operating cost is too high, the rate of water and coal consumption is very high.Star I still prefer them to PRR J1!
S2: Overweighted when built, but very close to success. Got ditched when Pennsy was low-key as broke as a beggar in 1948.Star My poor S2, best experimental locomotive ever built in America!
PRR: Management was chaotic since WWII, better let me take over, asap DrinksLaugh
She got the looks; she got the power and speed. All she needed was a longer track for her to spread the legs! 

 

  • Member since
    September, 2003
  • 6,366 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, November 29, 2018 2:53 PM

Jones1945
Yes, I think dumpster fire is an appropriate word to describe all of them.

None of them (with the possible exception of the Q1) really qualifies as either a 'dumpster fire' or the military use of cluster as half a word.  That is properly reserved for something like the N&W K-3, the wrong answer to a question nobody asked and nobody tried to fix.  These are more like railroading's answer to the steamship Great Eastern, or 'not realizing the definition of insanity is not trying more and harder with the same non-working approach' (which PRR and NYC did with first-generation diesels just as with steam).  Let me take up some of these in your order:

S1: Powerful and fast enough but designed only for the World's Fair, too large and troublesome for revenue service. Perfect engine for a HSR which never happened.

This actually wasn't done for the World's Fair; the timeframe doesn't fit.  The Fair was the ideal place to show off the world's most magnificent passenger engine for two years, though: the point should be noted that the whole rigmarole needed to get the locomotive out to Long Island and back was repeated twice during that period and the engine presumably run in testing during the 'off season'.

As you note, there was really no place in the United States other than Wisconsin that actually used an 84" wheel to anywhere near its potential.  That the situation in running wasn't viewed as utterly intolerable can be seen from the (frankly rather obvious in hindsight) refusal of PRR to retrofit four pairs of 80" drivers and revise the equalization and frame fits of the lead and trailing trucks to test the engine with a less wild running gear.  And revise the front end to something with better gas entrainment at low back pressure (with or without Kiesel nozzles) -- perhaps something with vanes of appropriate contour and a lower position on a blast stand than what we see in the pictures.

The trick (as noted in part in the other thread) was to find some service that actually used the high-speed capability more gainfully.  Or to install something like a Lewty booster to enhance the low-speed acceleration without compromising high-speed running (this puts the 'engine' of the booster on the frame of the locomotive, and minimizes both the unsprung mass and the high-speed motor efficiency of anything on the driven axles...)

T1: Top tier world class dumpster fire ...

As far as I know, nothing about this design was major-league unfixable, including the aspects of Franklin gear that were carried over into B-2 use.  We know two things now: that reducing the stroke of the oscillating cams wasn't the answer for broken valves (although it certainly compromised performance, for reasons either the English commentator or I don't seem to have quite recognized) and some combination of changed valve-spring strength/variable rate and research by 1948 had definitively solved the breakage issue in PRR's mechanical-department opinion, going forward.  The engines were demoted to second-tier service without making the recommended changes (whether or not the 'fix was in' by then to make them out to be dogs, I don't know, of course) and after that the whole don't-care momentum was on, for all big steam -- that's not a dumpster fire as much as a 'perfect storm' of changing costs and priorities.  Would you blame Boeing for the unworkability of the 2707 because the aircraft world evolved differently?

,

... firebox grate area was too small; the whole project was building upon a misinterpretation of the test of PRR#5399, hated by some PRR high-ranking officials.  Failed to challenge any EMD product after 1945

Firebox grate area could have been bigger.  Feed it the fire expected when designed and you'd have no trouble in service.  Put Snyder preheaters on it and you might just have solved some of the issue, too.  Yes, I would have tried using a Baldwin-recommended grate size (as NYC clearly did in the same war years with the C1a) and indeed that was an assumption at the T1 Trust ESC until Dave Griner worked out how many changes would be needed to provide it.  On the other hand, even a quick computation of the weight increase involved in a 100-104' grate with all the bell-and-whistle circulators, plus an external Cunningham circulator and the aforementioned Snyders, gets you dangerously into Lima-style six-wheel-trailer territory.  Not that that's a bad thing, mind you: just that in a world that turns as quickly and definitively to diesels even in the presence of near-perfected conventional steam, that would have constituted even worse overkill than the small grate provided.

Although I have not made the claims here, I am not at all a subscriber to the 'sine-wave superheater was the only improvement on 5399' theory.  There were reasons PRR did not go wholesale to these, or to Houlet-type elements in general, and you can easily work out what some of them would be (igniting any piston-valve lubricants at high horsepower being among them).  Remember again that Cover et al. were not fools, no matter how their work may have misfired at times, and sometimes what was not built does not mean a demonstration of what was not tried.  I am reserving many of my comments on the four-valve Franklin system until more of the practical simulation and construction of the arrangement for 5550 has been conducted, as I think there is far more to poppets even of this type than has been proven so far.

