PRR J1's and Santa Fe 2-10-4's at Sandusky, Ohio (1956)

mark s posted:

Stuart - 100% correct. The"Committee" took the highly successful T1 design and scaled it down for NKP/C&O/Pere Marqette/W&LE use.  Highly successful?  The T1 2-10-4's "were pulling 160 car coal trains into Columbus (OH) when Electro Motive Corporation was peddling doodlebugs" (comment by David P. Morgan !) in the early 1930's.

What's also interesting is that considering that the C&O didn't use their H-8 2-6-6-6's to pull longer/heavier trains than the T-1 2-10-4's, they could have just ordered more T-1's, thus saving themselves the extra cost of the larger engine, and the higher pay scale for the crews.

Stuart

 

The light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an on coming train!

Very good observation, Stuart.  It hadn't occurred to me, but, yes, the Alleghenies pulled the same 160 car trains into Columbus. Theoretically they would have pulled the trains faster - faster over the road times - with their higher horsepower, but I bet not, in actuality Maybe Big Jim has found his T1 book and can offer more insight.

From what I remember reading, I believe management spent money foolishly (kind of like the number of new, post war passenger cars that they bought) and wanted to have the most powerful engine ever made and 'they' didn't find out the true value of the H-8's until they started using them on the flat lands of Ohio.

Some of the PRR J-1's had valuable improvements compared with the original C&O 2-10-4 of 1930. One major was a one piece cast GSC engine bed. The PRR J-1's were regarded by the PRR as a "drag" engine, however. A PRR test report on the PRR 4-4-6-4 Q-2 compares it with the standard PRR "high speed freight locomotive", the PRR M-1 4-8-2! Go Figure.

The PRR J-1's had about the same drawbar HP performance as the N&W A class, but the "A" was faster. Both engines weighed 573,000 lb, and the PRR due to its heavier axle loadings could do with five driving wheel sets and two cylinders what N&W required six driving axles and four cylinders to do. (The N&W A had two weaknesses for "mountain work". One was a low factor of adhesion and the second was limited cutoff.) The limited cutoff increased maximum horsepower, great for manifest freight, but handicapped the engine at low speeds. After all, the N&W had the Y-6 for mountain work! The speed limit for general freight on the PRR was 40 mph, and most mineral trains ran even slower, so the J-1 design was better for the PRR.

Talking about the J1, two other Pennsy features they got along with the tenders were the pilots and the cab.  These look like the ones on the M1 and the ones that the k4's got later on.  images

Is that a Hippo I see on the left? 

The cab had that we saw on the T1 and Q2 of the same era has the same curved window as the J.War_babies

Attachments

Photos (2)

"Sam - Not to mention the wild steam locomotive buying spree the C&O went on after WWII  (4-6-4's, 4-8-4's, 2-6-6-2's, 0-8-0's, 2-6-6-6's, 2-8-4's) !  In relatively short order, they were being moth-balled or scrapped."

My understanding is that at least some of this was driven by immediate need: They couldn't get diesels due to the builders not being able to supply them in time.  For example, the 2-6-6-2's they could get quick.   Apparently, and perhaps this is new insight, management considered them to be disposal.  While a lot of folk thought since it had only been in service for what, three years, before retirement that 2-6-6-2 #1309 would be in pretty good shape.  But evidence now seems to suggest they rode it hard and only did what needed to be done to keep it running.

Andrew Boyd posted:

Truly bodacious footage. I found it neat that an engine from the ATSF would wander that far away.

The Santa Fe 2-10-4s did NOT "wander"!  They had already been removed from service by the Santa Fe, and thus were leased to the PRR for the heavy coal traffic. Once the PRR folks were done beating the snot out of those poor Santa Fe locomotives, they were quickly sent to scrap, by the Santa Fe.

Hot Water posted:
Andrew Boyd posted:

Truly bodacious footage. I found it neat that an engine from the ATSF would wander that far away.

The Santa Fe 2-10-4s did NOT "wander"!  They had already been removed from service by the Santa Fe, and thus were leased to the PRR for the heavy coal traffic. Once the PRR folks were done beating the snot out of those poor Santa Fe locomotives, they were quickly sent to scrap, by the Santa Fe.

You should probably get the picture. How I was surprised they got that far when I first heard about this.

Add Reply

Likes (4)
texastrainPAUL ROMANORSJB18mark s


OGR Publishing, Inc. PO Box 218, Hilliard, OH 43026 330-757-3020
www.ogaugerr.com
×
×
×
×
×