synonymouse Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In the summer of 1959 I visited with my
> grandparents some relatives in Penna. Most
> memorable was Uncle Mark, who was a retired
> hostler on the PRR at Altoona.
>
> Naturally about my first question was what did you
> think of the T-1's. Right off they were dirty and
> they slipped. My take was something about the
> design was problematical, not imaginary. My take
> was the lack of deflectors caused cinders, etc
> from the stack to go back toward the cab and into
> the faces of the crew, more than ordinarily. You
> have to figure those engineers were pros of many
> years and they would have tried everything they
> knew to deal with the slipping. On the other hand
> they may have grasped after a few years the
> engines were already toast in the mind of
> management and the sooner they departed the
> better.


Well, much has been written about the PRR T-1 class, and some of the diehard PRR fans have always found it difficult to swallow the fact that, the vast majority of PRR Engineers were NOT well trained/schooled on the T-1s. Mainly, they had no experience with a front end throttle, and thus didn't learn quickly enough how to properly regulate that front end throttle on the VERY high HP T-1s.


> I also asked him about the J's; the driving rods
> were too heavy and damaged the rails in his
> estimation. So I tried a different tack - what
> class did you like the best? K-4's. I might have
> mentioned the M-1 4-8-2's but they were kinda like
> a bigger K-4 for freight to my thinking.
>
> Clearly the PRR was a fundamentally conservative
> line and never got into modern northerns or
> articulateds. But they really went experimental
> at the last with the T-1's and the S2 turbine.
> You would think an N&W A type 2-6-6-4 with all
> roller bearings would have been less tricky to
> maintain than a T-1 or a turbine and a better
> match than the C&O 2-10-4 clones they chose during
> the War.


Those "C&O 2-10-4 clones" were really the best steam locomotives the PRR ever had.



But the PRR had more flat territory in
> the west than the N&W, pretty much all in the
> mountains.



The N&W Class A was a fast freight locomotive wand would have served the PRR extremely well. However, its down-fall was,,,,,,,,it was NOT invented by the PRR, which was the same issue with the N&W Class J that the PRR tested.


And the PRR did lease some Santa Fe
> 2-10-4's ca 1956. I wonder what grade of oil they
> used?

Bunker C, same as the Santa Fe.