Note also by implication that if the Niagara was superior to E7s, the C1a would have been 'more superior' to them (as the prospective water rate was lower and the unrefuelled range was sufficient to make the full distance from Harmon to Chicago without a stop at Sidney and 'fast enough' refuelling as with Milwaukee-style 'coal shoots' to increase the necessary tender content of fines, which would have resulted in that many absolute minutes of schedule reduction or available padding...).  By 1948 practical magnetorheological conjugation becomes practical (and the knowledge mainstreamed through a wide range of industry) so even if high-speed slip turned out to be a real problem in that design, full solutions were available short of automating the independent brakes by engine for control.

But as you readily understand from 'reading between the lines' in NYC practice, there was as much or more animosity to steam in place of 'more diesels' at NYC after 1948 than there could have been objection to high-speed passenger steam from a large fixed-by-then investment.  "Dieseliners" became a major marketing pitch ... years before the whole Young/Perlman era wiped big steam out definitively in all contexts.

Q1: Abandoned by the management before built due to better performance available from PRR Class J1, PRR wasted her potential as a dual function engine. Racked up only 65,000 miles in total

The real problem here is that the locomotive was the wrong approach to a 'lab rat', perhaps by having to fill the wrong set of shoes with the wrong combination of acquired wisdom and technology at just the wrong era.

What you had was the same sort of approach that had worked so well for the AMC on C&O: scaling up a successful 8-coupled approach by 5/4 to get something nominally synergistically better.  (Ignoring the subsequent advantage of de-scaling the result to 4/5 with some of the 'lessons learned' to produce some of the best Berks in the world, but note how this for good or ill became 'rolled' into the T1 project... throwing out dual-service effectiveness in the bargain...)

As we've discussed, the right answer to what PRR was actually asking involved little more than applying Voyce Glaze's theories on balancing to a slightly glorified M1.  Even without going to a two-axle trailer (which might have been needed to steer the chassis effectively, as on the N&W J, with the required stiff compliance for low overbalance correction, even without accommodation of better radiant-section uptake means) this could have been done to great and useful effect.

Instead, PRR used the 'backward' configuration that up to then was the agreed 'standard version' of duplex drive in the design world (even the ATSF duplex design used it, so you have to conclude it was canon or there was something in the Depression-era water).  That combined with the decision to have no less and no more than 5 driver axles was really 'it' as far as practical advantages other than reduced augment were concerned -- for some first-principle and some emergent reasons.  As one example: PRR pretty well solved the issue of where to hang the rear cylinders without compromising maintenance access to them, something B&O either couldn't or didn't do ... but at the cost of radically reducing the ability to cure issues of inertial augment by having the mains for the rear engine so far outboard.  Steam circuit couldn't possible produce 'automatic action' across even the useful running "powerband" of a locomotive with 77" drivers even if its 'dual service' freight service was in M&E or (later) container service not subject to the arbitrary 50mph freight restriction.  It was unfortunate in the extreme that the development work fell precisely into the 'donut hole' between the imperative toward reducing reciprocating inertial mass and the adoption of the logical follow-ons from Eksergian and the retrofit 'kits' of the mid-Thirties that worked so well for roads like T&P and C&NW.

Q2: The most successful duplex, very powerful and fast for freight service but overall operating cost is too high, the rate of water and coal consumption is very high.

Built as war babies, and while wartime traffic incentives were 'on' meaning it could run long distances around its practical horsepower peak, there was likely no better engine that didn't have worse effect on the track.  (At least not one that wasn't articulated and very, very, very expensively (in union terms) heavy... neither of which PRR management would care for.

Much of the maintenance problem with the locomotives would likely have been fixed with two comparatively simple things: better materials to increase the service interval on the cylinders and valves, and development of a proportional activation for the otherwise-excellently-conceived antislip system.  We could further presume that by the time significant boiler replacement was required, mainstream adoption of welded boiler shells would have been available (not just to Alco) and this would in turn have handled the issue with leaks at the waist.  Had these things survived to the TrucTrain era where they could actually have used high horsepower with restricted hours at low speed and command more premium coaling policies, history might have a very different conclusion.  But the locomotives surely don't qualify as failures in the sense they have been condemned in 'railfan history', if anything deserve it less than the T1 which we have increasingly seen to be propaganda at best.

S2: Overweighted when built, but very close to success. Got ditched when Pennsy was low-key as broke as a beggar in 1948

You are getting carried away by flights of fancy.  Look carefully at what actually happened to PRR in 1947, and more specifically why it concerned them.  A large part of the concern involved uncompensated wear in the wartime years, and loss of the large guaranteed fast traffic in those years, and they were very, very far from "broke" at that point, just receiving a potent wakeup call about their up-to-then-a-bit-complacent attitudes and priorities.

