It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 11:46 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 146 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:31 pm 

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 1:25 pm
Posts: 6400
Back in the days when the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy was running steam on fan trips, one of the railroad clubs announced that they would sponsor a trip with steam using the regular Eola (near Aurora) freight train out to Oregon, Illinois and Mt. Morris. I figured they would use O1A class Mikado #4960 for the trip. But apparently the ticket sales meant additional passenger cars had to be handled and with normal freight business, they opted to use O5B class 4-8-4 #5632 as power. The big Northern actually ran over at least one light rail siding delivering cars! However, that day, the light rail branch from Oregon up to Mt. Morris was not tested by the 4-8-4.

Les


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:00 pm 

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:39 am
Posts: 90
For both the 1361 and the 290, I would look to the operations of R&N 425 in terms of "what a pacific can do" (although 425 is a light pacific). Looks can admittedly be deceiving, and that engine does perform some impressive runs. I believe the issues stated before with the smaller tenders/fuel capacity could be similar.

On my own personal note, I would love to see the 290 at least cosmetically restored. I truly find it to be one of the most beautiful engines out there. Here's hoping that SERM does find the time and money to do so.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:28 pm 

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 6:47 pm
Posts: 1398
Location: Philadelphia, PA
To put some numbers on this forum, here's a link to a PRR diagram that shows the dimensions, including weight, of a K4s with stoker. I believe 1361 has a 110P75 tender while the diagram engine has a larger 130P75:

http://prr.railfan.net/diagrams/PRRdiag ... &sz=sm&fr=

Of course 1361 as rebuilt will be somewhat different but this can be a ballpark figure.

Phil Mulligan


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:43 pm 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 1:19 am
Posts: 218
Location: Decatur, GA
CommodoreWesley wrote:

Both of these locomotives face similar challenges, as both could be considered “Heavy Pacifics” due to their heavy axel loads. This weight makes shortline operations for these locomotives risky. I know that even if 290 is just cosmetically restored, the Southeastern Railway Museum’s track is not rated for her weight for her to be removed from the shop. Thus any restoration budget for her will also have to require track replacement.




Just to be clear, cosmetic restoration and display of 290 does not require replacement of any track. Unfortunately, like most volunteer organizations, we cannot always control the uninformed chatter outside of management circles.

_________________
Andrew Durden
Chief Mechanical Officer
Southeastern Railway Museum


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:06 am 

Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:52 am
Posts: 2561
Location: Strasburg, PA
Kelly Anderson wrote:
Prior to 2008, repairs to #1361 were proceeding with what looks like no sheet specific strength calculations having been done. As I understand it, a policy was initiated where any sheet that measured less than 80% of new thickness was replaced, whether it needed it or not. In the case of the roof sheet, it needed it, but since it was over the 80% threshold, it wasn't replaced.

When researched and calculated, it was found that the original design had nearly no corrosion allowance built in, and was good for 210 PSI From the factory (205 was the MAWP), with nuts and washers on the roof sheet end of the crown bolts. In the 1940's PRR eliminated the nuts and washers without any corresponding design change (perhaps as an economy move?), reducing the factor of safety below 4, not counting any loss from corrosion. Repairs made up to 2008 consisted of replacing the inner firebox, but not the roof sheet, and new crown bolts were made and installed, without the nuts and washers needed, resulting in a FOS of closer to 3 than 4.

I knew I had it here somewhere! This is the PRR blueprint calling for the elimination of the nuts on the top end of the crown bolts, resulting in a lower F of S, 10/30/43. Note that the dimensions around the crown bolt nut have been crossed out, and a conventional crown bolt has been drawn in to the left of the note.

Not that it much matters at this date, just wanted to back up what I've been saying.
Attachment:
crown bolt modification.jpg
crown bolt modification.jpg [ 290.71 KiB | Viewed 6628 times ]


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 12:24 pm 

Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:41 am
Posts: 3911
Location: Inwood, W.Va.
Kelly's comments are most enlightening!! Off the top of my head, I would say it at least partially exonerates the (hack, kaff, kaff) "clowns" who were essentially trusting what the PRR did. After all, the PRR ran these things for years and years, surely they knew what they were doing, didn't they?

But then you have the change in crown sheet repair going from a marginal FOS of 4 to a clearly inadequate FOS approaching 3!! What were those guys at Altoona thinking? How the hell did they get away with it?

It sounds to me like the "Standard Railroad of the World" wasn't quite up to the hype even in the later steam era!!


