Discussion in 'Getting Started' started by nkp174, Sep 1, 2007.
Looks like most of us love the BIG MOMMAS, hehe. :mrgreen:
Russ, thanks for the info and the pictures of the Valley Flyer. That was one I was not familiar with, so I really appreciate the education!
BTW, Model Power has a loco that looks like that Valley Flyer in N Gauge. In HO you can get it from Mehano (IHC).
While all Pennsy buffs love the K-4, of course,(if one won't haul it, use 2, 3, or ???), I have a thing for the M-1,a,b. Admittedly designed as dual service and mostly used on express/freight- would love to have the room for a long drag of heavyweights and head-end cars with one of these smoking up the right of way at speed! Bob C.
I love the M-1bs which had tenders longer than the engines.
I think someone needs to find a Bowser kit or something.
sign1ABSOLUTELY !...or a Power Ball winner and a bunch of BLIs!!! Bob C.:thumb:
Yeah, the BLI M1b is pretty awesome. I also like the Duplex, mostly because I read stories of Pennsy engineers racing through the backwoods of Pennsylvania at night doing 140mph. The actual steam speed record is probably held by some engineer in a Duplex who was late into Pittsburgh one night. haha :mrgreen: :thumb:
A Pensy atlantic hit 128 or 129 near Elida Ohio around 100yrs ago.
I'd take the S-1 over a T-1 any day of the week...unless I was strictly modeling Horseshoe Curve (the S-1 was for northern Ohio & Indiana exclusively due to turning her). The T-1 is a nice trade off for a commercially available alternative.
I've also heard that the Duplexes could have beaten Mallard, since they usually reached speeds of 122mph (Mallard did 126mph and a bit)- so I've heard.
Pity we'll never know . . .
If I recall correctly...most of the extreme stories were for the S-1. (The prototype for the T-1s...the 6-4-4-6)
Problem was by the time of Duplexes no one was interested in record steam engine speeds anymore.
nkp174, you got a pic to post?
Here's the S-1...
Jeepers, that loco must of had excellent tractive effort because of the extra weight those bogies must of offered.
Forgot to add, what are some of those extreme stories?
Well, let me think...I know that the 140mph stories were about the S-1 (known simply as "The Big Engine")...but I don't recall any others. My father was curator of the Altoona museum 20yrs ago...so I don't really remember specifics...just that there were numerous stories (Altoona was THE railroad town on the Pennsy. Many locomotives were built there...and it was at the base of Horseshoe Curve)
Actualy, I've read that it had very bad traction for some reason, I just can't remember why though.
I would venture to guess the 6-4-4-6 had bad traction because so much of its mass was centered over its giant pilot and trailing trucks, and not enough on its drivers.
Kanawha is quite correct, also, there arn't enough drivers.
Our Class 26- The Red Devil, would have been more successfull if it had an extra axel, because leaving yards she used to slip and slide all the time, but out on the open road she was a dream.
You all are on the right track...
weight on drivers/tractive effort = Factor of adhesion. 4.0 was regarded as the ideal balance of traction and pulling power. I can't find anything on either engine's weight on drivers...but I know that they were low. Saving on running gear weight was one of the main downfalls as it contributed to their poor FoA.
The S-1 & T-1 were famous for such problems. One of the factors in them not making it out of the 1940's.
4-wheel lead trucks (bogies) were used to give a smoother ride at speed...they also reduced wear on the #1 axle of the drivers. 4 and 6 wheel trailing trucks were used to support larger fireboxes.
Ironically...it all applies to model trains too. I once had a Bachman Plus N&W J which could hardly pull itself...despite being quite heavy. I clipped the springs on the lead and trailing trucks...and suddenly it could pull my 13 car N&W passenger train. Fortunately I lost a wheel set after the new Spectrum J came out...and I was able to replace it for something like $30-45 with a new J. The same thing applies to cars. I've found that my unweighted HOn3 cars don't like to stay on the track (they bounce too high on rough track). My weighted On3 cars don't have this problem...hence the NMRA standards. But adding too much weight doesn't really improve anything...but reduces the length of trains that you can pull (I have a Grandt Line porter which can't even pull my brass business car...while it can pull several freight cars).
The D&RGW coaches at the Silverton wer delivered as 20ton cars by Jackson & Sharp in the 1880s. They now weigh 40 tons...the change was due to safety at the expensive of train length.
Separate names with a comma.