And the S2 was a clever design, but in the hands of people who sometimes couldn't run T1s it was a bit like one of the turn-of-the-century fast ocean liners: a disaster just waiting to happen with irremediable damage on comparatively little provocation.  You see this from 'outside' in the correspondence preserved at the Hagley: they are all gung-ho on how effective this new wonder locomotive concept is going to be, and debunk 'conventional wisdom' on some of the misconceptions (like low starting torque due to 'slip') ... but oh brother, watch the tune change as the staybolts start to pop!  (And no, there is no market basket of incremental fixes to get around that; as subsequent history regarding Westinghouse sales of direct-drive steam turbines effectively shows.)

The answer even in the Forties was a V1 layout, two 'articulated engines' powered separately by their own turbines, making better use of the capacity of a Q2 boiler.  (Apply all the changes listed above to the slightly-modified boilers used on V1s...)  This failed not so much for hard technical reasons as a somewhat-delayed recognition that you either needed to haul an ocean or arrange expensive water-treatment dosing (that your crews would likely botch necessary consistency in application of) if you wanted a range much more than one division without stopping for a good, solid fill.  Whereas a bunch of Fs, with no augment and no piddling caustic substances onto the track, and no statistically-detectable explosion hazard, could make it across four or five without refueling, and (in that era) without even a need other than 'political' to come to a complete stop (and recharge and release, etc.)

PRR: Management was chaotic since WWII, better let me take over, asap

Unless you were born and raised in Philadelphia, or were extremely successful in the financial markets (much more so than even Mr. Young!) you had little chance.  I would argue (with some pain, as I have ties to Philadelphians) that proximate cause of the true dumpster fire that was PC was the inherited red-team management, including that cost-cutting mouthpiece from down south.

However, if your idea of sound management reflects, say, the suggestions you made in the other thread on postwar passenger service -- you'd have thrown the balance sheet in the toilet far faster and probably far more irremediably than any potential PRR management team would, let alone could have done.  What you show is precisely the sort of 'fighting-the-last-war' thinking that actually produced the Great Streamliner Fiasco of the late '40s and '50s, almost all of it money irrevocably and uselessly thrown away on something that just wasn't going to work in that era of the real world as it came about.  And yes, we could logically have fixed all the underlying issues (given 20/15 hindsight, something we usually aren't provided far enough in advance) but that's not PRR management, it's thousands of people at all the levers of power in American industry, society, and government, sometimes doing things that would guarantee loss of career if implemented in a kind of suicidal and counterintuitive series.

And just as a heads-up: sometimes English expressions are faux-amis.  Perhaps the best, or at least terrifying, misuse of idiom in my long and fruitful experience with the language, and only partly conceivable as a malapropism, is

All she needed was a longer track for her to spread the legs!

That is certainly NOT what you meant to say -- the expression is 'stretch her legs' and what you actually said means something ... not the same, not the same at all.

  • Member since
    February, 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 21,497 posts
Posted by selector on Thursday, November 29, 2018 3:08 PM

I could buy 'spread the rails', as the duplexes were wont to do in places, but....spread their legs?

Indifferent 

Naaaaaaaawww. 

  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 3,389 posts
Posted by Miningman on Thursday, November 29, 2018 3:31 PM

Give Jonsey a break... he was likely thinking of ' spread her wings' meaning to let run free. 

My native students say 'Skoden' to which the response is 'Kayden'

( lets go.. ok then) 

  • Member since
    September, 2003
  • 6,366 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, November 29, 2018 7:05 PM

Miningman
My native students say 'Skoden' to which the response is 'Kayden'

Sounds like the Swedish in this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1TlAd6M-xU

 

  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 3,389 posts
Posted by Miningman on Thursday, November 29, 2018 7:56 PM

Earlier this year, the term 'Skoden' was painted on the water tower in Sudbury. Police say a 31-year-old man has been arrested and charged in connection with the incident. (Waubgeshig Rice/CBC)

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 634 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Friday, November 30, 2018 5:20 AM

Miningman

Give Jonsey a break... he was likely thinking of ' spread her wings' meaning to let run free. 

My native students say 'Skoden' to which the response is 'Kayden'

( lets go.. ok then) 

Thank you for the kind words Miningman. But I blame you and your silly dumpster fire. gif! I was trying to please everyone but once again it didn't work, the trick of legs spreading never work neither for obvious reason. Devil Now your dumpster fire is being put out by Overmod with his essay; worth reading but I hope people keep in mind that who was the person or company treated the duplexes like a dumpster fire. DrinksSmile

Overmod

 

 

 
PRR: Management was chaotic since WWII, better let me take over, asap

 

...the suggestions you made in the other thread on postwar passenger service -- you'd have thrown the balance sheet in the toilet far faster and probably far more irremediably than any potential PRR management team would, let alone could have done.  

Post it here one last time for the record.Confused

"No Please. No need to spend your precious time writing a 1400-word essay to analyze how my fantasy is divorced from reality, how historically inaccurate it is etc. Especially when I told you clearly in the message I sent you that I firmly believe that my "900 miles fantasy HSR between NYC and Chi-town" is mechanically and economically impractical just a few days before I post it on the forum.  Any person with a basic knowledge about HSR knows its limits.

