But which town was the west end of the B&E railroad? The east terminal of the ferry?
Interesting that the SP and the GTW (Detroit-Durand) used some of their most modern steam power in commuter service toward end of steam. Earlier, Pacifics were use for both SF and Detroit, but we saw 4-8-4's out of 3rd and Townsend and streamlined 4-8-2s on the GTW. Occasonally, a Hudson would substitute for a Pacific for the Harmon - Poughkeepsie service, but never a Niagra. I suppose that when a Hudson was used, the commuters just had to put up without lights, because the Hudsons did not have generators large enough for head-end lighting power, and as far as I know, NYCentral mus did not have oversized battaries or axle-generators. Steam heat yes.
I've always thought the ferry docked at Annapolis,but I don't know for sure. As for the D16sb's, unfortunately 1223 is the sole surviver. I understand that 1035, one of the last three, was slated for preservation, as she was in decent shape when retired. Someone obviously felt one was enough. Two were sold to the Kishacoquillis Valley Railroad in central PA. #1033 and 2082. Both ran until the end of that little line in 1940. 2082 was scrapped on sight, 1033 went elsewhere, surely for scrapping also.
A friend of mine complained that the 1223 was always the engine operating when he visited Strasburg back in the 70's. I never saw her run! I was so jealous! I did get to ride behind 7002 one time. She is a beauty in her own right!
The Baltimore Eastern's connection with Baltimore was by ferry boat or via the PRR Cape Charles Line. It was mostly an east-west operation across the Del-Mar-Va Penninsular. I would like to be reminded as to where the ferry boat landing at the west end was located. Of the three D16s that survived the purge for operation on the Baltimore Eastern, were any others saved besides the one at Strassburg's Pennsylvanina Railway Museum? A really beutiful locomotive! And be glad you can see what is at that museum and others. We could have faired worse!
As I said in my original post, Prior to the depression years, PRR cycled it's power out in 20-25 years. As noted in your comment, Dave, in later years, Pennsy steam often did attain impressive age. Your example of the E6s class being a good one. They didn't build any consolidations after 1916, yet the H8, H9 and H10 classes were well represented in the late 50's. D16sb was a unique case. Only three survived the purge 1930's, and only because they were the only power light enough and suitable for service on the Baltimore & Eastern subsidiary. The rest of the class was scrapped out as commuter lines electrified and larger power became available (G5s, E6s, etc.) along with the decline of branchline service systemwide due to the depression and bus/auto competition.
I made a statement in my posting that's bothered me all day. I said that Pennsy was unique in acquiring brand new steam power exclusively for commuter service (G5s) when the CNJ 4-6-4T and B&A 4-6-6T locomotives had just been discussed! Neat, modern engines, with a sole purpose; transport commuter trains efficiently!
Wish I'd been around to see any of them!
Not quite right. Remember the E6 was a 1914 design and the full pack survived through WWII, with a few making it to 1952, rode behind one Little Silver - Princeton Jc., subst. for the Red Bank - Trenton doodlebug summer 1952. The K4's I-10's, H-9, H10, Ls and Ms lasted more than 25 years for sure. But these were locomotives designed with the help of the Altoona test facilitiy and some real engineering, with possibly the E6 being the first. And certainly the rebuilt D16s lasted 50 years or more. The G5 was designed to be an efficient locomotive. Taking over from earlier power reduced maintenance iand fuel costs, possibly even with light trains.
And as noted, the NYCentral did have specific Boston suburban tank locomotives. But from the B&M Moguls to the SP 4-8-4s bumpted by diesels, certainly downgraded road power was normal for North American suburban servie.
'
Yea, those K2s were dogs. I'm not sure if any ever got power reverse. Pennsy was not one to waste much money on "frills" unless ordered to by the ICC. D16, E3, E5 and E6s classes never did get it. The reluctance of engineers to adjust valve settings under way on K2s, out of fear of being injured by the johnson bar throwing them into the front corner of the cab, may have been one of the reasons they were so inefficient and also would be cause for excessive wear in the valve gear and valves. I have also read that the trailing trucks had a bad habit of running hot and also disassembling at speed! Not good.
It is interesting, to me, the different approach some roads took to powering commuter service. Pennsy seems alone, at least among eastern lines, to have acquired brand new engines for such service. Everybody else just used outmoded road engines, although often heavily rebuilt. This seems to be in keeping with PRR's policy up through the 1920's of not really keeping engines a long time. 20-25 years seemed about typical, some classes of yard power not even lasting that long. I guess it was deemed cheaper to replace than to rebuild. With the onset of the depression, locomotive lifespans start to really stretch out, with some engines approaching half a century at the end of steam.
I agree with you about upgraded light Atlantics and Americans on two and three-car branch-line trains. But the K2 Pacific was a notoriously inefficient locomotive, both in coal and water usage and in maintanace, the latter because of heavy valve-gear needing adjustment frequently. Its Johnson bar was heavy for the engineer to control . PRR and LIRRand PRSL were happy with the G5s (and of course the E6s) that they had, especially during WWII.
Growing up on a Pennsy (Pemberton) branch in south Jersey, the PRR enginemen prefered E6s Atlantics. G5s just rode too rough! A Baldwin RS-12, PC #8084 was the last power on that lines commuter train (4-25-1969).
My comment concerning possible PRR regrets over acquiring G5s engines was in regard to how they sometimes seemed severely overpowered for the 2-5 car trains on mildly graded territory (NOT Pittsburgh territory). Pennsy ended up scrapping alot of fairly recently upgraded light power, after the arrival of those big ten wheelers. D16sb, E3sd, E7s K2s engines could have conceveably carried them through the depression years traffic levels with little more than heavy overhauls. Of course, the second world war found them needing every thing that could steam!
Thanks for the NYC info, Dave.
Pittsburgh commuter trains lasted into the 1960s. Like the "Valpo dummies" in Chicago, they got boiler GP9s in their last years.
RFPJOHN: Although the Pennsy got its G5s Ten Wheelers for commuter service, and indeed the Pittsburgh commuter trains used them until dicontinuance, withouit diesels, if I remember correctly, most migrated into branch line and pedler freight service because of massive electrification of the Phiadelphia and NEC commuter lines. Indeed, many fans associated these modern 4-6-0's with this type of service, not realizing they were originally designed as commuter lcomotives. They were solid, economical, easy-tp-mainatain locomotives, and I doubt the Pennsy regreted having them. The rebuilt D16s were valuable where track and/or bridge conditions prohibited the overall weight and axle loadings of G5s.
The Gettys Square tank engines were used right up to electrification of the branch and never saw regujlar service on the Putnam main line to Brester. Downgraded 4-6-0s were the regular power there until dieselization with RS-3s. Some of the 4-6-0's in use after wwii still had slide-valves.
There were a few American RR's that had a 2-6-4"T" (Tank engine). But Lionel was the only "RR" to have an American outline 2-6-4 tendered loco, including the (in)famous "Girls Train" in pink.
Yet, Lionel was not the only "RR" to have a 2-6-4 that was "tendered". The name given them is "Adriatic" and that is because there were some tendered 2-6-4 locomotives in countries that border the Adriatic Sea in Europe. They were also used in South Africa and Australia.
I do think the Lionel 2-6-4 is a very finely proportioned locomotive and I wish there were some real 1:1 scale of that type in America.
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
Interesting, that Reading 2-6-4. I thought Lionel was the only bunch that had 2-6-4's.
Dave, I'm curious. How long did steam last on the Yonkers branch of the NYC. The pictures I've seen of those 2-4-4T engines seem to indicate farely modern machines. I notice they had piston valves and electric headlights. Really cool looking little engines! Wish I had one!
Also, does anyone know how long the New Haven ran 4-4-0s. I've seen pictures of them in service as late as 1938.
IC also assigned 2-8-0's to commuter service. The major change was a big headlight mounted on the tender.
Wisconsin Central and its Chicago Harlem and Batavia subsidiary ran 2-4-2 and 2-6-2 tank engines over what's now CSX's B&OCT line to Forest Park, along with another line on what's now Randolph Street in Chicago, Oak Park and River Forest from the late 1880s to about 1897. Part of the line in Chicago(Austin) and Oak Park was shared between a branch of the Lake St L and the Suburban Railroad from 1897 to 1902.
CNJ also had a group of 25 classy looking 2-6-2T side tank engines, some of which lased though WW2. Five of these engines were originally built for the Long Island in 1904 and sold to the CNJ in 1911. Some of the photos in northeast.railfan show a few of these engines rebuilt with piston valves, indicating they may have superheated a few, though not necessarily. Of course they also had their big fleet of ten wheeler camelbacks, equipped with pilots and headlights on the tenders for reverse running. The Reading rebuilt some of it's D8 4-4-0s with piston valves and superheat for commuter service as well as revamping some of it's freight 4-6-0s into nifty looking L3sb class. I believe these were rebuilt from conventional cab 4-6-0 freight locomotives as the last camelbacks built in the country in 1929! Of course, Pennsy rebuilt D16 class americans into the wonderful D16sb which were great commuter engines. I've often wondered whether PRR regretted going for the 90 huge G5s engines on cusp of the depression, when patronage on many commuter lines plummetted.
The Reading had class Q1 2-6-4T locomotives which were specifically built for commuter service and were supposed to run both ways without turning.
http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/pr381.jpg
The CNJ had 4-6-4T locomotives which also were specifically built for commuter service and were supposed to run both ways without turning.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1675599
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