The PRR was also a collosal bureaucracy, and its entrenched management style was one of the factors in the failure of the Penn Central...
They also weren't widely known for customer service. The Alphabet Route, a patchwork of 5 railroads between New York and Chicago, of which the Western Maryland was a part, could move freight faster and more efficiently than the PRR, often making a point to point delivery in the same time it took PRR to classify a car in one yard.
Sorry to be the turd in the punch bowl!
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
2-8-8-0 wrote:So the L1, I1, and K4 all shared a common boiler? So the GHQ kit would be a good starting point for any one of these locos?
Yes and no... You'll have to check the location of domes, etc. Also, the firebox length varied slightly.
But Max used the GHQ kit for his I1sa 2-10-0 with the stock firebox and cab. He did need to relocate the sand dome.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
Actually, the I1 was a larger boiler than the K4 and L1, and was shared with the two K5's. The H8, H9, H10, G5 and E6 also shared a common boiler. I am not sure where the M1 boiler fits in with the all of these.
Rick
Rule 1: This is my railroad.
Rule 2: I make the rules.
Rule 3: Illuminating discussion of prototype history, equipment and operating practices is always welcome, but in the event of visitor-perceived anacronisms, detail descrepancies or operating errors, consult RULE 1!
wm3798 wrote: The PRR was also a collosal bureaucracy, and its entrenched management style was one of the factors in the failure of the Penn Central...They also weren't widely known for customer service. The Alphabet Route, a patchwork of 5 railroads between New York and Chicago, of which the Western Maryland was a part, could move freight faster and more efficiently than the PRR, often making a point to point delivery in the same time it took PRR to classify a car in one yard. Sorry to be the turd in the punch bowl! Lee
True 'nuff! PRR was deeply mired in too many layers of management. Also, because it had been such a corporate success for so long, it insisted upon paying stockholder dividends at the expense of maintenance and reinvestment. Once upon a time, Pennsy was the epitome of innovation. By the 1950s it was a slow beast with cancer. Yes, it did spawn TTX, but that was too little too late to save the giant. Loss of passenger traffic to airlines, LCL freight to highways, and loss of demand for coal was a 1-2-3 punch for the Pennsy.
By the 60s, the lack of re-investment in infrastucture was obvious. Tracks were weed-grown and locomotives were failing. It viewed merger with the New York Central as its only hope for survival. Instead, the merger hastened its death.
She was great in her heyday, almost without equal on the planet. But WWII ran her into the ground, and she never really got up again. The bureaucratic lethargy and corporate short-sightedness saw to that.
Still, we mourn the Late Great Pennsylvania Railroad. Nothing like it in the world...!
On this thread, we also have indications of something else the PRR (and it's fans) is famous for: hubris. Hang out at The Station Inn in Cresson, PA sometime and you'll see what I'm talking about.
Dave V.,The PRR did have more electrified milage than anyone, but it was based on the New Haven's AC high voltage practices and experience (since 1907).
The PRR could not come up with a satisfactory electric loco design until they borrowed some New Haven EP-3's with their 2-C+C-2 wheel arrangment. Oddly enough, that's the same wheel arrangment of the GG-1. Hmm...
The PRR was not a TOFC pioneer. They were, in fact, a latecomer. The Chicago Great Western started modern TOFC service in 1937. The New Haven sent observers to the CGW to see what it was all about, and within mere months started their own TOFC service ("Trailiner") also in 1937 based on CGW patented practices. CGW stopped TOFC service, and then restarted it the next year. The NH, however, was the first RR dedicated to TOFC in the USA, and was the #1 TOFC RR until the SP got into it in 1953. PRR's TrucTrain service didn't start until 1955...almost 20 years after the CGW and the NH.
The NEC's only true "high speed" operation (over 125 mph) takes place on former New Haven RR tracks in Mass. and Rhode Island.
All this reminds me of a trip I took to Steamtown in 2006. The backshop tour's quide (a Park Ranger) was talking about the K-4 that was undergoing restoration at the time. He said, "Do you know why the PRR had so many K-4's and kept making and using them for so long? It's because every time they tried to invent something to replace them, it didn't work."
Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
loathar wrote:WOW! I had no idea they were THAT big! (or that old) Thanks for the info!
L:
Yes, they were big. Big big big. If you model practically any era besides the very early days or the(somewhat poorer) years since the keystones started fading, you need PRR cars, especially if you're modeling the East. This includes hoppers. I'm not sure how much PA coal made it south and west, but it certainly went all over the Northeast. I think it's hard for us, in this oil and electrically-powered age, to realize just how many single or few-car shipments of coal went to factories "back in the day".
dehusman wrote: 2-8-8-0 wrote: If i can ask, what did pennsy use for its coal drags? 2-10-0's, "hippo's", lots of them (almost 600) I-1's. Waaaaaaay cool engines. Haul as much as you want anywhere you want it, as long as you only want to go 25 mph. 8-)
2-8-8-0 wrote: If i can ask, what did pennsy use for its coal drags?
2-10-0's, "hippo's", lots of them (almost 600) I-1's. Waaaaaaay cool engines. Haul as much as you want anywhere you want it, as long as you only want to go 25 mph. 8-)
d:
25 MPH isn't too bad as drag-freight engines of that era go, of course (some of the compound mallets were real creepers), and the upgraded I1sa's could go faster, 35-40 mph. I understand the ride was rough.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that the N1 2-10-2's were a lot slower than the I1's.
Thommo wrote:. . . . . . . . . . So, 2-10-0 or 2-8-2 plastic model od PRR locos was NEVER produced to this day?! . . . . . . . . . . .
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
Paul3 wrote: ...Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
...
Nope, nope, nope! Not gonna do it! Not gonna get in an argument! Nope! Nope!
...except to correct you on a minor point. TrucTrain service began in 1954, not 1955.
My love for the Pennsy flows not from the many superlatives one can attach to it.
I grew up on Long Island, a long-time Pennsy ward and built to PRR standards (i.e., position light signals and keystones everywhere) and have family in Lancaster, PA. I also went to Penn State near the PRR Middle Division, Bald Eagle Branch, and L&T Secondary.
My exposure to steam was primarily during our annual pilgramage to Strasburg, PA where PRR 1223 and 7002 ran regularly, or to the East Broad Top, which met the PRR at Mount Union, PA. I also spent loads of time at the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania.
So to me, real trains were Brunswick Green and had keystones on them!
outdoorsfellar wrote:No 2-10-0s produced, even in N scale ?
PCM is supposedly working on an HO scale I1sa 2-10-0. There's actually a pilot model (unlike the N scale M1a/b), so there's some hope there.
Bowser offers a metal kit of same in HO.
N scale, nope. None. Gotta do what Max did in RMC and build your own. O rre-motor a Minitrix 2-10-0 and have a foobie. The Minitrix engine needs the firebox shortened so the steam pipes line up with the cylinders.
Only the Trix foobie, which as Dave noted is a K-4 shell jammed onto a German drive.
Not a prize winner in any category.
R. T. POTEET,Good point. Revise my statement above accordingly (tho' I think it may apply anyways...).
Dave V.,Well, the info came from Wikipedia, so take it for what's it's worth. According to this page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trailer-Train_Company the agreement with Rail-Trailer Company was signed in Nov. 1954, however TrucTrain service didn't begin until Feb. 1955. BTW, that page also has a rather large error on it when it states that TrucTrain was a "radical departure" by handling trailers from trucking co.'s in addition to RR owned trailers. Um, sorry, but both CGW and NH hauled privately owned trailers from Day 1 in 1937.
What I will give credit for PRR for is the innovation of the interchange of TOFC cars among other RR's. Other TOFC RR's ran "captured" service cars that didn't venture away from home rails (CGW, NH, SP, etc.), which lead to a hodge-podge of TOFC practices (NH cars had only one large ramp at one end of the flat, for example).
IMHO, PRR didn't "innovate" all that well. What they did was make existing techology bigger and better. They weren't the ones to create AC overhead, but they made theirs faster and longer than anyone. They weren't the ones to invent TOFC, but they made it interchangable and massive. The didn't come up with the 2-C+C-2 electric, but they made it into an instant success that lasted for decades. And so on. When the PRR did try to invent things, that's when it got into trouble (6-8-6 Turbine, 4-4-4-4, Penn Central, etc.).
Dave Vollmer wrote: outdoorsfellar wrote:No 2-10-0s produced, even in N scale ?PCM is supposedly working on an HO scale I1sa 2-10-0. There's actually a pilot model (unlike the N scale M1a/b), so there's some hope there.Bowser offers a metal kit of same in HO.N scale, nope. None. Gotta do what Max did in RMC and build your own. O rre-motor a Minitrix 2-10-0 and have a foobie. The Minitrix engine needs the firebox shortened so the steam pipes line up with the cylinders.
DV:
Jim Kelly built the same Minitrix engine into an N1, described in the Oct '79 MR. Neat engine, the N1, if aNomalous on the PRR. It did fill a Niche.
Dave Vollmer wrote: outdoorsfellar wrote:No 2-10-0s produced, even in N scale ?Bowser offers a metal kit of same in HO.
The only problem is the Bowser 2-10-0 boiler dimensions are too small in diameter (from using the K4 boiler molds I assume), the same thing applies to the early PFM imports, the latter imports were of the correct diameter.
Paul,
You can try, but I won't bite!
Not gonna get in a peeing contest...!
-Morgan
Dave V.,I'm not getting into a contest, either (of any sort). But part of the Pennsy story (like any RR) is it's failures as well as it's successes. To gloss over one to focus on the other is unfair to those asking the question, "So....tell me about the Pennsy..." Getting the facts straight should be our goal, with opinions based upon them.
The Pennsy was big...really big. But was it actually as innovative or pioneering as some claim?
Paul3 wrote: Dave V.,I'm not getting into a contest, either (of any sort). But part of the Pennsy story (like any RR) is it's failures as well as it's successes. To gloss over one to focus on the other is unfair to those asking the question, "So....tell me about the Pennsy..." Getting the facts straight should be our goal, with opinions based upon them.The Pennsy was big...really big. But was it actually as innovative or pioneering as some claim?Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
Okay, I deleted a long dissertation I'd written in reply where I'd defended my statements in this thread. Pointless, probably. Paul, you don't like Pennsy. I know that from previous threads.
I stand by all of my assertions (except for the B28 USRA 0-6-0 goof)... including my honest assesment of PRR's corporate ineptitude.
But when we model a railroad, we usually chose our prototype based on what we admire about it, which is essentially what's being asked here. We don't usually model the labor disputes, the poor customer service, or the slow management.
We who love the Pennsy do so because it truly was a giant in the US railroad scene for its 120 year existance. That's something no one can deny.
Dave V.,I don't like the Pennsy? News to me. I know I don't like the Penn Central, but I think we both agree on that. I don't know what previous threads you're talking about where I've indicated a real dislike for the PRR, honestly. I admire the PRR. It's service was top-notch, it's trains were impeccable by all accounts, and lordy was it big. There's a heckuva lot to like about the Pennsy, and I admire anyone who trys to model that beastie (it must be a quick way to go broke!).
The only thing I don't like is the associated hubris and the failure to give much credit to other RR's. For example, in the Altoona museum, there is a PC display. It grudgingly mentions the NYC...and there's no mention of the New Haven at all. Considering that the NH was the third RR of the PC merger, and it's inclusion was a condition set by the ICC, one would think it would get at least a mention somewhere in a museum display about the creation of the PC.
I really don't want to come off here as all argumentative. Honest. If you just read my words in a neutral tone or in a lighthearted manner (at the smilies), and I hope you'll understand that I'm trying to debate the facts and my opinions based on them. I'm more than willing to be proved wrong (won't be the first time I've had crow for dinner). I do admit I tend to be defensive of the NH's achievements, so take it for what it's worth.
Sorry if I ticked you off.
25 mph is decent speed for coal drags during the late 40s....B&O's coal drags crept along at single digit speeds over much of the west end, albeit over a route that would make most locomotives chant quietly, "no way i can, no way i can". The B&O had to use articulateds, as the curves were too sharp for the long rigid wheelbase of their excellent S1 2-10-2s, which they had about 125 of.....and i once thought that was a huge class. YIKES, 600 decapods on the PRR?!
I see the Kato mike being used as a foundation for a lot of scratchbuilds in N, including apparently at least 2 classes of 10 coupled engines (B&O S1As and apparently Pennsy 2-10-0s) Im going to build at least one L1 with the GHQ kit, as they seem to make a nice model when they are done. This engine wouldnt be out of place on a mine run would it?
By the way, what is the purpose for the Belpaire firebox? Did it just fill a specific niche on the PRR for ease of maintenance or something, or did it provide a performance gain, or did they just do it to make their locos stand out? The squared off boiler and overhanging cab combine to make a intimidating looking loco, kind of in contrast to B&O's "classic and simple" designs. PRR and B&O both home built (or extensively modified) most of their engines. Odd how they look so very different.
My wallet will soon plot to kill me at this rate.
I may have misread you; if I did, I'm sorry. I understand your point about fair and balanced. But again, I think when we are fans of a prototype, we prefer not to think about the bad, and to perhaps over-emphasize the good. All the superlatives I've passed along about Pennsy are from print; granted, not all that is printed is truth. Many of the histories I've read about the Pennsy were from former employees... not exactly unbiased.
I didn't get to see Pennsy; when I was a tiny tot it was a dying Penn Central and then a rainbow Conrail struggling to realize the potential the PC merger never did.
My grandfather told stories of riding behind double-headed K4s around The Curve on his way to Pittsburgh. Man, if only...
Penn Central sucked, but as a prototype to model I think it's neat. The crumbling infrastructure and patch jobs make for neat models. That nuclear vomit green just looks so awesome on freight cars when streaked with rust. So classless as to be cool.
2-8-8-0 wrote:Off i go, to read more PRR stuff. Maybe the PRR, not the B&O, would obtain control over the Western Maryland. PRR on one side of the Potomac, B&O on the other....
Off i go, to read more PRR stuff. Maybe the PRR, not the B&O, would obtain control over the Western Maryland. PRR on one side of the Potomac, B&O on the other....
North East Rails is my favorite picture site for the majority of noteworthy Northeastern railroads operating in your neck of the woods...
http://www.northeast.railfan.net/home.html
The B&O, Pennsy, and Western Maryland is among them. Also, don't overlook the links on the lefthand side to the Gallitzin Tunnels and the Horseshoe Curve. Truly a great resource for motive power and rolling stock to include on your pike.
Conemaugh Road & Traction circa 1956
2-8-8-0 wrote:By the way, what is the purpose for the Belpaire firebox? Did it just fill a specific niche on the PRR for ease of maintenance or something, or did it provide a performance gain?