PRR 1361

[ACY Tom]

I don't get it.  Why all this talk about welded conical boilers?  That's the way you build a U.S.R.A. locomotive.  So if you want to build a brand new engine with a conical boiler, you might as well build an Erie K-5.  PRR K4s boilers were not conical.  They were wagon top.  Just how one would fit a conical boiler onto a frame that was built for a wagon top boiler is beyond me.

If you're going to go the all-new-boiler route, you might as well just build an all-new frame and tender and everything else.  Then it could be built to the most modern standards, as the British Pacific was.  That idea has surfaced before, but a New York Central J was the usual subject.  Let's face it:  1361 and 3750 are both approaching their 100th birthdays (the first K4s was built in 1914, wasn't it?).  How many parts do we replace before it becomes another engine altogether?  Frankly, the Altoona folks proved several years ago that they were out of their league when it came to operating a steam locomotive.  To be fair, it is possible that newer members have arrived to replace the people responsible for the original damage.  But I personally would not donate a penny to these folks UNLESS I had assurance that they would put the engine back together and let her be a cosmetic display.  Waiting for the money to arrive for a full restoration means a long wait.  Parts will be lost.  Knowledge will be lost.  And ultimately, the engine could be lost.

For God's sake, let the old girl have a rest!    

[Juniatha]

@ ACY

I invite you to re-read my text , I have added an addenda especially for your ingenious sharp curving past the point .  

To quote >> Waiting for the money to arrive for a full restoration means a long wait.  Parts will be lost.  Knowledge will be lost.  And ultimately, the engine could be lost.<<

Sounds stringently logical , as the saying goes :  where there is a will there is a way .   I'd even write " .. the engine will be lost and ultimately fans will be lost and it will all go down in history where it all get's lost , so when and if the money finally arrives nobody knows what it was meant for and why -

Tragedy !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPcsMMEMbfw

>> For God's sake, let the old girl have a rest! <<

There's a point in it , I'd agree .  It's incredible to think the K4s story all started a *century* ago - and still the engine looks as good as an original Ford Mustang ..

oh-oh-ok , one of my mindboggling associations , I know , it’s all about just staying alive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKdVq_vNAAI

and don't fear the reaper

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUO_5EALZoM

or it will be the end

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htemHKtbkU0

Oh-my-god , Nico

 

Quick , gotta quit

 

= J =

[ACY Tom]

Hi Juniatha (and others):

   Just to be clear, I'd like to say I'd LOVE to see 1361 or 3750 run again.  But the K4s is such an iconic loco that it scares me to think we could be putting her at risk just because we want a thrill.  It's the historian in me that wants to protect the engine.  Actually, both K4's probably are carrying a lot of parts that originated on other locos, and PRR's interchangeability practices might have allowed parts from other K4's, as well as L1's, G5's, H8/9/10's, E6's, and possibly other classes, to find their way onto both existing K4's.  I'd be willing to bet money on it, in fact.  So a few replacement parts would actually be in keeping with established PRR tradition. 

   But it scares me to think that 1361's boiler is, at this moment, in storage about sixty miles from me.  The running gear is supposedly in Scranton or Altoona, and the tender is someplace else --- maybe with the running gear or maybe not.  I want to see those parts united once again, and once that happens, a decision can be made as to the feasibility of restoring the engine.  To be seen as a cosmetic display, or to be run is a question to be asked and answered later.

   Other posts of yours tell me you know an awful lot more about the engineering aspects of this than I do.  I admire and respect that.  You or technical people like you can make the judgments as to the appropriate level of restoration.  But remember George Washington's axe.  The head's been replaced 10 times and the handle's been replaced 20 times, but it's the same axe.  I don't want that to happen to either K4s.

   I do think your proposal for a new state-of-the-art welded boiler is a good one.  But I'd feel better about the whole thing if the running gear were also new and state-of-the-art.  And the tender, for that matter.  As I suggested before, I would want to see some serious vetting done on the management team that oversees the project, or the team that operates the K4s, whether she's "original" or a modern copy.  That might be the most important factor of all.  Compromising that engine is like destroying old Penn Station.  And what idiot would ever suggest actually doing such a thing?