Here's a bit of a mystery:

At the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago, there is a locomotive cab on display with complete backhead and appliances, set up so you can sit in it and pretend to be an engineer or fireman. (I'm working on a report about MSI's collection, and hope to have my act together soon.) The display identifies this cab as belonging to PRR K-4 #1361, and being sort of slow about such things, it wasn't until later that I realized why this number sounded familiar - it's the engine that's now being restored at Steamtown! Now there are a couple of inspection reports in frames attached to the inside of the cab at MSI which definitely identify it as #1361. But the engine at Scranton certainly has a cab: I've seen pictures of it somewhere on the web.

Can anyone familiar with the 1361 shed some light on this?

Of course, there's a possible explanation. I've never seen pictures of a double-cab ("camelback") K-4, but maybe there were some. Bet you didn't know....

Randall.Hicks at eacemr.com
(but right now my email server is on strike)

> Here's a bit of a mystery:

> At the Museum of Science and Industry in
> Chicago, there is a locomotive cab on
> display with complete backhead and
> appliances, set up so you can sit in it and
> pretend to be an engineer or fireman. (I'm
> working on a report about MSI's collection,
> and hope to have my act together soon.) The
> display identifies this cab as belonging to
> PRR K-4 #1361, and being sort of slow about
> such things, it wasn't until later that I
> realized why this number sounded familiar -
> it's the engine that's now being restored at
> Steamtown! Now there are a couple of
> inspection reports in frames attached to the
> inside of the cab at MSI which definitely
> identify it as #1361. But the engine at
> Scranton certainly has a cab: I've seen
> pictures of it somewhere on the web.

> Can anyone familiar with the 1361 shed some
> light on this?

> Of course, there's a possible explanation.
> I've never seen pictures of a double-cab
> ("camelback") K-4, but maybe there
> were some. Bet you didn't know....

> Randall.Hicks at eacemr.com
> (but right now my email server is on strike)

This question had come up on the PRRTHS web; the conclusion was the cab in Chicago is from a different engine. The inspection forms may have come from 1361, but the cab didn't.

Drat! I've read this explanation somewhere. I believe Dave Conrad made the mockup. I'm sure someone here knows....

Joshua

joshuakblay@hotmail.com

> Drat! I've read this explanation somewhere.
> I believe Dave Conrad made the mockup. I'm
> sure someone here knows....

> Joshua

Speaking of those displays, I heard that the set of drivers that used to be on display there (its been a while since I've been there)were from a C&IM 2-6-0. Anybody know what engine, and why the whole thing wasn't saved in the first place, instead of cutting off one side of wheels? As far as I know (and I am not a C&IM fan) there aren't any C&IM steam survivors are there?

TJG


Port Huron Museum
peremarquette@hotmail.com

T.J.,

As far as I know there is only one remaining C&IM steam loco, a Lima 2-8-2 (#551?) in St. Louis @ the Transportation Museum.

Many of the older & smaller locos, ie, 2-8-0's, 2-8-2's, etc were disposed before WWII when the C&IM began buying 2-10-2's and larger surplus 2-8-2's from other roads (for instance DL&W).

As we all bemoan the fact that certain engines were not saved during the 50's, who can forget that none of the last 4-4-0's built for a Class 1 railroad where not saved (the C&IM #500-502)as well as, IMHO, any of the best looking USRA design 2-10-2's (Lima built C&IM 700-703).

Thanks,
MAS

mark.stoeckel@rrd.com

> Drat! I've read this explanation somewhere.
> I believe Dave Conrad made the mockup. I'm
> sure someone here knows....

> Joshua

No, Dave Conrad didn't built it--it was there when I was about 5, and Dave and I are about the same age. My recollection is that it was there since the early 1950's. Dave's contribution to the display at MSI was the rebuilding of the 999.


Kevinmccabe@avenew.com

Close, but not quite. The running gear on display is from a Chicago and Eastern Illinois Atlantic (4-4-2), #223. There's a picture of it on the display, and these were certainly beautiful engines - I'd much rather have had the whole thing! However, the display is quite effective: the wheels turn and you can see how the valve gear works, etc.

Meanwhile, thanks for the info on #1361. I looked at the archives for the PRRTHS but couldn't find anything. However, I'm sure the cab must be from some other unspecified engine, and I guess we'll have to leave it at that. And as Kevin says, the cab has been there a long time (I too remember it from my distant youth) so it's not Dave Conrad's fault a K4 was cut up.

Have but patience: a complete report on MSI should be available soon.

Randall.Hicks at eacemr.com

> T.J.,

> As far as I know there is only one remaining
> C&IM steam loco, a Lima 2-8-2 (#551?) in
> St. Louis @ the Transportation Museum.

> Many of the older & smaller locos, ie,
> 2-8-0's, 2-8-2's, etc were disposed before
> WWII when the C&IM began buying 2-10-2's
> and larger surplus 2-8-2's from other roads
> (for instance DL&W).

> As we all bemoan the fact that certain
> engines were not saved during the 50's, who
> can forget that none of the last 4-4-0's
> built for a Class 1 railroad where not saved
> (the C&IM #500-502)as well as, IMHO, any
> of the best looking USRA design 2-10-2's
> (Lima built C&IM 700-703).

> Thanks,
> MAS

Mark:

I agree that it is a shame that none of the C&IM "modern" 4-4-0's survived. Seems to me I read somewhere that one of them was held for a period of time while someone tried to come up with the bucks to buy it but were eventually unsuccessful and the engine was scrapped. As for the 2-10-2's, the C&IM in the end was primarily a 2-10-2 railroad. Not only did they have TWO different classes of 2-10-2's that were built for the railroad (the 600's and the 700's) but they also had TWO sets of 2-10-2's that were built for other railroads (Wabash and Atlantic Coast Line) that they purchased used. I am often curious as to why the Museum of Transportation in St. Louis didn't take one of the 2-10-2's from the C&IM instead of one of the Missabe's and gotten a 2-8-2 from the Missabe instead of C&IM 2-8-2 #551. But at this late date, we will be have to be satisfied I guess with #551 and the Missabe 2-10-2.

midlandblb@cs.com

> Close, but not quite. The running gear on
> display is from a Chicago and Eastern
> Illinois Atlantic (4-4-2), #223. There's a
> picture of it on the display, and these were
> certainly beautiful engines - I'd much
> rather have had the whole thing! However,
> the display is quite effective: the wheels
> turn and you can see how the valve gear
> works, etc.

Randall:

I had heard that the drivers were actually from C&EI Atlantic #222, not #223. This engine was supposedly "rescued" by the C&EI from their "dead line" and restored for display at the Chicago Railroad Fair in the late 1940's. The question is, why after restoring the locomotive and putting it on display, did the railroad then turn around and scrap it? Sad, especially when you consider that NO Chicago & Eastern Illinois steam locomotive was saved!

> Meanwhile, thanks for the info on #1361. I
> looked at the archives for the PRRTHS but
> couldn't find anything. However, I'm sure
> the cab must be from some other unspecified
> engine, and I guess we'll have to leave it
> at that. And as Kevin says, the cab has been
> there a long time (I too remember it from my
> distant youth) so it's not Dave Conrad's
> fault a K4 was cut up.

> Have but patience: a complete report on MSI
> should be available soon.

> Randall.Hicks at eacemr.com


midlandblb@cs.com

L,

Not knowing for certain, I can only speculate why the MOT did not take a C&IM 2-10-2.

The aforementioned Wabash 2-10-2's (650's) were shot and replaced by the ACL 2-10-2's (750's). The 600's, 700's & 750's were used until replaced by diesels (the 700's & the ex-ACL's received ex-NYC Mohawk tenders). I believed all were scrapped at Springfield & Taylorville.

The 550 2-8-2's were the last steam engines in actual service, in fact, one was used in stationary boiler service in Springfield. One of the Mikes was used on passenger special using RI commuter cars. That was the last use of steam.

It is my guess that by the time the C&IM got around to offering any engines to the MOT only the 2-8-2's were left.

It is also my guess that the Missabe 2-10-2's lasted into the late 50's, early 60's. They definitely outlasted the C&IM 2-10-2's.

It is also a shame that none of the C&IM passenger cars that were built the same time as the 4-4-0's were saved. These cars were basically CSS&SB trailers, actually tacked onto a CSS&SB order (Insull owned both railroads at that time).

Thanks,
MAS


mark.stoeckel@rrd.com

> It is also a shame that none of the C&IM
> passenger cars that were built the same time
> as the 4-4-0's were saved. These cars were
> basically CSS&SB trailers, actually
> tacked onto a CSS&SB order (Insull owned
> both railroads at that time).

A whole bunch of CSS&SB trailers (I presume you're talking about the 200-series) were saved, though. Most are owned by the National Park Service and have been spread around at various musuems, most of which have preserved them in a state of decaying stasis. They don't seem to be incredibly historic (one was recently scrapped without much fanfare), so some tourist line could always try and restore one as a C&IM car.

> It is also a shame that none of the C&IM
> passenger cars that were built the same time
> as the 4-4-0's were saved. These cars were
> basically CSS&SB trailers, actually
> tacked onto a CSS&SB order (Insull owned
> both railroads at that time).

I have been told that these cars were so similar to the interurbans that they were equiped with the interurban style U4 air brake valve that the Insull interubans had. Also told that they had a business car with the same air brake system.

Brian Norden


bnorden@gateway.net

Dear Randall:
It is no mystery. The PRR cab at MSI was repaired/restored by me several years ago. When I started the project it had no number on it, nor did MSI have any documentation on it's origin save that it was donated by the PRR. I thought that it would be amusing to put the number 1361 on it. The cab cards (inspection reports) in the cab are quite bogus-check out the names of the inspectors, etc.- all guys who worked with me during my days at IRM, again I was just amusing myself.
By the way, MSI records indicate that the running gear display was made from C&EI No. 222 as Les Beckman thought.
Kevin McCabe is also correct that I restored No. 999 now displayed inside the Transportation Hall.

jdconrad@snet.net

> L,

> Not knowing for certain, I can only
> speculate why the MOT did not take a
> C&IM 2-10-2.

> The aforementioned Wabash 2-10-2's (650's)
> were shot and replaced by the ACL 2-10-2's
> (750's). The 600's, 700's & 750's were
> used until replaced by diesels (the 700's
> & the ex-ACL's received ex-NYC Mohawk
> tenders). I believed all were scrapped at
> Springfield & Taylorville.

> The 550 2-8-2's were the last steam engines
> in actual service, in fact, one was used in
> stationary boiler service in Springfield.
> One of the Mikes was used on passenger
> special using RI commuter cars. That was the
> last use of steam.

> It is my guess that by the time the C&IM
> got around to offering any engines to the
> MOT only the 2-8-2's were left.

Mark: That's a nice theory but I don't buy it. You have to remember that Dr. Roberts of NMOT was one person who had an idea of what he wanted to acquire for "his" museum. And that was one example of each major wheel arrangement. PLUS, he seemed to be one "collector" who actually had an "in" with railroad officials. My guess is that he WANTED a C&IM Mike and a Missabe 2-10-2. There were other 2-8-2's and other 2-10-2's available from other roads besides the C&IM and the DM&IR. He probably got what he wanted; it's just that he ignored the fact that if he really wanted an example of a steam engine from the Midland, it should logically have been a 2-10-2. Would be interesting to have somebody at MOT go through the records (if they exist) to see if this theory is correct or not. Could very well prove I'm wrong I guess.

Les

> It is also my guess that the Missabe
> 2-10-2's lasted into the late 50's, early
> 60's. They definitely outlasted the C&IM
> 2-10-2's.

> It is also a shame that none of the C&IM
> passenger cars that were built the same time
> as the 4-4-0's were saved. These cars were
> basically CSS&SB trailers, actually
> tacked onto a CSS&SB order (Insull owned
> both railroads at that time).

> Thanks,
> MAS


midlandblb@cs.com

> Dear Randall:
> It is no mystery. The PRR cab at MSI was
> repaired/restored by me several years ago.
> When I started the project it had no number
> on it, nor did MSI have any documentation on
> it's origin save that it was donated by the
> PRR. I thought that it would be amusing to
> put the number 1361 on it. The cab cards
> (inspection reports) in the cab are quite
> bogus-check out the names of the inspectors,
> etc.- all guys who worked with me during my
> days at IRM, again I was just amusing
> myself.

Dave!!! How could you?!?

Obviously I didn't look quite closely enough at those stupid cards - but then I didn't know you had worked on the cab, since it had been there a long time. Sheesh. And here I thought you were an ethical person.