PRR Duplexes and Experimental Engines ( S1, S2, T1, Q1, V1 etc.)

[Miningman]

It's a very haunting picture. Something so important, so advanced and so permanent just vanished off the planet. Inglewoods railroad importance is gone now too, the platforms, all the PRR track. 

Why it all ended has been discussed in several different lights and ways but the fact remains this scene was all gone in short order. 

[Jones1945]

After almost a week of an involuntary break due to some unknown technical difficulties, I can log in to the forum again with the help of Classic Trains' customer service! Now I can post in our lovely community again!

Thank you very much to Overmod, Miningman and Dave replied to my emails and helped me to kill some time during the break! I will reply to all of them in detail as soon as I am available! I want to say that I miss every single forum members of Classic Trains! Even though we might not agree with each other on some topics! 

I wish our regular forum members will be able to continually support our forum --- our lovely community in the future by posting and sharing ideas without encountering any troubles. I understand that many of our forum members are retired or semi-retired, they contributed a lot to the country and deserve to have a free railroad community. I believe the management of Classis Trains would agree with this point. I wish I still have the chance to exchange ideas with many regular members very soon!

Thank you very much!

 

Back to the topic of this post.

Here is some non-copyrighted photo of the PRR S2 #6200 6-8-6 6900hp direct-geared steam turbine locomotive from Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania online archive, enjoy!

Westinghouse 6900hp turbine(forward) 

(Touched up publicity shot)

2nd and 3rd Drivers (68 inches) with the gearbox.

Why a steam booster engine was not equipped? #6200 was a testbed, her 6-wheel trucks were big enough to house any steam booster engine. Even though Pennsy probably didn't want to use a steam booster engine of the never happened 4-8-4 steam turbine engine, it still worth a try especially when PRR had some spare booster engines removed from locos like T1 #6111 and some K4s. I heard that some mechanical engineer working for PRR asked the same question at the time. 

[Overmod]

It does appear that Jones1945 has gotten through to the 'new' Customer Service (Penny, I believe) and they have almost immediately resolved the login problem.  Others who have been unable to log in might want to confirm that things are copacetic.  A big THANK YOU to Penny and to whoever she contacted that has worked so well and so fast to restore access!

 

A common issue regarding the Franklin Booster/Bethlehem Auxiliary Locomotive sort of 'power adder' is that the practical value of its starting aid was not worth the additional capital and maintenance costs and special training to use effectively.  Perhaps the best discussion of this aspect I have seen is in Fryer's book on experimental steam, regarding the testing LNER conducted.  No one seems to have made a multiple-axle booster work very well at high speed (not unlike the various flavors of geared truck used on diesel-hydraulic road locomotives) and without that, applying a typical booster to one of the three axles on the S2 (almost certainly the one at extreme rear) would contribute little more than the expected "one driver axle equivalent" to low-speed TE ... I think that would help very little with the drafting issues due to turbine slip at the required power to start trains proportioned to what the S2 design was supposed to do.

 

My own opinion is that what should have been tried was a variable nozzle or baffle arrangement that would bypass some of the large exhaust plenum and hence draft induction in that four-stack arrangement.  Even blowing bypassed steam to atmosphere would be preferable to inducing stay bolt failure... which is really the Big Issue the PRR mechanical department had with the design over the critical years.

 

Better than a 'Franklin Booster' would be a Lewty booster running on that bypassed steam -- which would have no problem driving multiple axles right up to six off a suitably compound-expansion engine probably hydraulically.  But a nuclear lower-cost and probably better approach would be to provide either a magnetorheological clutch or Bowes drive somewhere in the reduction geartrain to allow the turbine to spin up at low road speeds, or provide some sort of torque multiplication at starting and low speeds.

[Miningman]

The PRR certainly supported the S2 and was very proud of it. Then suddenly turned its back on the whole project, not because it was hopeless and beyond successful modification but because steam/coal was over in every way with them. 

[Jones1945]

Overmod

It does appear that Jones1945 has gotten through to the 'new' Customer Service (Penny, I believe) and they have almost immediately resolved the login problem.  Others who have been unable to log in might want to confirm that things are copacetic.  A big THANK YOU to Penny and to whoever she contacted that has worked so well and so fast to restore access!

Absolutely agree! I also note that some forum members who can't access other forums under Trains could log in again since yesterday. I wish this is like a turning over a new leaf before 2019.

 

Overmod

Better than a 'Franklin Booster' would be a Lewty booster running on that bypassed steam -- which would have no problem driving multiple axles right up to six off a suitably compound-expansion engine probably hydraulically.  But a nuclear lower-cost and probably better approach would be to provide either a magnetorheological clutch or Bowes drive somewhere in the reduction geartrain to allow the turbine to spin up at low road speeds, or provide some sort of torque multiplication at starting and low speeds.

 

Interesting idea. The S2's massive tender, roomy space under the smoke box and boiler as well as both massive 6-wheel truck provided enough space to install a Lewty booster system( I am searching for a detail drawing of it ) or any modified booster engine.

I think any method which could have shortened the time for her to reach 30 mph or above for the economic reason was worth a try. If PRR didn't drop the project of S2 and V1, they might have to rebuild a whole new engine and all the things they learned from the S2. The new engine, probably the proposed but never fully built V1 might have answered all the questions regarding other disadvantages of S2.  But V1 was designed for freight service, wasn't it? 

A drawing showing the Lewty booster system:

https://www.martynbane.co.uk/modernsteam/ldp/usa1978/ga-large.html

 

LIFE (magazine)

PRR's rendering of V1

[Jones1945]

Miningman

The PRR certainly supported the S2 and was very proud of it. Then suddenly turned its back on the whole project, not because it was hopeless and beyond successful modification but because steam/coal was over in every way with them. 

 

Nice poster! Miningman. Yes, there are quite a lot of Patent drawings specially made for the S2 project; different kinds of gears and devices were designed to fix her problems. But due to an unprecedentedly financial problem of Pennsy in 1947, they couldn't afford an experiment at such a scale and dropped it. The last publicity event the S2 attended was the Chicago Railroad Fair 1949.

Her name was not in the promotional flyer but there are some photographic evidences and a very short clip showing she was in the fair. 

[Jones1945]

After some complaints (of me) about how difficult it is to find a "new old" pic of PRR S1 #6100, someone sent me a pic of S1 which I have never seen. (Thanks a lot) Probably taken not long after the first overhaul of S1 around 1942 in the early morning (5:33 am) if the train was not late. The de-skirted big engine was seen stopping at Lima, OH station, heading to Fort-Wayne.

Lima Station was the 13th station (westbound) of the Trail Blazer; judging from the skirted PB70ER lounge baggage (betterment) car behind her, S1 was hauling the Trail Blazer westbound in this photo, 60 miles away from Fort Wayne, 200 miles away from the Chicago. I believe a photo of the Lima Station in the early 1940s is rare as well.

http://www.trainweb.org/usarail/lima.htm

Amtrak Lima Station (June 1978)

 Betterment car, the PB70ER lounge baggage and POC70R observation car specially built for the Trail Blazer. (https://digital.hagley.org/)

LIFE 1939

I wish I know the model of the Radio on PRR's Betterman cars... I want to search for one for my house's decoration!

[Jones1945]

Pennsylvania Railroad Class S1 (#6100) 6-4-4-6 "The Big Engine" in Trainz (Simulator)

This video showing the Pennsylvania Railroad S1 #6100 "The Big Engine" in TrainZ Simulator hauling The Trail Blazer (1360 tons) a deluxe all-coach train, inaugurated between New York and Chicago via Pittsburgh, PA. 

The 3D model itself was created as freeware by a railfan from quite a long time ago and the original config file of the engine was borrowed from an SP GS-4, if you are interested, you could download it on the download station for free. After various updates from different parties in the last few years, it has a new engine file now and I updated it, as well as the skin of it in 2018.

Since there is no suitable US route for the test, the Settle-Carlisle Railway was chosen. Please note the gradient changes. After editing the engine config file of it with historically correct data, the engine is capable of reaching 100mph within 14 mins with 1300 tons passenger stock behind her on the Settle-Carlisle Railway northbound, starting from Skipton station.

This video is an attempt to pushing the engine to the limit and to find out how fast the PRR S1 #6100 can go on a real route, therefore all speed limits were ignored. The Train in this video is running on "realistic mode" with functions like "auto fireman" activated and "derailment" deactivated. 

After editing the config file of it with historically correct data, the engine showed wheel slipping when starting at full gear and full throttle. I keep an open mind on these suspected bugs or glitches. If you have any question or tips about how to improve the realism of the train, please feel free to leave your comment, thanks for watching!

[Jones1945]

Oh hi ... I have been struggling and fighting with the annoying flu virus for almost a week. Finally, I feel like I am 95% recovered. If only there was a heavy train can run over all those ugly fluffy little virus and their ugly dirty protein spike thing or let me throw them all into the firebox!!

Anyway, I found this "Transitioning of the design of PRR Q1" pic when I managing the railroad folders on my computer. A lazy Photoshopped pic for this mysterious experimental engine. 

Set one:

 

---

Set two: The Q1 itself. 

I believe all of these drafts and drawings came from PRR. If you know their background and source, please kindly let us know. All of them have missing details.

The top one showing a 4-6-4-6, probably made in the early 1940s. The streamlining shared some common characteristics with PRR S1 like the decoration around the headlight and the S1-style one-piece huge front end nose and the bow shape neck between the bullet nose and the front end as well as the air deflector around the smokestack. 

The middle one is another 4-6-4-6 drawing. Compare to the drawing on the top, the front end design was changed where the headlight was placed above the smokebox door. it had a higher smokestack, a S1-style skyline of the boiler, the teardrop-shaped marker light was replaced with square shape number board. The shape of the cab window is almost identical to the four streamlined K4s of 1940 and 1941.

The last one is a 4-6-4-4 scaled down from the 4-6-4-6 design. At least 3 ft shorter than the 4-6-4-6 version, we can see even more redesigning on the front end, the skyline as well as the size trailing truck. Some of the detail of the streamlining doesn't match the final product. None of them have the dog house on the tender. 

It seems that the firebox was also scaled down from the 4-6-4-6 version. But I don't have, and probably could never find more detail about all the design changes and the reason behind it of this project. 

Q1, together with S1,T1s and Q2s were Pennsy's epic answers to the concept of the superpower and Northern 4-8-4s. But Q1 was born in wrong times and didn't become the successor of PRR M1s. She was outperformed by some much simpler and trouble-free 4-8-4s duel-service engines like N&W Class J.

 

[selector]

Middle one is really a 4-6-4-4.

Edit: Did you mean the middle loco in the first set?  If so, you are correct.  I failed to see that there are only two images.

[Jones1945]

selector

Middle one is really a 4-6-4-4.

Edit: Did you mean the middle loco in the first set?  If so, you are correct.  I failed to see that there are only two images.

 

Thank you very much for pointing it out. Extra info is added to improve the typesetting. : -)

[rrlineman]

With all discussion on what could have been or why the PRR did this or that, I remember some years back in the PRR Keystone someone did a similar study. One of the things this person did was to create the R2. A steam engine that used the S2's boiler with either a expanded M1a chassis or a drivetrain from one of the Santa Fe's big 4-8-4's. He even had a painting to show what it would have looked like along with his proposed Specs of speed, HP-TF etc. Does anyone remeber this article??

[Jones1945]

rrlineman

With all discussion on what could have been or why the PRR did this or that, I remember some years back in the PRR Keystone someone did a similar study. One of the things this person did was to create the R2. A steam engine that used the S2's boiler with either an expanded M1a chassis or a drivetrain from one of the Santa Fe's big 4-8-4's. He even had a painting to show what it would have looked like along with his proposed Specs of speed, HP-TF etc. Does anyone remember this article??

Thanks for the useful information, rrlineman. I remember there is at least one, probably only one article on Keystone Magzine about Q1 (but not even one about S1). I wish more railroading document and historical material will come out of the surface (Not only Pennsy) before they were forgotten or storing in different universities for another three hundred years. 

By the way, do you mean using the Q2's boiler on a M1a chassis? We have some very intensive discussions no long ago about why PRR "skipped" the development of Hudsons and Northern. The M1s were so powerful and reliable that this class could have been the only Mountain class which is epic enough to fit into the "Super Power" category. If Pennsy wanted to make 4-8-4s their prime power, there would have been no difficulties for them to build one or a fleet of it.

I think I can call it a consensus that PRR was so ambitious to make something more than any RRs can imagine. But turn out all these new prime steam power development plans had a lot of set back and didn't go according to plan.

I believe Q1 was designed base on the concept of CN/Grand Trunk Western 4-8-4s of 1938, but Pennsy wanted to make it a lot more powerful than it and let it become the successor of M1s.  Both class using 77" drivers, streamlined and was a dual-service engine.

 

locomotive.wikia.com

 

[Jones1945]

30 years earlier before the arrival of PRR T1 prototype (#6110, #6111), we had PRR E6sa #1092 using an experiential rotary valve designed by O. W. Young. According to Wiki, It was actuated by regular Walschaerts gear (?) and was not a completely unsuccessful experiment.

 

PRR #1092 in 1912:

PRR #1092 in 1937: 

Source: HAGLEY DIGITAL ARCHIVES

 

 

[Jones1945]

Liberty Limited powered by the PRR S1 #6100 in April 1941 (78 years ago). Meanwhile, B&O is winning the game with their diesel-powered Royal Blue and Capitol Limited in the Washington D.C - New York and Chicago market.

The Train of Tomorrow vs The Train of PRR's Tomorrow! 3600hp vs 7200hp! It was a good game well for all railfans anyway!

[Jones1945]

This new video is from my family's hobby YouTube channel. I think I found the answer regarding the capability of PRR S1. 

 

= 138 mph = PRR Class S1 Duplex Steam Locomotive

"We heard about a lot of tales and rumors about how fast the 7200hp PRR S1 could go in the past. I think It is the right time to show the whole world about her power, her top speed, and her capability to break any speed record created by any other steam locomotive in the world at any time. 

- 100 mph (06:42)

- 120 mph (10:58)

- 130 mph (12:26)

- 138 mph (16:45)

Pennsylvania Railroad was a responsible railroad, they encouraged safety driving and paid attention to the comfort level of their premier train. Therefore, The PRR, as well as many other great railroads in the States like MILW and NYCentral never claimed any speed record during and after World War II. 

But with the help of computer simulation, like Trainz, we could show you which steam engine was supposed to be the fastest steam engine ever made in human history! In this video, PRR S1 is hauling a historically accurate 1939 standard 8-car consist of the "Broadway Limited". I added one 13 double bedroom Pullman sleeper (re-skinned from a sleeper made by  K&L Trainz) on it for heavier loading. The engine's config file has been carefully tuned for historical accuracy. 

Just like other speed test video, the train won't obey any speed limit on the route and the "derailment" function is off. The feature of "Auto Fireman" is activated, so maybe you can make the PRR S1 run even faster with better fireman skill! Do you wanna try? :P

Thank you for watching!"

 

[Jones1945]

The is PRR form 109-J 1948 provided by Charles Crawford, the official spec of Q1, Q2, S1, S2.