That could be true. The East Tennessee and Georgia did wreck three locomotives by running them off a bridge near Loudon. A written account appears in the book "Southern Railroad Man" about this as the author, Conductor Nimrod Bell was the one ordered to ensure the destruction of the locomotives. His description is pretty much staightforward and accurate. I don't have my copy handy or I would list the names of the locomotives wrecked there. From his account, the bridge had been burned previously, trapping the three locomotives between the bridge at Loudon and another burned bridge. All they did was run the equipment off the end.

awalker1829@yahoo.com

Portlands UP 3203 (AKA OR&N 197) had a fresh outshopping before being placed in Oaks Park. The story I was told is it was rebuilt for flood service as many of the area yards used to flood before the dams were built. The tubes are new circa 1956 and show evidence of one fire, brick was never glazed, fresh lathe marks on all tires (not just edges, but the entire tread face), and an almost full load of Bunker C (sorry Sarge!)

Smokebox

Frisco 1522 myths

When the Frisco 1522 was undergoing it's initial restoration at the Museum of Transport, a spectater asked if the locomotive burned wood like the other steamers. When told that the Frisco 1522 would be burning oil, the spectater said, "Oh, its a diesel then."

When the Frisco 1522 was on display at Springfield Missouri, at the former home shops, so many people told me that their Father, Uncle, Grandfather, neighbor, etc had run the 1522 when the engine was in regular servicde. I calculated that the cab of the Frisco 1522 was about 15 feet wide at some point to accomadate all these engineers and firemen.

jim1522@aol.com

A bride-to-be who was contemplating having her wedding reception at the B&O Museum Rounhouse said to me, "Do they lower the trains into the basement at night?"

kevin.r.gillespie@verizon.net

Alright guys, this has been an interesting thread and just can't resist.

While I was riding a Steamtown train around 1990, a middle aged woman dressed as and acting the part of Phoebe Snow sat down next to me. We spoke for several minutes and then she mentioned the day she would never forget...the day the Union Pacific Big Boy STEAMED into town. I said that she must be mistaken because a Big Boy has not steamed since around 1959 or so. She was insistant and noted that the diesel pulling it was there just because the Big Boys simply couldn't handle the grades on the Lackawanna...I just nodded my head in disbelief! I was really hoping one of the rangers would set her straight someday...funny stuff.

Paul


hubbard5004@msn.com

I ride the San Francisco F Line PCCs frequently and am always amused by the comments of riders that they rode the line "years ago" and are so glad they started running the old streetcars again.

The right of way was the State Belt Line which operated Steam and Diesel not traction!

I don't think a PCC is an old street car; Muni 1 or 130 or 162 " Iron Monsters" are old street cars!

Ted Miles

ted_miles@nps.gov

My personal favorite...

"Yeah, when they ran (Steamer X) on that fan trip a few years ago, they didn't really need those diesel helpers. In fact, it could have gone faster, but the diesels' were holding it back!"

Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of the drivetrain on a diesel-electric usually gets a kick out of that one...



Fiv4HghStk@aol.com

> Although my specialty leans tword internal
> combustion it seems reasonable to me that
> any piece of machinery you can get to pull
> 1200 tons at speeds in excess of 100 MPH is
> pretty damn legendary....I don't care if it
> came out of the beloved halls of
> Altoona...Eddystone..Lima or LaGrange. What
> I wouldn't give to stand at the diamond at
> VANDALE tower, MP 336, Columbia City,
> Indiana and watch a T1 roll through with the
> General....or better yet trying my hand at
> getting underway out of Englewood with the
> above mentioned 1200 tons....No IDAC or
> WS-10 card here...but the real thrill would
> be charging down the long hill near Winona
> Lake, speed above the century mark......NO
> DEFECTS!

Isn't the 1200 ton/100 mph design goal in reference to the S-1 6-4-4-6? I believe the T-1's numbers were more modest, something around 900 tons? Anyone??

justighe@bright.net

re: diesels holding back steam;

Yeah, when the governors kick in at 89mph, or whatever they are set at, then the diesels are literally dead weight.


John Stewart
Ottawa, Canada.

> "Yeah, when they ran (Steamer X) on
> that fan trip a few years ago, they didn't
> really need those diesel helpers. In fact,
> it could have gone faster, but the diesels'
> were holding it back!"

> Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of the
> drivetrain on a diesel-electric usually gets
> a kick out of that one...


freewrl-1@rogers.com

> They were not
> converted by the Skagway shops but rather
> were shipped from Baldwin as 3 foot gauge.
> Another 20 went to Queensland Ry as
> 42", and the rest went to India as
> meter gauge where the order was destined
> before the Alaskan and Australian
> diversions.

There were others that were built for 42" gauge. Some saw service in the Philippians after their reconquest. Some never went over seas and after the war were sold to central american 42" bannana operations. My referance book on this is loaned and not yet returned.

> None were ever destined for "Iran"
> as it's mistakenly stated in most history
> books and magazine articles about the
> WP&YR. Iran's government railway was all
> standard gauge. No narrow gauge USATC
> locomotives were ordered for or sent to
> Iran. Any author who visited Skagway came
> away with the Iran myth, including such
> notables as Omer Lavallee, Cy Martin, and
> Stan Cohen. This myth about Iran has been
> perpetuated since the 1950s by authors who
> copied someone else's mistake, instead of
> researching the facts.

There were some of the military engines that operated in North Africa in and out of Oran, Algeria. Now, if someone heard Oran and did not know what or were it was they may think the speaker was saying Iran. 2-3 years ago the WP email group had a great discussion about this.

Brain Norden

> How about the tale of the B&O EM-1 that
> was supposed to been cut up in 1972.

I think there is some truth to that story. However it was more of a mix up. The EM-1s were stored in Northeast Ohio in 1960-61 when the last one was scrapped.

I think a old trains magazine article or news report told of the sad end. It may have had one saved for the B&O Museum that got away. However there were two Y6b's in Roanoke scrap yard that were cut up about that time, 1971-2. Maybe a little confusion and lack of good reporting?

D. Brown

Story
> goes
> that it was being stored in some undisclosed
> location, but that some dolt in the upper
> management had it cut up out of spite as a
> result of an argument with the motive power
> department.?


Peruvian Rails
dwbrown1@fuse.net

> There were others that were built for
> 42" gauge. Some saw service in the
> Philippians after their reconquest. Some
> never went over seas and after the war were
> sold to central american 42" bannana
> operations. My referance book on this is
> loaned and not yet returned.

I was refering specifically to the initial 1943 Baldwin order for 60 MacArthurs destined for India. USA nos 190 to 249. The first eleven of that order went to the WP&YR, twenty went to Queensland, the rest to India. Yes, some of the MacArthurs in the four other later Baldwin orders were also for 42" however most were meter gauge. Baldwin produced a total of 253 of this design in five seperate orders for the USATC, from 1943-45.

> There were some of the military engines that
> operated in North Africa in and out of Oran,
> Algeria. Now, if someone heard Oran and did
> not know what or were it was they may think
> the speaker was saying Iran.
> Brain Norden

Those MacArthurs were all meter gauge and from the initial order of 30 from ALCO in 1942. A year before the 11 Baldwins for the WP&YR. There were a total of twelve ALCO orders for a total of 338 MacArthurs from 1942-45.

As shown in the Baldwin lists of locomotive production, there is no doubt that the initial order was for India.

Mike

mike211@yknet.ca

> ............ who never actually had to get
> said locomotive and train out of Chicago or
> Englewood (as one "expert" said,
> "they were great engines to run fast;
> it was getting them to stop slipping their
> way out of the station that was the
> b****"). Of COURSE you'd love to be
> trackside; sure beats having to deal with
> the monstrosity itself! <;-)

How much of that was caused by being equipped with poppet valves? Its my understanding that any engine equipped with poppet valves tended towards "slippery." I've read that T-1 was re-valved with Walschaerts valves. While it was too little too late, has anyone heard if the Walschaerts valves tamed T-1's slipperyness? Just wondering.

Ed

The T1 was designed for 880 tons at 100 mph. Exceeded that during over-the-road tests and in service.

Should I presume that the two or three recent articles/letters in PRRT&HS Keystone are inventions? They cover in some detail the observations of the enginemen that actually ran them. Not all comments are positive, some preferred the K4, but others had considerable praise for hte T1. Virtually all said they didn't slip excessively. Based on these articles, it sounds like what the T1 needed was someone who know how to run them. Some get the hang of something new, some don't. Just like today.