CSSHEGEWISCH-- All true, no doubt. If you listen to the lecture by Al Churella ( found on the thread ' Al Churella on the PRR and why it was different') you will hear that they actually went quite rouge and ignored what they were obligated and ordered to do by legislative bodies. They just went ahead and did it anyway.
Its interesting to think if there was a path forward for the PRR after the war. There must be one scenario that works and keeps the PRR whole. Also I suppose today's Norfolk Southern could be somewhat what the PRR becomes. No Penn Central, no Conrail, ever happens. Still the PRR.
With 20/20 hindsight we can put together some way they survive.
PRR started going south right after WW2. It's rather well known that it took an operating loss in 1946 but still paid a dividend, quite probably from income from N&W dividends received and foolish borrowing. Steam operations would have become more expensive as suppliers left the parts business and replacement parts became custom (expensive) orders. Aside from the J-1's and M-1's, PRR did not have a lot of modern steam. A merger with N&W in the ICC regulation era would have been a legal ordeal and was probably unlikely. Defying the ICC was not a viable legal or political option. Poor management was also a factor.
The fact the PRR was a cripple, lost its identity under Penn Central and promptly went bankrupt says it all. Diesels did not save them. Some say it postponed the end but I say bullocks to that. They would have done better retaining modern steam, merging with N&W and held out for 10 or 15 years before Dieselization. The eventual outcome could not be any worse. They could have also defied the ICC , fight with delaying tactics in courts. What they gonna do.. send the Army? Nationalize all those assets? Just keep it going and to heck with them, give them lip service or pretend.
Jones1945I always want to calculate the total cost Pennsy spent on Erie-builts, Centipedes, Alco PAs, Sharks and compare to the operation cost of T1s and Q2s assuming they continued serving until the late 1960s to find out which appoach was more expensive. But I am too lazy to gather all the data for a meaningful answer. Anyway, problems of 52 T1s were solved as early as 1947 which is equal to 338000 DBHP, 104 units of K4s or 169 units of a 2000hp diesel engine! 26 units of Q2 equal to 202800 DBHP or 102 units of a 2000hp diesel engine.
Anyway, problems of 52 T1s were solved as early as 1947 which is equal to 338000 DBHP, 104 units of K4s or 169 units of a 2000hp diesel engine! 26 units of Q2 equal to 202800 DBHP or 102 units of a 2000hp diesel engine.
On a HP basis you may have something, however, on a availability basis even as bad as the non-EMD locomotives were, they were hands down more available than any steam locomotives.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Miningman Great photo album link. The lineup of power at Cincinnati Union is amazing. Really captures an era... Very little, even many of the Diesels, survived much longer after these photos. Some show T1's and Q2's already in dead lines. PRR Erie builds, Centipedes, Sharks both freight and giant passenger versions all on borrowed time really, looking for a place to fit and be useful.
Great photo album link. The lineup of power at Cincinnati Union is amazing. Really captures an era...
Very little, even many of the Diesels, survived much longer after these photos. Some show T1's and Q2's already in dead lines. PRR Erie builds, Centipedes, Sharks both freight and giant passenger versions all on borrowed time really, looking for a place to fit and be useful.
Yes, that is a very good photo album on Flickr with tons of photos of B&O, C&O, PRR, NYC, N&W... etc. If Pennsy kept using their T1s and Q2s, I believe they would have had a longer service life than all those diesel engines you mentioned!
Flintlock76 Sometimes I wonder if among other things one of the reasons the PRR got in money trouble after the war was their going absolutely nuts buying diesels from everyone who had one for sale. EMD, Baldwin, ALCO, Fairbanks-Morse, you name it, and in a big way, instead of just buying a few of each for evalutation and then going for the best that suited their purposes.
Sometimes I wonder if among other things one of the reasons the PRR got in money trouble after the war was their going absolutely nuts buying diesels from everyone who had one for sale. EMD, Baldwin, ALCO, Fairbanks-Morse, you name it, and in a big way, instead of just buying a few of each for evalutation and then going for the best that suited their purposes.
I always want to calculate the total cost Pennsy spent on Erie-builts, Centipedes, Alco PAs, Sharks and compare to the operation cost of T1s and Q2s assuming they continued serving until the late 1960s to find out which appoach was more expensive. But I am too lazy to gather all the data for a meaningful answer.
Jones 3D Modeling Club https://www.youtube.com/Jones3DModelingClub
The Norfolk & Western profited by the Pennsy's example. When the time came they bought Geeps and didn't bother with any other road diesels. Any other diesels the N&W wound up with usually came by way of merger with other 'roads.
