The salient point about the Reading locomotives is that -- and strict historic preservationists aren't going to like this -- it would be comparatively easy to rebalance an 'excursion-only' restored locomotive to work effectively at "79mph" without severe augment. I have seen nothing in the valve design that would limit the engine from reaching that speed, and in fact the drifting bypass arrangement ought to facilitate safe operation with that as a peak speed.

Very careful dynamic balancing and correction of weight angling, right down to pounds and ounces, is something 'conceivable' for a single locomotive used for special purposes, and maintained by a volunteer team or expert consultancy.

(Just teasin' y'all -- but this would apply in spades to 614, were there any practical interest in decreasing augment at high road speed...)

The UP and NYC 4-8-4's were balanced at 25% of the reciprocating weights, versus 31.6% on the N&W J. I don't know if all their overbalance was in the main driver or spread over the other drivers or not. Also, it seems like designers were considering total engine weight in their calculations. In the late 1930's some engines were still using 40% of reciprocating weights factor and later had to reduce the overbalance.

I've noticed that in Railway Mechanical Engineer, in the 1940's, several newly built engines had their overbalance distributed over several drivers.

The J that the PRR tested at 100 mph over several days, broke some of its valve gear parts. The Big Boy was built with a requirement of 70 mph continuous speed and an 80 mph maximum speed. I would call that a design factor of safety in miles per hour.

I can report that after many hours of operating both the 2101 and 614 at track speeds the 614's overall ride quality is superior, especially when operating north of 70 mph.

That makes sense when you think about it as the 614 was constructed with all the lessons Lima learned over the decades and she was built to be a mainline passenger hauler vs. the T-1's that were built to slug it out in the mountains of Pa. hauling heavy tonnage coal trains to tidewater.

Ross Rowland

The T-1's were built for fast freight and initially stayed off the mountainous Shamokin Division (West of Tamaqua). After 1954 they were reassigned to Gordon on the Shamokin Division because that was the only place RDG still ran steam.

In their heyday, 1945-1954, they worked through freight because they were faster than any other freight power. They could mostly be found on the Crossline Hagerstown*-Rutherford-Allentown or Phila; B&O trains East Side (Phila)-Jersey City**; Abrams-Port Reading and Main Line St. Clair-Phila.
* - pool with WM
** - pool with CNJ

Speeds were limited officially to 50 mph. Sometimes they unofficially went faster; there were plenty of tower operators, shifter crews and trackmen to watch for hotboxes, dragging brakes or flat wheels.

Phil Mulligan

While the debate rages on....

You have three significant trips THIS YEAR behind 2102, including the 'long one' to Tunkhannock behind 2102 on June 22

Which may be as close as you get, this summer, for a heavy-duty steam experience.

And as of 1:02 on 3/15, still 229 tickets left, so you want to talk, or fish? I'm on it. Sell out the train.

I have to admit, the most remarkable steam experience I ever have had was behind 611 in the Claytor era, on the NKP just accelerating back to track speed (70) out of the curves at Dunkirk, eastbound, 18 cars, and it just threw me back in the seat.... And we were passing a CR intermodal running right parallel to us on the NYC. I'm glad I got to experience it, but it's not likely to ever be repeated. And I've been on Kelly's trips, out to GCR, 1218, very fortunate for every last one here.

I think Randy is correct in that the June 22nd. trip behind the 2102 will be this years best in terms of witnessing a steam locomotive giving its all. There are a couple of good stiff pulls on that route which will see the T-1 giving it her all.

As to Septa someday allowing the R&N to operate their o/w coaches on mainline trips between Philly-Reading I wouldn't totally discount it as Andy Muller keeps them in good shape and my bet is that they would pass a Septa inspection.

Time will tell.

I've got my ticket for the 6/22 trip and will get there early so as to get a good window seat in coach # 5. Hope to see many of you aboard.

Ross Rowland

I will be in one of those open window cars as well. It was the only trip that worked for me, so I guess I stumbled into a good one. I haven't seen or ridden behind the '02 since 1988. I go back to the Steam Tours days and rode one of the Akron-Spencer AC&Y trips in April of 1971. I'm hoping we get back at a decent time, I'm going to try and squeeze in a 1/2 day at Orbisonia on Sunday before heading back to Ohio by dark (it is going to be the longest daylight weekend of the year). I haven't been to the EBT since 2005, when 14 and 15 were both operating.

As for the speed of RBM&N's Iron Horse Rambles is concerned, I've heard that they go the speeds that they do to balance making the ride exciting but not too fast so the passengers can enjoy the scenery and so the ride isn't over too quickly. In other words, they could go faster, but don't so the trip is more enjoyable.

Bert Pennypacker wrote that a Reading T-1, in a test, took 200 loaded hoppers from St. Clair (near Pottsville) to West Falls (just outside Philadelphia.) They were no doubt 2-bay 55 ton hoppers. The train got a push out of the yard, there were orders to not stop the train, and the ruling grade is level 0.0%. There must have been a schedulled water stop.

The RDG Main Line from Belt Line Jct. to Norristown is owned by NS so the RBMN cars would have to be acceptable to them to get from RBMN to SEPTA. In fact, 2102 has conventional bearings on the driving axles, so NS would have to approve that, too.

Assuming 2102 could get to SEPTA, a train with 2 Bomber push-pull car sets with an electric motor on the inbound end (on the Reading) should suffice, and 2102 will need ACSES on board which could be powered from the train's HEP as in a cab car. The cab signal pickup bar MUST be ahead of the lead axle of the movement. I suggest a push-pull with the electric at one end and 2102 at the other.

79 mph is not a factor as ACSES includes cab signals which meets the old ICC rule for operation at 80 mph and above.

Phil Mulligan

Not that it was going anywhere close to that fast, but let's not forget that SEPTA let NHIRR 40 operate out of Lansdale for their founders day in 2019 - using New Hope coaches and a SEPTA diesel on the "rear" of the train.

RBMN ran full page ads for 2102's return in the Philadelphia Inquirer upon its grand return back in 2022 so it does have interest in the Philadelphia market.

Correct! NHIR 40 did run trips out of Lansdale with NHIR cars. It ran as a pull-pull train with 40 on the outbound end.

The Warminster Line to the NH&I and the Lansdale Line are SEPTA-owned and by then were ACSES-equipped. ACSES was in service on both lines because SEPTA considered ACSES a valuable safety device. ACSES was not mandatory yet. The Stony Creek Branch from Lansdale to Norristown and the stub of the Bethlehem Branch to the Lehigh County Line are also SEPTA-owned but do not see passenger service and do not have ACSES or working signals.

On the Lansdale Line the train ran on the inbound side and had the diesel on the Phila end and 40 on the Lansdale end. Regular passenger service continued in both directions on the outbound side. (the regular schedule was written that way to allow maintenance windows with minimal delays) Neither NS nor CSX was involved.

As it worked out, 40, wthout ACSES, could go out of control to its heart's content and have until Quakertown to get stopped. The diesel, with ACSES, would be stopped short of the crossover by ACSES if it tried to go to Center City on its own.

Phil Mulligan

As I recall, the part of the ACSES system that would have to be installed on a locomotive is the 'transponder scanner'. The on-track transponders are mounted in pairs (thereby giving a 'check' on actual locomotive speed) and work a bit like RFID tags -- they are 'excited' by the 27.115MHz transmission from the 'scanner' and broadcast their information back to it at 4.5MHz.

That implies that a suitable generation capability to support the 27.115Mhz radio at acceptable power, and a means of transmitting modulated communications from the actual ACSES receiver in the associated diesel or electric, would be needed to "remote" the leading EOT function the overlay system requires.

The transponder ("balise") is indeed a key part of ACSES. It is similar to the balises used in European train control. It is also an independent part of the ACSES system from the pulse code cab signal system developed by US&S and PRR years ago.

ACSES cab signals have a second carrier frequency because NEC speeds are much faster than they were when 4-aspect cab signals were developed. Today's displays show the maximun speed allowed by the signals as well as the signal aspect.

Phil Mulligan

Moderators,

Please rename this very drifting (derailed?) thread.

Wesley

I don't think we need a new title. If we want one of the big 4-8-4's to stretch their legs, we will need a cooperative Class 1, and that means PTC, probably I-ETMS.

This part of the thread is focused on ACSES because it's closest to where 2102 is and 611 was, two passenger operators, but anywhere else means I-ETMS.

Remember, 2100 is under overhaul too.

Phil Mulligan