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 4:43 pm 

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:48 pm
Posts: 181
What they were doing is that instead of repairing the boilers they were just replacing them. They looked at them as just another consumable item on the locomotive, and they probably crunched the numbers and found it was less expensive to build replacement boilers than to rebuild existing ones. Why overbuild something when it was just easier to replace it


Online
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:01 pm 

Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 9:23 am
Posts: 189
Location: willow grove pa
The elimination of Nuts and bolts in 1943 by the PRR can possibly be pointed to the war effort and the intense pressure to conserve materials in the face of vast material shortages for the war effort. The USA was building anything and everything resulting in many unique cost / material efforts.
SPS manufacturing in Jenkintown PA ( in the old Warton railroad switch works) employed a “re-purpose shop” that salvaged and re-purposed Nuts, bolts and washers from anything and everything for the war effort. Could you imagine doing that today?
Sometimes we forget how close things were in 1942/43, nothing was more important than the war effort.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2019 6:41 pm 

Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 2:50 pm
Posts: 2815
Location: Northern Illinois
Jennie K wrote:
What they were doing is that instead of repairing the boilers they were just replacing them. They looked at them as just another consumable item on the locomotive, and they probably crunched the numbers and found it was less expensive to build replacement boilers than to rebuild existing ones. Why overbuild something when it was just easier to replace it


That still doesn't justify changing the construction and causing a situation that yielded less than the ICC called for... But I suspect the ICC never realized the issue. If someone did, they likely were told that the engines were running every day and not blowing up, so why get excited about it. I would imagine if there would have been a boiler incident that was directly traceable to the change there would have been hell to pay, but apparently there never was.

So, lacking the extra support of the nuts, the factor of safety drops below the ICC mandated factor of four... But I seem to recall (and I could be wrong) that the national boiler code only calls for a FOS of 3. They were shaving it close, but apparently not TOO close.

Were there ever any failures directly attributable to the lack of nuts on the stays?

_________________
Dennis Storzek


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:19 pm 

Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:52 am
Posts: 2561
Location: Strasburg, PA
RDGRAILFAN wrote:
The elimination of Nuts and bolts in 1943 by the PRR can possibly be pointed to the war effort and the intense pressure to conserve materials in the face of vast material shortages for the war effort.
As far as I know, the ICC did not allow lowering of the required factor of safety for locomotive boilers during the war. They did allow some things to slide during WW1, but nothing as critical as the safety factor of the boiler. I believe that someone at PRR simply screwed up. The duplex boilers were designed with heavier roof sheets and without the nuts, and I suspect that some overworked engineer saw this modification to an old design as a quick way to cut a corner.

Dennis Storzek wrote:
But I seem to recall (and I could be wrong) that the national boiler code only calls for a FOS of 3. They were shaving it close, but apparently not TOO close.
I believe that the current ASME standard F of S is 3.5 for non-locomotive boilers, but the FRA, ASME, and NBIC all are standardized on a F of S of 4 for locomotive boilers.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 4:25 pm 

Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:36 am
Posts: 594
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
Concerning relaxation of standards during WWII, the three major builders built a total of 2120 "S160" Consolidation locomotives to a War Department commissioned design during WWII. The boilers were built to the same standardized design by all three builders. The locomotive specifications state, "Boiler built to comply in all respects with the A.S.M.E. Boiler Code, except that the shell shall have a factor of safety of 4." Given the number produced and that they were specifically designed for the War Department for wartime use, if there was any relaxation of the factor of safety I would expect it would have been exercised in these locomotives.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Wed Jun 23, 2021 4:46 pm 

Joined: Sat May 19, 2018 10:03 am
Posts: 190
Quick update here, ARM has a new website and shows Wick as a chairmen and Levin as secretary. On the museums facebook, a post with the simple phrase “We woke up feeling nostalgic today” and a photo of 1361 was put up. The rumor mill (not the best source of course) claims that there are some events going on tomorrow with possible news. Just thought i’d show what I found.

https://www.railroadcity.org/mission.html

https://m.facebook.com/pages/category/H ... ity/posts/

Also of note, the PRR observarion, Mountain View, has received a lot of work, including lighting and paint.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:08 pm 

Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 3:55 pm
Posts: 91
Further to that point, FMW made a post recently of the Railroaders Memorial Museum clock, with the caption "We hear it's a good time to be in Altoona..."

Seems like 1361 is in good hands!


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:19 pm 

Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm
Posts: 2279
Just mho, but I hope they decided to replace the existing crown sheet instead of going with a new-build boiler.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR 1361
PostPosted: Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:21 pm 

Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2016 10:17 pm
Posts: 246
If money is not a concern, who wouldn't you want an all new boiler?

It will give the locomotive a very long service life with future operators etc having little to worry about in regards to major boiler projects. Seems like a very desirable outcome.


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 146 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Jennie K and 148 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: