Sorry Wayne, my mistake.......maybe T1 dash 2?

dave

Hugh -

In addition to that fabricated (welded) frame for a "new" PRR T1 that the originals did not have, I think a booster would also make sense. Of the T1's that ran on the Pennsy, only number 6111 apparently had a booster. This to me, might have helped address the "slippery" reputation that the locomotives had. I am not sure why the PRR didn't put boosters on the T1's, except that I think their mechanical department seemed not to favor them. I am certainly not an expert on Pennsylvania Railroad steam power, so maybe someone else can advise why the T1's didn't have them. I realize that they added to the cost of operation and also to maintenance, but it seems to me that boosters, in this case, might have made sense. I think that any discussion, whether fanciful or not, that talks about trying to build a T1 today, should include a trailing truck booster.

Comments welcome, and certainly expected.

Les

I agree, really, there is nothing wrong with the gorgeous southern engines running now (although a Ps-4 would be absolutely fantastic), TVRM is one of the best shops in the country, I don't see 4501 or 630 getting worn down anytime soon. NS also uses 765 and hopefully very soon a certain class J (so plenty of steam, but one can dream) But none the less I would love to see something like this (T1) take place.

We are now on PAGE FIVE of talking about essentially nothing. My NALCO anti-foam meter is off the scale.

"We are now on PAGE FIVE of talking about essentially nothing. My NALCO anti-foam meter is off the scale."

Well said, Dave. "Build it and they will come." They won't give a penny a to support or help but they will come. Flame away.....

David...

NALCo made Continuous Blowdown equipment.

The Electro-Chemical Engineering Corporation of Chicago made the Foam-Meter...

Come to think of it, a Foam-Meter WOULD be a pretty nifty feature to have on this site...

"SAFE FOAM"

"UNSAFE FOAM"

Foam-On!

I didn't mean for my Southern PS4 mention to be taken as any type of criticizim on TVRM and their fine work on 630 and 4501,I hope they run for many years. I am just fascinated by the recent new build projects in UK and the southeast is lacking in preserved big passenger steam power compared to other regions.

5 pages and no art? For shame.

Right half of PRR 100th anniversary ad. New Yorker, April 13, 1946.

Here's the problem:
There were relatively few modern British steam loco types NOT preserved. Relative to the SR, GWR, and LMS "families" of locos and the BR designs, there were few LNER and LNER-style steamers saved. The BR designs also roamed the system for the most part, and Britain is a small country compared to the USA.

The U.S. is bigger, vastly more spread out, and had far more "home roads" to root for. Imagine if all we had were PRR, NYC, B&O, and N&W, and we only had to argue whether to build or rebuild a NYC Hudson or Niagara. Instead, we have unemployed 2-8-4's, 4-8-4's, and even a 4-8-2 and 2-10-4 with "nowhere to go."

Click the "Next Topic" button at the top of the page.

Problem solved.

Somehow I get the feeling that discussing the rearrangement of the deck chairs on the RMS Titanic might be a tad more productive.

Some minor quibble points -

I'll accept brother Rowland's representation that he is aware of the backers and that they might be able to do it. I will also remind one or two people here that some of Ross's failures have been far more spectacular, possibly more financially successful and certainly a great deal more fun than some other's successes.

You need to incorporate before you can even apply for 501 status and, though few and far between, there are non-profits that by choice do not have 501 status. If your business model does not rely on the tax-exempt donations you do not need the 501 designation. If you are going to rely on donations there is certainly no harm in announcing yourself while the application is pending. As a rule it is perfectly permissible to solicit non-deductible donations so long as you do not misrepresent the status to the donor. Besides, the IRS was closed for two weeks...

Synopsizing Brother Levin the Elder (aka Bennett) in a piece he wrote here years ago concerning an E Unit - Its my engine and my money!!

The question of historical accuracy is an interesting one. The Tornado is not a run of the works British pacific constructed to be exactly as if it had been in a time capsule since 1955. It is far more the evolution of the design using every bit of modern technology and construction method available which did not detract from the original design concept. A modern TX (note that I did not put a number there) should be expected to do the same. Why repeat something which you already know doesn't work or can be expected to fail when you can do much better. That is what should be the normal progression of design through the life of a product.

Finally, the various class sub-designation used by the PRR are something which only a dedicated indexer who is also a Slobbering Pennsy Fan can really keep track of. Most class and subclass changes tended to look rather alike, the notable exception being the P5. Therefor I suggest that should this thing ever be built with all of the necessary modernization that it is actually a T2.

That idea, however, is not mine: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29789
I have made a minor investment in the next drawing.

We can argue the merits of the T1 as a locomotive another time.

GME

Try to imagine, if you can...what would and will happen when this puppy starts to get credibility...and results. If you can find the wherewithal in the USA in our day and time, to see this to completion, then all the minor details like "where you gonna run it?" will fall into line rather easily, believe it ! How hungry are we....the "T1 people"??? This is NOT going to be for everybody, but it will happen...regardless of how many of the old classic era PRR steamers get restored or not. The T1 was never accepted by the "majority" even when it was just the PRR operating and mechanical depts.; before the first two were built. Just ask Jim Symes !

[quote="jaygee"]Try to imagine, if you can...what would and will happen when this puppy starts to get credibility...and results. If you can find the wherewithal in the USA in our day and time, to see this to completion, then all the minor details like "where you gonna run it?" will fall into line rather easily, believe it ! uote]

When did "where you gonna run it?" become a "minor detail?"

You might want to talk to a few people who already have or are working on getting operable engines but have little or no place to run them. Ask them how "minor" that little detail is.

The comment about "where you gonna run it" got me thinking about another kind of T1, Reading 2100 out on the West Coast. I'd rather see some money put into bringing that one back East, and reconverting her to burning coal, than building a new engine to what proved to be a marginally successful design.

I just looked at the specs on Wiki; the PRR T1 was, in a manner of thinking, an 80 inch drivered 4-8-4, (with already a long wheelbase!) made longer by the addition of a second set of cylinders between the number two and three axles. I can picture all sorts of issues with it (not) getting around curves, getting the middle drivers hung up on vertical curves, or having the middle drivers suspended in sags. The driver equalization and lateral motion devices will have to be absolutely perfect, as will the track it runs on. (And I don't think it will be perfect track for long. I was involved in a discussion earlier today about an A-1-A diesel truck, and what it does to track; the PRR T1 will be far worse).

Hi,
Having read these 5 pages, my first impulse was that the T1, came it to fruition, would be a more macho, more cool project that the Big Boy. Yet all questions here are unanswered by the person who put up the website and some of them may probably remain unsolved as long as no trustwothy names appear. A project may fail, but even if this one was successful: As Lincoln and others said, where do they want to run it?

Honestly, I rather see the T1 have its base in Europe.

Think about it, financed by the Brits, built by the Germans, and - "to set the record straight" as to be read on the website, it needs to run beyond 120 mph. There is no place in the USA the T1 may do this with a decent train consist.

European RRs do have regulations which can not exclude steam per se. And central Europe looks much like Pennsylvania! ;-)

As "plan B", the group could still build a second track next to 614 in Clifton Forge. At least it would be kept perfectly in shape there.

Mike