Oh well. At least the Northeastern railfans got a great show when many of the PRR "also-rans" wound up hauling commuters on the North Jersey Coast Line.
That's also where the K4 Pacifics made their "last stand."
Great photo album link. The lineup of power at Cincinnati Union is amazing. Really captures an era.
The photo of the T1 hauling frieght 'down in the weeds on the low line' is stunning. 55?9 looks to be in superb condition, not all banged up and holes poked all over the place. Haunting images. Could study these pictures for hours. Really like the Columbus Ohio station picture with the NYC and PRR locos all over the place. Busy spot!
Some photos of prime power of the "Fleet of Modernism" at the Lima Station:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jjyoungjr/33063303950/in/album-72157645605285036/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jjyoungjr/33447106005/in/album-72157645605285036/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jjyoungjr/33448637165/in/album-72157645605285036/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jjyoungjr/32528206483/in/album-72157645605285036/
Thank you for watching.
Thank you for the detailed and informative response, Overmod. I note post-war trucks (GSC 41-N-XX?) were used on the demo car in the 1939-40 World Fair, while Pullman's products were still using GSC 43-R passenger truck. The design of mini-skirt streamlining and the wider but shorter window was also adopted on PRR's post-war P85b passenger car. Judging by its high capacity, I guess the demo car was assigned to the highest demand all-coach trains after it was bought by Pennsy. Let see if I can find one more pic of it in service!
PRR Betterman car P70KR (1939)
Pressed Steel Car Company, PRR P85C (1940)
PRR P85B (1948)
Source: http://prr.railfan.net
Jones1945 Collection of Stephen A. Thomas
Collection of Stephen A. Thomas
This deserves a little more recognition in context, especially with PRR building specific high-speed coaches 'for itself' in this era (about which I hope Mr. Klepper, for one, will add some comment).
Here is Pressed Steel advertising its premier product in 1940. Their production of passenger cars was shut down by the WPB in 1942, but something interesting was that they never resumed domestic passenger-car production, even for the 'streamliner boom' of the 1940s.
There is an 'accounting' of Pressed Steel production in this PDF.
One of a kind, PRR P85C #4045
Publicity photo
Collection of Stephen A. ThomasIn 1940 New York World Fair before purchased by Pennsy.
Overmod Well, there was a future after Normandie: it included the United States (far faster) and the France. These partook directly of the 'streamlined' style that characterized so many of our postwar 'luxury' trains. Think carefully about why Normandie was not promptly floated and restored after the fire. (And it is interesting to think about the interiors that would have been built into [url=https://oceanlinersblog.wordpress.com/2017/10/22/the-ships-that-never-sailed-part-2/] Yourkevitch's version of the Bretagne, Blue Riband speed and 100,000+ tons at the same time...)
Well, there was a future after Normandie: it included the United States (far faster) and the France. These partook directly of the 'streamlined' style that characterized so many of our postwar 'luxury' trains. Think carefully about why Normandie was not promptly floated and restored after the fire. (And it is interesting to think about the interiors that would have been built into [url=https://oceanlinersblog.wordpress.com/2017/10/22/the-ships-that-never-sailed-part-2/] Yourkevitch's version of the Bretagne, Blue Riband speed and 100,000+ tons at the same time...)
How could I forget the Big U and SS France of 1961 my dear friend? But I skipped them in my previous post because they were not fabulous enough for my taste. There were really fast and modern at the time but the styling of the late-1950s is not my cup of tea. I would have jumped on the SS France of 1910, a much older and slower four funnel steam liner instead of the new SS France if I could travel back in time. But RMS Lusitania is still my favorite four tunnel steam liner.
Regarding the total loss of SS Normandie, I believe there are some reasons why you raise the question in this way. So, besides all the historical facts and official answers, please let me think out of the box for once. Allow me put it in this way: was it possible that Charles de Gaulle or the Franco-British Union administration actually wanted to get rid of the USS Lafayette (Normandie) instead of saving it? SS Normandie was never a commercial success; relied on government’s subsidies since day one, it was, and it would be a major negative equity of "The Government of the French in exile"; Let alone she already lost the Blue Ribbon to Queen Mary before the Battle of France, even though the Normandie had already been equipped with new propellers and various mechanical upgrades.
On the other hand, French folks needed the help from British to reclaim the WHOLE nation from the Nazi, there was no point to keep a ship that would have continuously compete with British ship the Queen Mary after the war. Sinking the USS Lafayette on purpose probably was an unofficial deal between Charles de Gaulle, Churchill and the British monarch at the time; which was 68,500 tons of steel, tons of luxury furniture, fittings and equipment. These were some of the best material "the Government of French in exile" could offer.
The best way, or probably the only way to find an excuse to scrap the SS Normandie was creating an accident since it would have triggered or disheartened the France folks or even the general public in the States.
The never-built SS Bretagne’s “radical design” by Vladimir Yourkevitch would have been a success if the French Line corrected all the mistakes they had made on the SS Normandie. Increase the proportion of 2nd Class capacity and improve the quality of facilities for lower class passengers. But the conventional design was chosen; I see it a totally wasting of time.
Norman Bel Geddes 's streamlined ocean liner
Overmod You're forgetting that there was an intermediate stage between Juan Trippe' flying boats and Freddy Laker: the whole stillborn SST revolution that was developing even before the 707 and its ilk became competitive to long-distance trains.
You're forgetting that there was an intermediate stage between Juan Trippe' flying boats and Freddy Laker: the whole stillborn SST revolution that was developing even before the 707 and its ilk became competitive to long-distance trains.
The development history of civil aviation is not something I am good at or very interested in. However, I still have this thought that Class I railroad on the North East didn’t try hard enough to compete with all kinds of transportation including the Airlines. Despite tons of resources gained from the wartime traffic, we couldn’t see any innovative transportation project like the Weems Electric Railway you shared with us (thanks). We discussed the reason on this topic before which included the US government’s post-war transport policy and different limitations, mechanically and financially of different RRs system. But I am still Up in arms about the demise of long-distance passenger train services in the States.
In short, I wish there was an HSR being built in the 1940s, connecting Chicago, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Washington, D.C., New York and Boston for my beautiful, fabulous S1, T1, S2, Streamlined K4s, Super M1c, PRR R2 etc to show off their speed!
Norman Bel Geddes 's seaplane
M636CReasonably authoritative sources suggest the Muskingum River had an aluminium skin on a steel frame.
All the authoritative print sources I know (e.g. Welsh et al. The Cars of Pullman) that mention Muskingum River say it used stainless panels over Cor-Ten framing. I was not aware of any Pullman car of this era that used aluminum over steel; the Geo. M. Pullman was full aluminum construction, as I think were the various UP streamliner Pullmans of this era (please, someone check Kratville), and the stuff chief engineer Parke describes in the 1939 SAE paper was Cor-Ten framed with stainless panels clipped on, the structure that has not 'worn well' in preserved equipment.
If you have detailed sources, ideally with photographs or detail drawings, that substantiate aluminum for Muskingum River, please provide them. You would not have said 'aluminium' without good cause.
Jones1945 A rare photo showing Pullman Muskingum River, an all-stainless steel 2/1/1 buffet lounge attached to a PRR F.O.M car: https://www.flickr.com/photos/barrigerlibrary/12349544773/ A scale model of Muskingum River:
A rare photo showing Pullman Muskingum River, an all-stainless steel 2/1/1 buffet lounge attached to a PRR F.O.M car:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/barrigerlibrary/12349544773/
A scale model of Muskingum River:
Reasonably authoritative sources suggest the Muskingum River had an alumininium skin on a steel frame. I know Arthur Dubin said it was stainless steel....
Peter
Jones1945WELCOME TO THE BLOODY FUTURE.
Well, there was a future after Normandie: it included the United States (far faster) and the France. These partook directly of the 'streamlined' style that characterized so many of our postwar 'luxury' trains. Think carefully about why Normandie was not promptly floated and restored after the fire. (And it is interesting to think about the interiors that would have been built into [url=https://oceanlinersblog.wordpress.com/2017/10/22/the-ships-that-never-sailed-part-2/]Yourkevitch's version of the Bretagne[/quote], Blue Riband speed and 100,000+ tons at the same time...)
They all went in the hole long ago, and I think it could be argued that even the best of the postwar streamliners had less 'luxury' than prewar trains like the ATSF de Luxe, even if there were better bells and whistles and lights and air conditioning.
You're forgetting that there was an intermediate stage between Juan Trippe' flying boats and Freddy Laker: the whole stillborn SST revolution that was developing even before the 707 and its ilk became competitive to long-distance trains. That's not for want of trying (notably on the part of the British) to develop luxury 'liners of the sky' with multiple decks, sleeper berths and cabins, and other amenities -- note that the 2707 in particular was predicated on large numbers of the equivalent of 'steerage' to make the numbers -- but you'll note what it took to get the 747 to pay "best", and it wasn't first class and observation glass noses on the upper deck. And you'll notice that getting there increasingly quicker became increasingly deprecated as a design criterion ... even today, when we could have 54-minute service between any two places.
BaltACD Let me interject some 'ambiance' to the times to something that was taking place outside the railroads but highlights some of the thinking at the time.
