Pennsylvania Railroad J1's

Just a thought - think people are being a bit too hard on Pennsy's "obsolete" steam power. Many/most railroads had scads of older steam locomotives up to dieselization. For example, the quite profitable Burlington Route (it kept co-owners Northern Pacific and Great Northern out of bankruptcy during the Depression) had only a handful of modern steam locomotives: 36 4-8-4's, 16 2-10-4's and 16 4-6-4's. All the rest of their steam power was composed of elderly 4-6-0's, 4-6-2's, 2-10-2's, 2-6-2's, 0-6-0's plus a big cohort of O1a 2-8-2's of early '20's vintage (the last Burlington steam locomotive in regular service was an O1a in 1959). Many railroads looked the same, a veneer of "modern" steam locomotives supported by a large cast of older locomotives. Look at the huge Southern RY - it never had a locomotive with a 4 wheel trailing truck. 

The Pennsy's locomotives were bought and paid for, and essentially did what was asked of them - although I will grant, quadruple headed I1 Decapods on ore trains was hardly a paragon of efficiency.

I would lay the bankruptcy of the Penn Central more on excess physical plant that could not be rapidly trimmed, due to govt regulation, not being in tandem with a shrinking industrial base (moving to the non-union South). Plus excessive labor manning/obsolete work rules that could not be trimmed due to union recalcitrance and political interference. 

Great points, and quite true.  This was the main reason why steam died so quickly.  Had every one been operating with the efficiency of N&W, plus a roster heavy with modern steam power, the Diesel revolution would have come at a slower pace.  One of the cascading effects on steam power was WW2. When it was over just about every road's power was a shambles.  So too their facilities and rights of way. It's like every circumstance that could favor the conversion to Diesel power happened almost at once.   This set of conditions hit the Penn particularly hard, so in a sense...who could blame them.  Public image at that time was largely anti steam anyway.  OTOH, picture a new built PRR H10s 2-8-0 with the corrected FRA boiler/firebox mods.  I'm guessing it would be almost as cheap, if not cheaper to operate than many of the larger fan trip steamers of the last few decades.

Yes, it wasn't only the Mighty Pennsy that was in financial straits at the time. The New York Central, Reading, New Haven, etc. were all cash strapped, hence the ill-fated PC merger. However, the PRR was, at one time, the largest and  the richest of the north eastern roads, so I think that makes it a bigger target for criticism.

  But nothing would save the steam locomotives from the cheaper, easier to maintain, diesel loco, It was inevitable. (But I am left to wonder how GG1's would do on horseshoe curve, hmm....)

Could it be...those older locos would've been weeded out through attrition during 1930s as technology improved through the 20s...but the depression hit.

Is it possible the Pennsy spent all that time and effort into the NEC, with plans to electrify westward, but the depression hit and all the neat electric equipment never pulled a train west of Harrisburg. By depression's end, the same efficiency was available in electric locos that simply carried their electric plant on their back instead of expen$ive power plants, cantenary etc. The Pennsy was among the first (okay along with the Milw rd)knew traction motors were the future going back to those funny boxy things in the 1890s through the jack shafts, L5s etc. until (finally) the GG1. All that money and effort, just to be passed up by the better idea from GM/EMD. Had they not electrified the NEC, well another PRR what if...

That said, as a kid that grew up in the Ohio Railway Museum in Cols (my "TIMES SQUARE" was one of their pullmans), did they REALLY almost get a J? Of course, then look at poor N&W 578 now.

Yeah they almost did, and we got into it with an old timer from the museum here a couple of years ago.  The Big Jay was simply too much chooch for the average enthusiast. Well, their physical plant, actually.  This loco was either 6170 or 6171, and she also disappeared from the scene around 1962, according to one version of the local legend. The N&W Pacific made more sense from an operator's point of view, but Worthington should have grabbed the Big Jay as a static piece....not everything has to run, you know!

Just a thought - think people are being a bit too hard on Pennsy's "obsolete" steam power. Many/most railroads had scads of older steam locomotives up to dieselization. For example, the quite profitable Burlington Route .... had only a handful of modern steam locomotives

 

Look at the huge Southern RY - it never had a locomotive with a 4 wheel trailing truck.

Mark

Quite true.  But what did the CB&Q and the Southern do about their situation in 1940-45?  They did not fall for the Baldwin duplex drive sales pitch.  Both the CB&Q and the Southern ordered early E Units and FTs that were still making money when Qs and Ts were going for scrap.

I would lay the bankruptcy of the Penn Central more on excess physical plant that could not be rapidly trimmed, due to govt regulation, not being in tandem with a shrinking industrial base (moving to the non-union South). Plus excessive labor manning/obsolete work rules that could not be trimmed due to union recalcitrance and political interference.

Government regulations and labor relations were certainly large parts of the problem.  But PRRs historic motive power policies were a contributing factor. Other railroads used the efficiencies provided by modern steam locomotives and early diesels to reduce excess plant and employment by closing smaller shops and abolishing unneeded maintenance and helper crew positions.  Those railroads could then invest in fewer, larger and more modern shops withbetter working conditions that improved health, safety and productivity.  The situation depicted in the 1974 Penn Central movie was created by the decisions of the 1920's, 30's, 40's and 50's.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHmyYqfNYnc

More Js, C&O derived T2 4-8-4s, FTs and the facilities to maintain them would have sure helped the situation in the 1960's and 70's. 

I wouldn't doubt for a minute that there were individuals within PRR's management hierarchy who correctly perceived the overall situation.  Getting the whole team to play ball is not always easy, and the Penn didn't really hit the panic button until 1946, their centennial year, and the first time they lost money. It's difficult to imagine the egg-on -your-face effect this had on the ego heavy Standard Railroad of the World.  As stated above, getting the circumstances under control, at least the major ones, would be majorly time and resource  consuming, if not downright impossible. Righting the motive power issues was something that could be addressed with reasonable speed and certainty of success. PRR was in the transportation industry, and in it to make a profit...a BIG profit. Supplying "warm, fuzzy ones" to the railfan community was not on the menu. Gotta give Clement and Symes credit for seeing what they saw, and getting the ball rolling ahead of the avalanche of '46. From the end of the war onward, it was one struggle after another to maintain some bottom line control, with the long term prognosis getting bleaker all the while. From a motive power point of view, this is where the 2-10-4 J stands out. More effective than the roundhouse oldies, and even some of the new internal combustion newbies....from 1944 until the end, they were your go-to piece. We can argue all day about Pennsy's second or third best design, but Lima/AMC grabs the gold on this one!

Some additional thoughts regarding Pennsy, motive power, finances, etc.    Was not the Pennsylvania Railroad pretty beat up from the enormous strain of WWII? Repairing the railroad was a big drain on capital and income. Additionally both Pennsy and the New York Central had a tremendous passenger investment - which following WWII, was a sunk investment. That is, not making money, only losing, and in greater and greater quantities as things progressed into the '50's and 60's. Huge amounts of money was tied up in 4 track mainlines (every inch taxed!), capital equipment (do recall that bond debt still had to be paid after a piece of passenger equipment landed on the property) and labor costs supporting the passenger business - which regulators were very reluctant to allow rationalization.

         Now let us suppose the Pennsylvania had acquired a very efficient 4-8-4 instead of going duplex. My suspicion would be that that would have had only a modest beneficial affect on the railroad's finances. Heck, the NYC did get a very efficient 4-8-4 and the Central ended up in the soup, anyway. The Pennsy went all-diesel in Nov 1957; so that allowed 13 years of the benefits of diesel operation before bankruptcy, and it still went under. Believe all the business factors surrounding the motive power issue were more profound in bleeding the railroad to death. Not to dismiss the motive power issue, just think it was one log on a blazing bonfire.

      Just a small anecdote, but it was said that the New York & Long Branch commuter operations were very hard to dieselize, because those darn "obsolete" K4's out-performed single unit E's. And it wasn't particularly attractive to buy two E's to replace one steam engine!

      These thoughts are from an arm-chair and are not offered as table-pounding doctrine!

Being a PRR fan myself, Oh, yes, I agree that a single K4 could out perform a single E-unit in pulling power. But, economically, factoring in the cost of long-term operation, the diesel wins. The PRR wasn't the only road at the time in financial distress, that's for certain. But, as someone had said earlier, hindsight is 20/20.

Ah, the NY&LB !  Two E units to replace one K4s, and such.  Back in the early years of post war commuting, CNJ bellied up to the bar with custom made Baldwin Double Enders.  This was fine to replace a 4-6-0 Camelback.  Bigger trains such as the ones seen on the NY&LB on a Friday night would need a bit more.  So what does CNJ do?   Take a hint from the Lackawanna, who had recently replaced Pacifics in commuter service with the FM TrainMonster.  Here was the chooch to replace both the Camelbacks, and the higher capacity P47 Pacific. Their first order to Beloit clobbered steam, and a second, two years later, clobbered the Double Ender Baldwins.  Pennsy never indulged in boiler equipped TMs, and didn't buy any until '56 anyway. They DID have the big V16 244H powered RSD7....AKA; APS24ms. Geared for 77MPH, these hefty dudes could replace a K4s, and Pennsy even tried it in the late '50s. No matter, these big Alcos were worth more as passenger helpers and pinch hit freighters in central Pennsylvania.  With train-offs, and passenger reductions, the PRR would not have to buy new power to undo the K4s. The trickle down of surplus passenger Diesels finally punched their ticket.  Had PRR been awash with revenue in the '50s, we'd have never been treated to this last steam passenger stand!