If you really think I want to run the PRR, a dead company, like a monarch, I suggest you take a longer vacation or "sit back, relax and have a glass of something fine ..." Drinks

I am going to ride a train which is pulled by Bee birds to the moon with one compass and two oranges in my pocket. Yes right now. 

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the theme. CoffeeSmile, Wink & Grin"

https://www.2kgames.com/cultofrapture/article/benmauro

  • Member since
    September, 2003
  • 6,366 posts
Posted by Overmod on Friday, November 30, 2018 11:40 AM

Jones1945
... I firmly believe that my "900 miles fantasy HSR between NYC and Chi-town" is mechanically and economically impractical just a few days before I post it on the forum. Any person with a basic knowledge about HSR knows its limits.

Ah yes, but the fun is figuring out how it might have been made mechanically and economically practical within credible recent history.  You went a long way toward doing that, but some of the details needed revision to make them work.  In another place you said it was a 'rough draft' -- take this as some thoughts about a first revision of something that may be of considerable interest. 

Now, I'd admit I wouldn't route the true-HSR line by way of Washington as it would involve some of the same compromise that Amtrak currently has with LD New York to Chicago traffic.  It would be tempting to use the old South Penn 'artifacts' including the tunnels for the high-speed route from the Pittsburgh area east ... but there's a problem: the South Penn as designed and initially surveyed was not a high-speed route but a relatively low-grade one and has waaaaaay too many curves and hiccups in its routing to be very quick.  Likewise it might be fun to use Truesdale's Lackawanna Cutoff, but that has too many curves where it matters, although the construction and architecture sure have an attraction, and concrete is cheap to produce and place in northeastern Pennsylvania.  (If it helps, routing through roughly the area of Sunbury produces what I think the likeliest orientation of what is essentially a high-speed bridge line with much construction on viaduct and large fill or in tunnels).  That leads me to wonder if there is a sensible place for a 'new city' that is a junction point between several logical major depot or terminal points in the East and the high-speed mountain line, that could be served by regional and private trains as well as 'feeder' HSR.

The 'there's your trouble' moment is that you seem to think I'm criticizing you when I edit one fantasy plan into another.  The only really critical takeaway there is that you might not want to mock the dead, as you did the management of PRR, without having something alternative that reasonably does things better than they did ... which the fantasy plan, in some respects, manifestly would not. 

Thing is, once you've gotten government buy-in on retaining passenger service, much of the remaining discussion becomes both 'facilitated' and potentially interesting ... as the designs for high-speed ground transportation did when the Johnson administration threw money at it in the '60s.

One question that might have come up in a 'government HSR network' would be the question of gauge.  I don't know if anyone remembers 'the case for the double-track train' (amusing as it was to the professional engineers!) but it might have been possible to implement something of the kind for late-'40s ideas of high speed ... not that dissimilar from war-booty Breitspurbahn implementations (we did it with rockets, why not with trains? Wink).  Who wouldn't love the ability to run three-level restaurants, real entertainment cinemas, cruise-ship suite amenities and parallel drive-off automobile carriers all in the same consist?  (And taking a leaf from White Star, plenty of Trail Blazer coach-class "steerage" at high speed, too...)

Now we should take up what the western side of the postwar passenger service might involve ... trains like the CZ prominently figuring into it, in my opinion, and perhaps a similar de-emphasis of pure speed on many of the nighttime stretches.  Remains to be seen how you and others make this come out!

If you really think I want to run the PRR, a dead company, like a monarch, I suggest you take a longer vacation or "sit back, relax and have a glass of something fine ..."

You were the one who said you could do a better job than the 'fools' ... I'm just pointing out some objective problems with getting into that position. Big Smile 

Note carefully why I suggested that the 'first' alternate-history change had to be how the Government separated the HSR project from anything the PRR would be doing with either its own money (as with the New Main Line just before the Depression started) or with RFC 'pump priming' (as with expansion of the electrification from Philadelphia to Washington and Harrisburg/Enola).  Now I would expect that one thing that would be well under way under 'federal control' by VE Day would be the formal PRR electrification to Pittsburgh, including in all probability great progress on the tunnels, and none of that would apply to the HSR route that would have to be used.  So we have a 'privatized' PRR proceeding in the late '40s to an optimized freight-driven future (with some optimized-profitable passenger, probably a mix of regional and Trail-Blazer-like coach trains in large part) with much of the 'postwar streamliner push' being either stopgap up to the opening of the true fast passenger lines, or (as some have claimed for our Avelia Liberty trains) built to full high speed standards (or easily retrucked to accommodate them) and operated "as fast as possible" in some fun places like west of Fort Wayne or between AY tower and Elida for a few interesting years...

One thing that bears examination: We know the 1943 proposal involved locomotives with quill drive and 428A motors (along the lines of what was used in the DD2) in several different sizes.  Presumably some, but not all, of these would have been built by the end of the War; a question of some technical interest might be what the subsequent history of motor (electric locomotive) design might have been (1) during the years when PRR actually tried modernizing to feeble success, and (2) in the 1960s when expedience gave us the E44s (and Metroliners) and perhaps the cautionary tale of the Jet EP5s as too much in too frail a box...

All this of course being colored more than a little by the 'joint standards' developed as a kind of more modern version of the USRA locomotive committee for the HSR network.  That all by itself is a promising, interesting subject.

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 634 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Friday, November 30, 2018 5:50 PM
Overmod
Ah yes, but the fun is figuring out how it might have been made mechanically and economically practical within credible recent history.  You went a long way toward doing that, but some of the details needed revision to make them work.  In another place you said it was a 'rough draft' -- take this as some thoughts about a first revision of something that may be of considerable interest. 
 
Actually, it only took me about less than 2 hours typing on and off with random thoughts. Thinking and writing are one of my hobbies when I have nothing better to do, it is not something that makes me feel stressful or a goal that I want to achieve before the deadline; I am not writing a movie script either. I can understand that your thought to write a long reply like this, and you are right, making something impractical or some people describe as a dream; come true can be fun, but but but but but sometime your tones really sound not that friendly to me (and not only me), maybe it’s me too being sensitive or it’s a language barrier thing, I don’t know and I don’t mind since a lot of bad things could happen like “mud” hit the fan within a situation like this. I see this forum as a community, so I really don’t mind sharing my feeling openly, I hope you don’t mind as well! Some people say communication on the net is the same as in person, I think it is absolutely wrong, there is a reason we have facial expressions and body language, isn’t it? let’s move on.
 
Speaking of the HSR thing in reality, not the fantasy world. The first step would be the US government willing to further upgrading the NEC, including all the things you mentioned about the status of NEC and the problem the Metroliner encountered and many many things we discussed within this 11-page thread. It is too easy to write a fantasy story of it, even the story is not too divorced from the reality, especially if you willing to help. But between New York to Chicago, the two colorful, legendary cities I really like, is 1000 miles of road, river, lake, farm, and hill. IF a 156mph S1Devil is not allowed to appear in my fantasy stories, I can only change the plot and location to LA and SF or NEC adding Boston into it. Not really interested this plot to be honest. I think you notice that I seldom talk about PRR’s services between Washington D.C to New York, didn’t you? In any fantasy world, we can change the plot and setting to fit what we want, including making all passenger of US to hate high-speed travel, but this is not I want.
 
 
 
 
Overmod
Now, I'd admit I wouldn't route the true-HSR line by way of Washington as it would involve some of the same compromise that Amtrak currently has with LD New York to Chicago traffic.  It would be tempting to use the old South Penn 'artifacts' including the tunnels for the high-speed route from the Pittsburgh area east ... but there's a problem: the South Penn as designed and initially surveyed was not a high-speed route but a relatively low-grade one and has waaaaaay too many curves and hiccups in its routing to be very quick.  Likewise, it might be fun to use Truesdale's Lackawanna Cutoff, but that has too many curves where it matters, although the construction and architecture sure have an attraction, and concrete is cheap to produce and place in northeastern Pennsylvania.  (If it helps, routing through roughly the area of Sunbury produces what I think the likeliest orientation of what is essentially a high-speed bridge line with much construction on viaduct and large fill or in tunnels).  That leads me to wonder if there is a sensible place for a 'new city' that is a junction point between several logical major depot or terminal points in the East and the high-speed mountain line, that could be served by regional and private trains as well as 'feeder' HSR.  
 
Interesting, in my last fantasy “plan”, the construction of  HSR involved different RRs and was pushed by the postwar US government, including N&W and NYC. The most ideal plan, which I considered earlier is that the whole HSR is built upon existing tracks of different RRs, the main reason is to save cost, and it will become a national project that “UNITED” America, but as you know I didn’t pick up the RR hobby again since two years ago. I need a map showing all the track covered different area between Pittsburgh and Washington. Too much afford for a fantasy story!
 
 
Overmod
The 'there's your trouble' moment is that you seem to think I'm criticizing you when I edit one fantasy plan into another.  The only really critical takeaway there is that you might not want to mock the dead, as you did the management of PRR, without having something alternative that reasonably does things better than they did ... which the fantasy plan, in some respects, manifestly would not.  
 
Not quite understand this part. If I am working or writing an official proposal like how to improve page views of Classic Trains forum or how to make the forum more user-friendly, inviting people to openly discuss it, of course I will accept criticisms for improvement. In real life, after a direct “one man/woman one vote” election every two years, I was elected to lead a board with 20 members to handle (voluntary) letters, emails, phone call from 600+ properties owners andtenants criticisms, complaints and suggestions and supervise the properties management company to solve the problem accordingly. But I am here for sharing train stuffs aka have some fun; my fantasy stories really didn’t deserve such special treatment. I feel like I shared my daughter’s drawings of a T1 and you used a metal ruler to measure it from front to back and from top to the bottom and then requested me to take the drawing to the laboratory to see if the color on the paper exceeded safety standards. I really felt like this. But I really don’t mind, let’s move on (I don’t understand the "mock the dead" part, mind specify? Sound like something important. Indifferent)
 
 
Overmod
…One question that might have come up in a 'government HSR network' would be the question of gauge.  I don't know if anyone remembers 'the case for the double-track train' (amusing as it was to the professional engineers!) but it might have been possible to implement something of the kind for late-'40s ideas of high speed ... not that dissimilar from war-booty Breitspurbahn implementations (we did it with rockets, why not with trains? Wink).  Who wouldn't love the ability to run three-level restaurants, real entertainment cinemas, cruise-ship suite amenities and parallel drive-off automobile carriers all in the same consist?  (And taking a leaf from White Star, plenty of Trail Blazer coach-class "steerage" at high speed, too...) Now we should take up what the western side of the postwar passenger service might involve ... trains like the CZ prominently figuring into it, in my opinion, and perhaps a similar de-emphasis of pure speed on many of the nighttime stretches.  Remains to be seen how you and others make this come out!
 
IIRC, there was a post or a website about a 3 rails track system which allows the train to be bigger, wasn’t there were some discussions around US and UK in the past about the gauge and the size of trains? The concept of Breitspurbahn was definitely festinating, it deserves to have appeared in my fantasy story! A double size Broadway Limited or 20th Century Limited, even in the real world it would be very attractive, but the power it would have needed and historical facts make them only can appear in my fantasy story or sci-fi movie.Cool
 
 
 
Overmod
 You were the one who said you could do a better job than the 'fools' ... I'm just pointing out some objective problems with getting into that position. Big Smile 
 
You know it was some jokes I am sure; I had zero experience running a railroad and didn’t start learning RR stuff in the states since 2016. The term was used when I was trying to say something like “if PRR do this or don’t do this, it was no other than telling the whole world they are the world-class fool”, can’t remember the details, but It just like people criticize political figures, a mezzo-soprano or a movie artist which doesn’t mean I am saying I can do better than that anyone. I did make some very harsh criticisms to the long gone PRR management after reading the history of how they handle things since the first attempt to replace their K4 aka the birth of S1. So many things they have done didn’t make sense. And I think you are the one who had solid evidence of PRR’s attempt to make T1 a “hopeless engine”.
I want to reply to the last part of your message, but my health status doesn’t allow me to use the computer for too long. I love the way you handle this “incident” and I think we should move on. If you want to join my Railroad Fantasy Club, please fill in the application with your imagination. If you want to discuss how to make a 1000 miles HSR possible in the 1940s in a 100% serious manner, let's do it and see you in the next postCoffeeSmile, Wink & Grin

 

 
  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 3,389 posts
Posted by Miningman on Friday, November 30, 2018 7:05 PM

In that case may I suggest a new thread for the Fantasy HSR Chicago- New York. 

With the straight as an arrow, no grade CASO, the NYC has a big leg up. Only terrain difficulties would be making the tunnel Detroit/Windsor bigger ( no prob, I have crackerjack miners) and some kind of pre arraigned custom clearance so zip delays at the borders. 

  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 3,389 posts
Posted by Miningman on Friday, November 30, 2018 11:02 PM

Thinking we should lighten the mood a bit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh0ess0Qzxk

 

  • Member since
    April, 2001
  • From: Roanoke, VA
  • 1,648 posts
Posted by BigJim on Saturday, December 01, 2018 7:08 AM

What the heck is an "HSR"?
Sorry if I am lazy in asking, I just can't swim through all of the reams of blibbity-blab. Tongue Tied

.

  • Member since
    September, 2003
  • 6,366 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, December 01, 2018 7:44 AM

"HSR" is "high-speed rail" (which I am using in the modern sense as meaning a line meant to run at greater than 125, and properly greater than 150 (now 160) mph.

There will probably always be a few threads that have more than the usual 'blab' content.  I enjoy alternative history (and high-speed steam) so I like the sort of future Jones1945 proposes, fleshed out in detail.  Is there much harm in that?

  • Member since
    September, 2003
  • 6,366 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, December 01, 2018 7:52 AM

Miningman
Thinking we should lighten the mood a bit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh0ess0Qzxk

Actually, I prefer this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_f6GHbe-mdU

(which if I recall correctly was actually the original A-side for the record that had "In The Still of the Night" on it -- and if you like Western-Swing-derived rock and roll as much as I do, you'll understand why.)

I want to discourage any disparagement of Jones; he's upset because he thought I was disagreeing with him, when little could be further from the truth.

  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 3,389 posts
Posted by Miningman on Saturday, December 01, 2018 11:03 AM

Nobody is disparaging Jones, I'm attempting the mediator role with a little humor. 

I'm wondering how long you would last at a Steampunk convention before they gave you the bum's rush whereas Jones would be still oohing and in awe and exclaimining 'wonderful'. 

The best side of Capitalism is it's ability to have tremendous imagination and its following innovation. So the best of both worlds, both Jones and Overmod.

Yet it is stunning beyond belief that Japan came out with the Bullet Train in 1964 while we were wondering 'Who shot the Passenger Train'.

 

  • Member since
    February, 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 21,497 posts
Posted by selector on Saturday, December 01, 2018 11:26 AM

By 1964, most households in N. America had a well-used automobile at their disposal.  That meant passenger rail, already in rapid disuse, was moribund by the time the Japanese thought to build their bullet trains.

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 634 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Saturday, December 01, 2018 11:30 AM

Star(Updated/edited Dec 2, 2018)Star

Overmod
Actually, I prefer this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_f6GHbe-mdU

(which if I recall correctly was actually the original A-side for the record that had "In The Still of the Night" on it -- and if you like Western-Swing-derived rock and roll as much as I do, you'll understand why.)

I want to discourage any disparagement of Jones; he's upset because he thought I was disagreeing with him, when little could be further from the truth.

Not upset but feel a little bit annoyed to be honest, as I pointed out in my first very brief reply on Nov 30, 2018. But I want to emphasize that I don't mind what happened between you and me, I let it go, wish we can move on and I hope I can keep sharing ideas and thoughts with you in the future! Thumbs Up

I think you note reader doesn't like these "blibbity-blab" materials and I didn't see any regular forum member wants to join or already joined, besides you and me. So I think there is no point to start a fantasy HSR thread in this forum, as Miningman suggested. I would join the discussion if other member wants to start it and I will keep update my 100% fantasy plan in my profile page for fun. Remember when we suggested Peter create a post for the France Steam Engines Photo not long ago; where is the thread now and how many replies that thread got? 

Moreover, I remember within this 12-page thread, we had discussed similar things a few months ago like how to shorten the travel time and the schedule of PRR's NY - Chi-town named trains, and the possibility to strengthen or extend the Fort Wayne race track, you clearly stated that you didn't see there is a need or place to do so when schedules like the Broadway Limited and 20th Century were carefully designed to fit the patron's pace of living in 1930s-1950s, and there is no room to upgrade the Fort Wayne race track.

If we want to discuss the possibility of such HSR thread in a serious manner, like making a feasibility assessment for an already Dead RR company from almost 50 years ago, it will require a lot of researches and resources, definitely not a two-man project and I am not interested and don't have the energy to do it. I hope you understand.

Miningman

Thinking we should lighten the mood a bit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh0ess0Qzxk

Wow, Miningman, you are really good at lightening the mood. Thumbs UpBow

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwfLQRpiMnw

 

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 634 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Saturday, December 01, 2018 12:18 PM

Miningman

Nobody is disparaging Jones, I'm attempting the mediator role with a little humor. 

I'm wondering how long you would last at a Steampunk convention before they gave you the bum's rush whereas Jones would be still oohing and in awe and exclaimining 'wonderful'. 

The best side of Capitalism is it's ability to have tremendous imagination and its following innovation. So the best of both worlds, both Jones and Overmod.

Yet it is stunning beyond belief that Japan came out with the Bullet Train in 1964 while we were wondering 'Who shot the Passenger Train'.

Thanks for the kind words, Vince.

For the future of this forum's sake, I think the following opinion worth to be noticed. I have been joining and leaving different internet forums or groups on and off for 20 years; just like many senior forum members here. Sometimes people didn't get someone's humor or jokes due to cultural differences and it would cause misunderstanding and unnecessary drama. That's why I mentioned the differences between communication in real life and internet forums (or even email). There is a reason why Overmod thought someone was low-key disparaging me, and you didn't notice there was any. 

Anyway, I think we should move on and go back to the topic:  "PRR Duplexes and Experimental Engines Discussion" CoffeeWink

  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 3,389 posts
Posted by Miningman on Saturday, December 01, 2018 12:34 PM

It is doubtful and that no more than a very very few would join in and it would be dominated by 2. That's just the reality, folks simply do not have the time nor inclination. 

But!...If you put all the responses, threads and comments together from day 1 regarding the T1's, S2, and so on you would have a book and a thick one at that, from many many contributors, many who are no longer with us or active any longer. An awful lot of it was top notch reading. 

It's like a sedimentary deposit and I suspect a few but not many go back and analyze all of it, or at least parts.

There is man made 24 hour time which we live in, Geological time which is barely comprehensible ( what's 2.2 billion years?) and then there's Classic Forum time, where a few of us pop in and out and a smaller core of regulars. 

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 634 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Saturday, December 01, 2018 1:38 PM

Miningman

It is doubtful and that no more than a very very few would join in and it would be dominated by 2. That's just the reality, folks simply do not have the time nor inclination. 

But!...If you put all the responses, threads and comments together from day 1 regarding the T1's, S2, and so on you would have a book and a thick one at that, from many many contributors, many who are no longer with us or active any longer. An awful lot of it was top notch reading. 

It's like a sedimentary deposit and I suspect a few but not many go back and analyze all of it, or at least parts.

There is man made 24 hour time which we live in, Geological time which is barely comprehensible ( what's 2.2 billion years?) and then there's Classic Forum time, where a few of us pop in and out and a smaller core of regulars. 

 

Exactly. Earlier when there was only me and Overmod exchange ideas on PRR's topics here or other thread most of the time, I imagine I am actually riding on the Broadway Limited in the late-1960s where only less than half of the train is occupied. Though I am still enjoying the adventure on Classis Trains forum when I am typing this message.

I have the same thought about the "Book" idea, I will keep updating my threads, let's see how it goes. I still want to create an index for this thread. CoffeeShy

By the way, there is a thread on Trains.com forum discussing T1 and Franklins poppet valve gear. Some Ideanew discoveries and analysis, please take a look if you are interested; a must read for Pennsy fans: 

An assessment of the benefits of the application of Franklin valves on the PRR K4 and T1 classes

http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/740/t/272776.aspx

 

 

  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 3,389 posts
Posted by Miningman on Saturday, December 01, 2018 8:15 PM

Jones-- There is a lot of stuff in older threads. Compiling all that together would be quite a challenge. 

Darth Vader stuff
Posted by Miningman on Saturday, May 20, 2017 7:40 PM

I use this picture as part of a slide show that acts as a screen saver at work ( not all of it is trains, lots of Field School stuff and students, that sort of thing)

What is striking is that absolutely everything in this picture is gone. The T1, the K4, the heralded Trail Blazer tail car. The tracks are gone, the platform is gone, the passenger trains are gone. Not only that but the PRR is gone. 

Been trying to reconcile that for a long time but the math does not come out right...ever. I know what I'm told as to why, and it's not as if I'm not trying my darnest to understand and keep an open mind. 

There is more to it than what we think or know.

 Darth Vader stuff I tell 'ya. 

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 634 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Sunday, December 02, 2018 12:38 AM

Miningman

Jones-- There is a lot of stuff in older threads. Compiling all that together would be quite a challenge. 

Posted by Miningman on Saturday, May 20, 2017 7:40 PM

I use this picture as part of a slide show that acts as a screen saver at work ( not all of it is trains, lots of Field School stuff and students, that sort of thing)

What is striking is that absolutely everything in this picture is gone. The T1, the K4, the heralded Trail Blazer tail car. The tracks are gone, the platform is gone, the passenger trains are gone. Not only that but the PRR is gone. 

Been trying to reconcile that for a long time but the math does not come out right...ever. I know what I'm told as to why, and it's not as if I'm not trying my darnest to understand and keep an open mind. 

There is more to it than what we think or know.

 Darth Vader stuff I tell 'ya. 

You are right, Vince. I think the Google search engine is good enough to play the role. But I will pick some interesting threads and simply put the link of them in the index for reader's convenience. Thank you for your contribution. 

I believe as time goes on, the number of people who want to search for things about Pennsy will keep slowly decreasing. Not sure if 5550 will change the trend or not, but the basic general premise is 5550 successfully get built. However, we will never know what will happen next hour. From today to the year 2030, a lot of things could happen, "A castle can only have one king". If the castle is the earth, who is the king right now?

I found the original links of this post "Darth Vader stuff" on google -  http://cs.trains.com/ctr/f/3/t/263084.aspx -  and I read all replies in the thread, I found some very profound or meaningful discussions. I do believe the demise of passenger train service of America was not a 100% natural cause; It was probably an organized and premeditated Homicide. Yes, there was no doubt the conventional steam engine was not as economical as other motive power thus it was only about time for them to disappear in the railway system. but the post-war US government never distributed enough money and resources to develop new motive power for the American's passenger train.

It was very obvious that The post-war US government chose to concentrate the nation's resources for aviation and automobile development, including construction of matching facilities like Airports and Highway. But for passenger trains, they looked on with folded arms, waited for it to die. There was a project like UAC-TurboTrain but it was negligible and lack of matching facilities, compared to the SST projects. After the failure of SST projects in the late-1960s,  the US government still had no plan to develop High-speed rail system like TGV or Shinkansen. US citizens didn't have many choices except buying and driving a car or taking the plane for long distance travel, unlike people living in Europe and Japan, or even developing countries like China in nowadays, travel on high-speed trains is a common thing for them or you can say, part of their daily life. 

Lack of modern trains development was supposed to boost the sales of America brands automobiles and related products after WWII when the States was still leading the automobile industry. But after cheaper car and products from Japan and China became mainstream stuffs in the market, it hurts the national interest of America. What the Darth Vader will do to his rival will inevitably change the fate of humanity. 

 If the photo Miningman posted was taken in 1947, the Trail Blazer in the pic was probably hauled by the PRR S2 #6200 or another T1. Imo, better than anything you can ride in America nowadays. 

SUBSCRIBER & MEMBER LOGIN

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

FREE NEWSLETTER SIGNUP

Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter