KCSfan 2. Many enginemen never bothered to learn how to operate the T1's and continued to run them like the K4's they were used to operating. This was the primary reason for their reputed "slipperiness". As Feltonhill well knows, given a bit of sand and a light hand on the throttle when starting, a T1 could walk away with the heaviest PRR passenger consist without slipping. I had the good fortune to see T1's running at track speed on the PRR main line east of Valpariso, IN and believe me they were an awesome sight to behold. Mark
2. Many enginemen never bothered to learn how to operate the T1's and continued to run them like the K4's they were used to operating. This was the primary reason for their reputed "slipperiness". As Feltonhill well knows, given a bit of sand and a light hand on the throttle when starting, a T1 could walk away with the heaviest PRR passenger consist without slipping.
I had the good fortune to see T1's running at track speed on the PRR main line east of Valpariso, IN and believe me they were an awesome sight to behold.
Mark
I was fortunate to see the T1's at speed on the St. Louis line around Effingham Illinois. They were really something to see running 80mph or more with a long passenger train.
We spent many days on the weekends watching the PRR in Effingham, and I don't remember a T1 starting a train without spinning. The westbound train stopped at the station about 100 feet from the IC diamond and when the T1 started up, the front engine would spin on the diamond. They were slippery and I have read they could go into a high speed slip also. There were some engineers that could probably handle them better than others, but an operating department has to have locomotive that everyone can run.
I really liked them, but it was more than an operating problem. I have always wondered why more weight was not added to the front engine of the T1. If steam had continued, they would have found some better solutions.
This is one of my pictures of an eastbound T1 slowing for Effingham station stop.
CZ
The photo in the first post of this thread comes from my Rail Archive web site, from the Random Steam Collection ( www.railarchive.net/randomsteam/ ). It was in my father's small collection and I don't know who the photographer was. (Perhaps someone here knows who took it.)
The T1 has long fascinated me. I never saw any of them in operation, and they were gone before I started taking rail photos (at around age 14, 1952). I have read whatever I can find about them, and own a few videos that show them in operation. Incidentally, the Green Frog DVD "The Golden Twilight of Postwar Steam," mentioned in one of the posts here, shows not only the T1 but also has scenes of K4 3847 which was equipped with rotary poppet valves.
Acela026Post Script: Not related to the previous Subject: How do you get images (like a logo) in your forum signature?
I don't know if anyone answered this, but it is fairly simple: on the right side of the screen it says "My Profile". Under that click on "Update Profile", then select the tab marked "Avatar" It lets you upload your selected picture.
In another message, you wanted to set the background picture on the computer, but the owner of the machine did not want it changed. On this family's computer, using Windows XP, we each have our own login, and can choose whatever background picture you want.
Dr LeonardThe T1 has long fascinated me. I never saw any of them in operation, and they were gone before I started taking rail photos (at around age 14, 1952). I have read whatever I can find about them, and own a few videos that show them in operation. Incidentally, the Green Frog DVD "The Golden Twilight of Postwar Steam," mentioned in one of the posts here, shows not only the T1 but also has scenes of K4 3847 which was equipped with rotary poppet valves.
Dr Leonard
The 3847 had the rotary poppet valves and all of that frame work to hold the drive shaft connected to the ecentric rod. One of the T1 had that system applied also, but it looked very odd to me.
We got to see the 5399 eastbound at Effingham in early 1952. It was the K4 with the Franklin system installed which looked almost normal except for the cylinder casting being different and the lack of the ecentric rod. Both the 5399 and 3847 also received a front end thottle, which was rare on the K4's since only a few were modified.
I looked at your web site recently and gave permission to the IRM display of the Picture of the C&NW display at the Railroad Fair. Thank you for forwarding that email
I wish that I could have seen one of these awesome machines in action. The Chesapeake and Ohio tested two T-1's in the late 1940's, and considered buying them from the Pennsy. In their tests their engineers reported no slippage problems, but were able to maintain speeds of over 100mph with very heavy consists over long distances. I believe this was the case because the engineers most likely chosen to test the T-1's were probably very experienced on the C&O's large mallets. As you mention, the K4 enginemen weren't trained on the T-1 properly. There was also the maintenance issue. The poppet valves were ahead of their time, and the Pennsy mechanics had trouble fixing them. The last Altoona models also had much less slippage than the earlier Baldwin ones. They were extremely fast and powerful, but didn't weigh much more than a large 4-8-4. With properly trained crews (maintenance and operating) the T-1 would have set many records. They were also very easy on the track--no hammer blow. The beauty of these machines is remarkable. The shark-nosed greyhound rules!
Joe
The shark-nosed greyhound rules!
I wonder who the Pied Piper was that hung "shark-nosed" on these engines? They sure didn't know what shark looks like. I'm still waiting for the picture of a shark with a nose that actually looks a T1, or Baldwin diesel for that matter!
.
PRR Joe I wish that I could have seen one of these awesome machines in action. The Chesapeake and Ohio tested two T-1's in the late 1940's, and considered buying them from the Pennsy. In their tests their engineers reported no slippage problems, but were able to maintain speeds of over 100mph with very heavy consists over long distances. I believe this was the case because the engineers most likely chosen to test the T-1's were probably very experienced on the C&O's large mallets. As you mention, the K4 enginemen weren't trained on the T-1 properly. There was also the maintenance issue. The poppet valves were ahead of their time, and the Pennsy mechanics had trouble fixing them. The last Altoona models also had much less slippage than the earlier Baldwin ones. They were extremely fast and powerful, but didn't weigh much more than a large 4-8-4. With properly trained crews (maintenance and operating) the T-1 would have set many records. They were also very easy on the track--no hammer blow. The beauty of these machines is remarkable. The shark-nosed greyhound rules! Joe
I really liked the T1's but they were not ready for prime time when it came to starting a train, but they really could run once the train speed was above 40 mph or so. We would go east of Effingham ten miles or so and watch the T1's come by at 80 mph plus. They just glided by at those speeds and really impressed anyone who watched them.
Most of our time was spent around the station in town at Effingham and the coaling tower west of town where the T1's had to restart the train. Never saw one leave without spining and sometimes over and over. We watched them almost every weekend as my dad was an advid railroad fan and I was there every time he watched the PRR. They really needed more weight on the front set of drivers, which seemed to spin first almost every time.
This is a T1 at the Effingham coaling station heading east. The fireman is building up steam while the worker was cleaning the fire. The tender of the H10 to the right hand side of the picture was a protection locomotive at Effingham. There was always two H10's there, one pointed east and one pointed west to protect trains in case of failures.
Are there any websites that pulls together these many stores and details of the T1? There a bits here, there, and in trains, but is there any place that pulls them together? Would like to know how crews felt about them, how they operated,and anything other interesting details.
Thanks.
No, there aren't any sites that pull all of the T1 history together However, the basic parts of "the book" have already been written and published in the PRRT&HS magazine, The Keystone (and others). Here's a list of articles, similar to what I posted over a year ago at the beginning of this thread, but limited to The Keystone for brevity:
Burnell, Neil. “An Appreciation of the T1 - The Enginemen’s Perspective,” The Keystone (Autumn 2001, pp 19-59)Burnell, Neil. “The ‘Slippery’ T1,” The Keystone (Winter 2001, pp57-62)Burnell, Neil. “A Reassessment of T1 6110 and 6111", The Keystone, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp18-39Burnell, Neil. "The Case for the T1a 5547." The Keystone, Vol.39, No. 3, pp40-52Burnell, Neil. “Dispelling the Myths,”, The Keystone, Vol.41, No. 1, pp15-55 Slee, David E., and Neil Burnell. “Some Thoughts on Pennsy Passenger Steam Power,” The Keystone, Vol .41, No.4, pp22-36Stephenson, David R. “PRR T1 Tests on C&O and N&W” The Keystone, Summer 2009, Vol.42, #2 , pp35-66
Most of Burnell's articles contin lenngthy comments from T1 crewmembers. All of these back issues of The Keystone can be purchased from the PRR Technical and Historical Society. See their website. The cost is about the same as a hard-cover book, around $60. I just sent this entire group to someone in Europe so I know they're available. There are more articles than this in other publications (C&O History, published by C&O Historical Society; The Arrow, published by N&W Historical Society; and Milepost, published by Friends of the RR Museum of PA) but they are harder to find and back issues are not always available. This is the major and minimum list that I'd recommend if you want the complete picture reflecting the most thorough research. Caveat: I'm a member of N&WHS, PRRT&HS, C&OHS and FRRMPA, so the above list may be biased.
feltonhill No, there aren't any sites that pull all of the T1 history together However, the basic parts of "the book" have already been written and published in the PRRT&HS magazine, The Keystone (and others). Here's a list of articles, similar to what I posted over a year ago at the beginning of this thread, but limited to The Keystone for brevity: Burnell, Neil. “An Appreciation of the T1 - The Enginemen’s Perspective,” The Keystone (Autumn 2001, pp 19-59)Burnell, Neil. “The ‘Slippery’ T1,” The Keystone (Winter 2001, pp57-62)Burnell, Neil. “A Reassessment of T1 6110 and 6111", The Keystone, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp18-39Burnell, Neil. "The Case for the T1a 5547." The Keystone, Vol.39, No. 3, pp40-52Burnell, Neil. “Dispelling the Myths,”, The Keystone, Vol.41, No. 1, pp15-55 Slee, David E., and Neil Burnell. “Some Thoughts on Pennsy Passenger Steam Power,” The Keystone, Vol .41, No.4, pp22-36Stephenson, David R. “PRR T1 Tests on C&O and N&W” The Keystone, Summer 2009, Vol.42, #2 , pp35-66 Most of Burnell's articles contin lenngthy comments from T1 crewmembers. All of these back issues of The Keystone can be purchased from the PRR Technical and Historical Society. See their website. The cost is about the same as a hard-cover book, around $60. I just sent this entire group to someone in Europe so I know they're available. There are more articles than this in other publications (C&O History, published by C&O Historical Society; The Arrow, published by N&W Historical Society; and Milepost, published by Friends of the RR Museum of PA) but they are harder to find and back issues are not always available. This is the major and minimum list that I'd recommend if you want the complete picture reflecting the most thorough research. Caveat: I'm a member of N&WHS, PRRT&HS, C&OHS and FRRMPA, so the above list may be biased.
As a railfan who watched the T1's on the St. Louis mainline, I can attest to many incidents of major spinning starting a train even at Effingham on what is almost level track. I cannot imagine the problems they had on grades starting a train. I really liked the T1's as it was my Dad's favorite locomotive and got into the cab several times when they were stopped at Effingham. It was exciting to see the T1 glide into town on the Spirit of St. Louis and the Jeffersonian.
I believe the test results of the two prototype locomotives on the dyno and the actual road tests were reviewed with a bias to the good results of the first two locomotives. The dyno testing was successful and showed that a T1 could really compete against the diesel locomotive, but I would question the results since that testing did not show slippery results from anything I have read. That testing seemed to indicate the T1 was great and outperformed the diesel sets above 30 mph and the T1's were really good at speed on the road. I got to see them gliding along above 80mph making it look so easy with long trains leaving a trail of coal smoke and dust flying in the air when they went by.
The poppet valve issue was not ready for prime time on those locomotives. That is one reason the 5547 was modified to see if that would help with the maintenance issues.
One Sunday, we were at Effingham watching trains when we heard what sounded like a locomotive approaching from the east and was chuffing extremely loud. We watched as the train got closer and then a T1 glided into town at nomal speed, which was a surprise knowing what we heard. The crew told us one of the exhaust valves was broken and when the thottle was opened, that cylinder blew close to 300 psi up the stack each time it was under power. You could hear that single loud chuff as it went west to the coaling station to get refueled. That was tearing the fire up also as it would lift the coals off of the grates and was making the fireman's job very hard to keep steam up to the normal close to 300psi. I am not sure if this happened many times but I was there when at least one T1 broke something that was a major fault that should not happened with any good design. Still, they were our favorite passenger locomotive and the J1 was the king of freight.
The photobucket below has some of my pictures around Effingham durning the era of the T1's and of course, J1's and K4's. I hope you enjoy those.
http://s197.photobucket.com/albums/aa205/City_train_usa/PRR%20Steam/?albumview=slideshow
Thank you ! Now I know what to put on my letter to Santa this year!
You'll have to do some searching but there was an extended thread in the Trains (Gen'l Discussion) forum about the T1, though it was probably a couple of years ago-it may not have survived the website updates since then. IIRC, it ran to several pages of good information (I believe feltonhill contributed significantly).
The thread Kevin referred to was extensive and started 1/29/06. It was on the General Discussion board, title was Duplex Steam Locomotives. It's still there.
Thanks for the mention!
Some fuel for the fire.
There is another reason why they were not as successful as other freight duplex drive locos. If there were more powerful passenger locos then that would mean that some passenger crews would lose their so called gravy runs and put back into freight service. If one T1 could do the job as two K4s then that would cut the passenger crews to other jobs and longer hours or less pay. Not to mention the passenger helper jobs lost to a single crew. How do think the shop forces felt. How many would be laid off if there were fewer and fewer locomotives to service. There has always been unsubstantiated claims of self induced sabotage. It is kind of funny how such an unsuccessful locomotive could rack up so many miles but only have trouble when someone was watching or there were cameras rolling.
If the Q2 was so successful why was it parked in the deadline while the final days of steam was handled by 35 and 40 year old smaller steamers? Maintenance costs are a poor excuse. Is it cheaper to spot and maintain 2 locos or one? The history of the Standard Railroad shows that large steam no matter how successful, was not liked by many employees and some management also had that feeling. Multiple locos meant more crews to man them and maintain them. Remember that this was a railroad built and managed by railroad men and not millionaires with a vision. Until the non railroad men took over the company was when the beginning of the end was near.
Pete
I pray every day I break even, Cause I can really use the money!
I started with nothing and still have most of it left!
CAZEPHYR The PRR made a lot of mistakes and spent a lot of money of duplex steam, but all steam went out the door when the diesels eliminated the coal, water and maintenance stops. I consider the greatest of mistakes of the PRR to be the day they became the PC.
The PRR made a lot of mistakes and spent a lot of money of duplex steam, but all steam went out the door when the diesels eliminated the coal, water and maintenance stops. I consider the greatest of mistakes of the PRR to be the day they became the PC.
At the risk of getting flamed by die-hard PRR loyalists, I've got to take issue with your last statement, CZ.
Although born and raised in PRR country (I didn't even know there was another railroad except that some cars had reporting marks that didn't seem quite right), I later worked for NYC and then PC. I always say that I survived the merger.
I was an Operating Department Trainee at the time of the merger and traveled extensively over both railroads ---- NYC before the merger and former-PRR after. I and many others with experience in both railroad's territories concluded that PRR was in such bad shape, NYC should have waited a couple of years and taken over a bankrupt PRR.
ChuckAllen, TX
And here I thought this thread was dead! Nice to have it back.
Keep 'em coming!
Acela
The timbers beneath the rails are not the only ties that bind on the railroad. --Robert S. McGonigal
Dear Pete,
I never thought about the possibility of sabotage. Seeing what is going on these days with the public school teachers' unions, that is a definite possibility. You read things like, that the poppet valves were dodgey from the get-go, the maintenance crews had trouble fixing them, they had to design the later models without the skirts that the prototypes had, because they had to be removed so often for repairs. Because of the slippage the outer bands on the drivers had to be replaced with frequency, which was very expensive. If they were really as bad as all of that, would they have racked up the miles that they did? As i said before when you read the article on the C&O reports, you almost think that they are talking about a completely different locomotive. No slippage, no valve problems, although I believe one of the two did report a minor braking issue. Obviously, the Pennsy sent two of their newest and best maintained locomotives to the C&O for testing, and the Union bosses would have loved if the pennsy sold off the T1s, as then it would be back to double and triple headed K4s. Little did they know that the demise of the T1 really meant an accelerated path towards dieselization, which in the end needed only about 1/3 of the workforce that the fleet of T1s required.
The K4's were used on the Vandalia Line to St. Louis after the T1's were pulled, but my dad had two H10's at Effingham at standby if they were needed. He switched freight with these until the diesels showed up, and I think they used Mikado L1's to haul coal. You seem to know alot about the area.
Dear Bluebell,
I am originally from Evansville, IN, but I had relatives in Vandalia, and I used to go to St. Louis for a ball game every now and then. Driven by Effingham various times, but I haven't stoped. I know the towns of Carmi, Mt. Carmel, Mt. Vernon, Charleston and Lawrenceville, IL fairly well.
thebluebell The K4's were used on the Vandalia Line to St. Louis after the T1's were pulled, but my dad had two H10's at Effingham at standby if they were needed. He switched freight with these until the diesels showed up, and I think they used Mikado L1's to haul coal. You seem to know alot about the area.
The main line to St. Louis used J1's for freight after they were built and replaced the N2's as the standard freight locomotive. You can spot the two protection H10's at Effingham in the picture below with the early production T1.
Standard freight power was the J1 class after 1944 and later.
This is one of the last N2's that ran by Effingham as the J1's took over.
Nice pictures, and yes I see at least one of the H10's in the background. You are correct about the Mikados not being used by the Pensnsy for coal on the Vandalia Line, as my Uncle it was, not my father, becauuse it was he who worked in Terre Haute on the NYC -- there they had one engine type they also called Mikado. Anyhow, I ddidn't know about the T1's, N2's all gone before my time. I was 8 when they let me ride the last H10 about 2 blocks about 1956 in Effingham.
Man, PRR J1's had to be the one of the best looking locomotives ever created.
thebluebell Nice pictures, and yes I see at least one of the H10's in the background. You are correct about the Mikados not being used by the Pensnsy for coal on the Vandalia Line, as my Uncle it was, not my father, becauuse it was he who worked in Terre Haute on the NYC -- there they had one engine type they also called Mikado. Anyhow, I ddidn't know about the T1's, N2's all gone before my time. I was 8 when they let me ride the last H10 about 2 blocks about 1956 in Effingham.
Those H10's were gone in early 1951 for ever at Effingham. The coaling station was removed in late 1954 and all steam ceased on any passenger or freight after that dry summer of 1954. The city water lake went almost dry and the PRR and IC could not get water in Effingham that summer. The IC used more than one extra water tenders on the 2500 series to bypass Effingham services, but the PRR just pulled steam. We did have one J1 on a work train in the summer of 1956 which I got to see several times. You might have seen that J1 there if the summer of 1956.
Utley26 Man, PRR J1's had to be the one of the best looking locomotives ever created.
I have to agree with you and say they were really impressive to watch them leave town with the typical 135 car train. They just leaned into the train and went off east from the coaling station without any major fuss or slipping. They were certainly big and impressive.
CZ.
CAZEPHYR I have to agree with you and say they were really impressive to watch them leave town with the typical 135 car train. They just leaned into the train and went off east from the coaling station without any major fuss or slipping. They were certainly big and impressive. CZ.
Okay, now I'm just jealous!
Acela026 CAZEPHYR: I have to agree with you and say they were really impressive to watch them leave town with the typical 135 car train. They just leaned into the train and went off east from the coaling station without any major fuss or slipping. They were certainly big and impressive. CZ. Okay, now I'm just jealous!
CAZEPHYR: I have to agree with you and say they were really impressive to watch them leave town with the typical 135 car train. They just leaned into the train and went off east from the coaling station without any major fuss or slipping. They were certainly big and impressive. CZ.
Well, I was very fortunate that my dad was a railfan or I would never have got to see them in action. I won't make you any more jealous by telling you of my cab visit times in J1's and T1's. Most if the crews were great in those days to kids and getting into the cab on a cold day was no big deal.
It was a time I will never forget. And remember, those trains had the old journals, no roller bearings on any of the cars. In very cold winter weather conditions if the train was standing for an hour or more, those cars must have been hard to get rolling again.
Above is No.9834 one of the H10's in the Efffingham Yard in 1951 and scrapped that year. Conductor Hubert Mankin, Brakeman Bus Maroon, Engineer Denver Ball, and 2 more.
Sure lets keep it going. I posted this on this forum when I should have posted it here.
http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/forums/t/203538.aspx
120 mph on the Ft Wayne div.
Goiod report, and increased my respect for the PRR T-1 greatly.
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