Let me interject some 'ambiance' to the times to something that was taking place outside the railroads but highlights some of the thinking at the time.
Nice Video, Balt. Interesting to see comments were inclined to love the SS Normandie more than the RMS Queen Mary. I love steam powered Ocean Liner since I was a child and my father always mentioned about Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth and the Titanic. The Former never impressed me anyway. They were good ships but not progressive enough for my taste. If I can afford a first-class ticket in that era, why would I travel on the second most expensive ship instead of the best one? The SS Normandie was not only the most expensive one in terms of construction cost, but she was also beautiful, revolutionary from inside to outside.
Nevertheless, the competition between SS Normandie and RMS Queen Mary was legendary. We couldn't experience the same style of traveling anymore. Limited trains powered by the steam engine plus steam powered Ocean liner was the best package of traveling. But both types of transportation were replaced by the Iron birds.
WELCOME TO THE BLOODY FUTURE.
PRR K4s #5471 leading the Trail Blazer. It was probably a 8-car section of the mentioned train. A "semi-streamliner" ? (1940)
Betterment car POC70R coach-observation carrying the original Trail Blazer keystone plate. (Winter, 1939)
The Trail Blazer in early 1940s, A 12-car consist leading by K4s (S1 can't be that small).
A rare color photo of PRR's betterment car, probably a P70KR coach, using the same interior color scheme as the Pullman lightweight sleeper of 1938.
Note the chairback of the reclining seat was rather short! The staff was changing the direction of the seats.
I am not sure if this is a pic of the rebuilt twin unit dining car. Note the light trough above the windows.
3rd rail If everyone wasn't in such a damned hurry these days, this would be the way to go! I took Amtrak City of New Orleans in 1994, It was about 14 hours late, not counting my connection being 24 hours off, due to a stoppage at Englewood. Amtrak did put me up in a hotel in CHI for the night, but I still missed one day/night in New Orleans. Still was a good trip...
If everyone wasn't in such a damned hurry these days, this would be the way to go! I took Amtrak City of New Orleans in 1994, It was about 14 hours late, not counting my connection being 24 hours off, due to a stoppage at Englewood. Amtrak did put me up in a hotel in CHI for the night, but I still missed one day/night in New Orleans. Still was a good trip...
For tourist-oriented train trains like City of New Orleans of Amtrak, speed is never a big problem, just as many long-distance overnight trains in the past like UP's the City of LA, Santa Fe's Super chief or PRR's South Wind, their target customer were families, retired people, individuals taking holiday break or tourists from different states and countries. Unlike those trains served the North East Corridor like the PRR's Congressional or Senator, their target costumer were businessman, executives or political figures and their retinues. Time is money in business world, so passenger on these train not only expected the trains arrive on time, they didn't want to spend too much time on transportation neither.
Even a 2 hours and 50 mins service schedule for NY to D.C still wasn’t fast enough to save the last trump card of PRR form the challenge of regional airlines, speed is no doubt an essential factor of RRs competitiveness.
Glad you caught that... although no, I did write 'Milwaukee' thinking about consists pulled by 4-4-2s becoming obsolescent quickly and this necessitating larger locomotives. Forgetting utterly about lightweight consists in the process.
Overmod Note that this is right at the time period when UP and Milwaukee were discovering that separable full-size consists were preferable to lightweight motor trains of the future.
Note that this is right at the time period when UP and Milwaukee were discovering that separable full-size consists were preferable to lightweight motor trains of the future.
I assume you meant to write "UP and Burlington", although there a couple of other roads using fully articulated trainsets.
Todd
Overmod Note that this is right at the time period when UP and Milwaukee were discovering that separable full-size consists were preferable to lightweight motor trains of the future. I suspect that is part of what guided PRR not to make the attempt; I can't really imagine a lightweight Broadway even with full sleeper accommodations, and of course the Trail Blazer is what actually introduced lightweight modernism in the 'right' context for PRR.
Overmod I can't imagine any rebuilding of PRR steam of that era that would support a 15-hour timing, even with the shorter route (vs. NYC). And a duplex 'rightsized' for one of those lightweight consists would be too small for alternative trains, but a T1 would be overkill at any practical increased speed outside the electrification (which presumably would have gone to Pittsburgh on the original '30s priority schedule if EMD locomotives weren't adopted).
OvermodOn the other hand we all have failed to find pictures of the proposed Pennsy '30s E8 ... no, that's not a typo, it would have been an oil-fired 84"-drivered Atlantic probably quite similar to a Baldwin version of the Milwaukee A. I'm surprised there is no mention of this being 'preferred' power for the PRR lightweight train service. I suspect if anyone can find pictorial references you can.
Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania
By the way, there is one thing I forgot about the Fleet of Modernism, which is the power of the fleet. GG1 and R1 were the power within the electrified territory, they were powerful and fast enough to represent the new fleet, but there were only two "new"steam train; PRR #3768 and S1 #6100 powered the fleet outside the electrified territory. K4s without streamlining was the prime power of this “modernized” fleet even after four streamlined K4s and two duplex prototypes put into service by 1942. So, Unlike MILW’s Hiawatha or NYC’s 20th Century, the Fleet of Modernism wasn’t a fleet 100% streamlined, from the engine to the car, west of Harrisburg!
Note that this is right at the time period when UP and Milwaukee were discovering that separable full-size consists were preferable to lightweight motor trains of the future. I suspect that is part of what guided PRR not to make the attempt; I can't really imagine a lightweight Broadway even with full sleeper accommodations, and of course the Trail Blazer is what actually introduced lightweight modernism in the 'right' context for PRR.
I can't imagine any rebuilding of PRR steam of that era that would support a 15-hour timing, even with the shorter route (vs. NYC). And a duplex 'rightsized' for one of those lightweight consists would be too small for alternative trains, but a T1 would be overkill at any practical increased speed outside the electrification (which presumably would have gone to Pittsburgh on the original '30s priority schedule if EMD locomotives weren't adopted).
On the other hand we all have failed to find pictures of the proposed Pennsy '30s E8 ... no, that's not a typo, it would have been an oil-fired 84"-drivered Atlantic probably quite similar to a Baldwin version of the Milwaukee A. I'm surprised there is no mention of this being 'preferred' power for the PRR lightweight train service. I suspect if anyone can find pictorial references you can.
I found this little pic from the online archieve of the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania. This is actually the first time I found a color rendering of the "Unit Train" project, which was supposed to upgrade the Broadway Limited in early 30s leading by Loewy but cancelled and replaced by his new idea: the Fleet of Modernism.
Aug. 17, 1936
"Staff meeting of VP's Charles D. Young, John F. Deasy and Walter S. Franklin considers the situation of Western railroads operating one or two "show" trains, like the Zephyr, Hiawatha, or Chief at very high speeds, reversing the trend where Eastern railroads traditionally had the edge in speed; urge placing two articulated lightweight two-car sets on the Broadway Limited, including Advance and Progress now running on the NYC; could bring weight down to under 450 tons, vs. 660 tons for existing heavyweights, and run Paoli-Chicago in 13:00; urges PRR to buy or build lightweight cars. (CMP)"
Sep. 14, 1936
"Pres. Clement presents memo on lightweight trains to Board; proposes a program to build nine lightweight trainsets, two of 12 cars for Broadway Limited, two of 10 cars for Liberty Limited, two of 12 cars for American/"Spirit of St. Louis", and two of 13 and 14 cars for The Congressional. (CMP)"
Sep. 28, 1936 (The "Mistake")
"Electro-Motive Corporation makes a formal proposal to furnish a 3,600 HP two-unit road passenger diesel that can haul the Broadway Limited between Paoli and Chicago, cutting the total running time from 16:30 to 15:00 flat. (CMP)"
Nov. 21, 1936
VP Charles D. Young in a memo to VP's John F. Deasy and Walter S. Franklin questions why they are planning for 102 seats in the new Broadway Limited, when the train only carries 30-35 passengers; suggests running lightweight equipment as an entirely new train without extra fare. (CMP)
http://www.prrths.com/newprr_files/Hagley/PRR1936%204_15_15.pdf
A conceptual design of an observation car, note there is no door and couper at the front end.
Bonus:
May 4, 1937
Gen. Douglas MacArthur departs New York on The Broadway Limited en route to the Philippines; MacArthur has been made Field Marshal to command the Philippine Army, which is distinct from the U.S. forces in the Philippines. (PR, Smith/FDR)
http://www.prrths.com/newprr_files/Hagley/PRR1937%204_15_15.pdf
Update was made on the first page, adding 88 lightweight car purchased from Pullman Standard in 2 lots from 1939-40, base on the information in the book "The Car of Pullman" by Joe Welsh.
I will confirm it by checking the actual Pullman car number from the Pullman Car list when I have time. If you have information about this topic, please feel free to post them here, thank you for your attention!
I forget this one: OEW 330 gas/electric car #4663, even though she didn't carry a complete F.O.M scheme. ( Without golden strips on both side)
Before refurbishment.
(source: http://prr.railfan.net/ )
Aug 21, 1941 from HAGLEY DIGITAL ARCHIVES.
Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!
Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter