|
|
 Posted - March 28 2014 : 12:38:34 AM
|
Didn't seen this mentioned on here. But I learned of this today and it blew my mind. The basic idea is that if a group of people in Europe could build a brand new steam engine (The Tornado) that the same should be done here. Rather than picking something easy, they are going right for the kill and they want to build a 53rd T1 which will carry on as 5550 (the next T1 number in the series). It's a unfathomable undertaking I have my doubts. However if it gets off the ground this will be the most incredible thing on rails!
http://prrt1steamlocomotivetrust.org/
|
Country:  USA ~
Posts: 531 ~
Member Since: January 29 2009 ~
Last Visit: July 10 2020
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 12:45:54 AM
|
killer! Now maybe they'll improve it make it run abit better & with better technology they didn't have back then
Such as Roller Berings, improved steam pipes etc
Course IF I had the money I'd go to them people who built the Peppercorn loco & build one to US specs 
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 15016 ~
Member Since: February 23 2009 ~
Last Visit: April 08 2026
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 07:43:04 AM
|
I hate sounding pessimistic but, the amount of money needed would be measured in cubic dollars.
Fascinating project idea.
I hope they fix the wheel slip problem.
Unspoken expectations are premeditated failures.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 825 ~
Member Since: December 22 2008 ~
Last Visit: March 16 2015
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 08:24:32 AM
|
quote:I hate sounding pessimistic but, the amount of money needed would be measured in cubic dollars.
Originally posted by NC shortlines - March 28 2014 : 07:43:04 AM
|
It'll be expensive to build, then keep right on being expensive. The thing is huge and so will be its fuel consumption. The long rigid wheelbase will, no doubt, restrict where it can run.
If I were launching into a project that large, I'd want something with a little better odds for success as an end result.
Carpe Manana!
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 2416 ~
Member Since: September 17 2013 ~
Last Visit: February 09 2026
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 08:28:13 AM
|
There is some great video of T1's running on their site if you look around. In one video the one set of drivers lights up the rails and it starts spinning lol. That said a few years ago a report came out from when the C&O briefly tested the T1 since they showed intrest in it. Mind you the C&O engineers were using to handling big articulators. The report showed that the C&O engineers didn't report nearly the amount of wheelslip that the PRR engineers did. Treating the T1 with a bit more of a gentle hand due to their experience might have been key there. On top of that some PRR engineers were not fond of the T1 because each T1 displaced what would have been a second K4 crew to help pull the same train. Also there wasn't much training on the T1 so engineers were being plucked from K4's and dropped into something with almost three times the amount of power. Working the throttle like a K4 might have been another source of the excess wheelspin. It's been said the wheelspin problem wasn't a unsolveable one, but the diesels were arriving and the PRR lost intrest in it's big steamer.
Regardless, it will be interesting to see how this progresses. They actually have a builder lined up who has agreed to do the work. The ballpark on the estimate is over 11 million. They would REALLY need a sponser with deep pockets to step forward to help get it off the ground. I think the only good idea at this time is if you guys haven't seen this on other forums spread the link around a little. Everything that's happened with this publicly has only happened in the past month or so. I'm sure spreading the word around would help th cause a little, maybe the right person will hear it!
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 531 ~
Member Since: January 29 2009 ~
Last Visit: July 10 2020
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 08:32:39 AM
|
quote: quote:I hate sounding pessimistic but, the amount of money needed would be measured in cubic dollars.
Originally posted by NC shortlines - March 28 2014 : 07:43:04 AM
|
It'll be expensive to build, then keep right on being expensive. The thing is huge and so will be its fuel consumption. The long rigid wheelbase will, no doubt, restrict where it can run.
If I were launching into a project that large, I'd want something with a little better odds for success as an end result.
Originally posted by scsshaggy - March 28 2014 : 08:24:32 AM
|
That surprised me too and was one of my main doubts behind the whole thing. I could think of a handful of other engines that would probably have a better shot at being more operator friendly. That said we now live in a world where UP is restoring a Big Boy to operate so anything is possible. And even a static T1 would be jaw dropping impressive to see in person.
Edited by - ChrisC on March 28 2014 08:34:00 AM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 531 ~
Member Since: January 29 2009 ~
Last Visit: July 10 2020
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 10:03:17 AM
|
Cool idea but I have no idea how they're gonna do that. With the Tornado, it was easier to build because it was a smaller loco and wasn't so complex. The PRR T1s on the other hand... you get the idea. It's a cool idea though.
-Steve
"A lot of modellers out there who go to these train shows see broken HO stuff and go, 'This is useless' when, in reality, they can still be used for modeling whether it's as a prop on your layout or a cool project to make something old new again."
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 3533 ~
Member Since: February 17 2014 ~
Last Visit: January 11 2023
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 10:06:15 AM
|
Although it's a cool idea to build another PRR T1, it would be much easier to build a NYC streamlined Hudson. It would also be way less expensive. There's none of them left so why not build another one of those? They're so cool looking! Both of them look cool though.
-Steve
"A lot of modellers out there who go to these train shows see broken HO stuff and go, 'This is useless' when, in reality, they can still be used for modeling whether it's as a prop on your layout or a cool project to make something old new again."
Edited by - kovacste000 on March 28 2014 10:19:45 AM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 3533 ~
Member Since: February 17 2014 ~
Last Visit: January 11 2023
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 11:29:22 AM
|
Why not build a S1? It´s much bigger!  - Erich
Edited by - Erich on March 28 2014 12:28:28 PM
|
Country:  Austria ~
Posts: 1046 ~
Member Since: December 03 2008 ~
Last Visit: February 14 2025
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 11:43:33 AM
|
quote:Although it's a cool idea to build another PRR T1, it would be much easier to build a NYC streamlined Hudson. It would also be way less expensive. There's none of them left so why not build another one of those? They're so cool looking! Both of them look cool though.
Originally posted by kovacste000Â -Â March 28 2014Â :Â 10:06:15 AM
|
I agree that an NYC streamlined Hudson might be a better project. That locomotive is probably the best known locomotive design in this country. I think it would appeal to a wider audience, hence more financial support.
I do like T1's. And a Y6b would be fun to see and hear run.
Unspoken expectations are premeditated failures.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 825 ~
Member Since: December 22 2008 ~
Last Visit: March 16 2015
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 1:30:28 PM
|
quote: quote:Although it's a cool idea to build another PRR T1, it would be much easier to build a NYC streamlined Hudson. It would also be way less expensive. There's none of them left so why not build another one of those? They're so cool looking! Both of them look cool though.
Originally posted by kovacste000Â -Â March 28 2014Â :Â 10:06:15 AM
|
I agree that an NYC streamlined Hudson might be a better project. That locomotive is probably the best known locomotive design in this country. I think it would appeal to a wider audience, hence more financial support.
I do like T1's. And a Y6b would be fun to see and hear run.
Originally posted by NC shortlines - March 28 2014 : 11:43:33 AM
|
Exactly!
-Steve
"A lot of modellers out there who go to these train shows see broken HO stuff and go, 'This is useless' when, in reality, they can still be used for modeling whether it's as a prop on your layout or a cool project to make something old new again."
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 3533 ~
Member Since: February 17 2014 ~
Last Visit: January 11 2023
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 1:34:06 PM
|
| There is a student spearheading a project that is moving ahead right now to rebuild a Santa Fe steam locomotive to run on carbon neutral biofuel and they are going after the land speed record for the worlds fastest steam powered vehicle. That said, the T-1 is perhaps the coolest locomotive in history despite some its operational deficiencies. If there is a project to build a new one then count me in!
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 867 ~
Member Since: December 21 2013 ~
Last Visit: December 08 2016
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 6:04:24 PM
|
This is odd, because on the other few forums I read this on, everyone voted the NYC Hudson Dreyfuss as the loco that would be just as good looking and more practical. I agree with that a lot, except the only issue is I'm pretty sure the group funding this has really close ties to the PRR historical society, so one way or another a PRR engine was going to be minted lol. Seriously though if they can build a T1, a Dreyfuss should be the second project haha.
Metalsmith - That sounds like a cool project any more information on it?
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 531 ~
Member Since: January 29 2009 ~
Last Visit: July 10 2020
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 6:14:26 PM
|
quote:This is odd, because on the other few forums I read this on, everyone voted the NYC Hudson Dreyfuss as the loco that would be just as good looking and more practical. I agree with that a lot, except the only issue is I'm pretty sure the group funding this has really close ties to the PRR historical society, so one way or another a PRR engine was going to be minted lol. Seriously though if they can build a T1, a Dreyfuss should be the second project haha.
Metalsmith - That sounds like a cool project any more information on it?
Originally posted by ChrisCÂ -Â March 28 2014Â :Â 6:04:24 PM
|
We'll see how it goes. They're doing a similar thing to Big Boy 4019 by basically rebuilding it. I think they said the Big Boy 4019 will be back in steam by 2019. I think the Big Boy is bigger, therefore, more complex than the PRR S1. I'm downloading it to Trainz right now actually. The S1 I mean.
-Steve
"A lot of modellers out there who go to these train shows see broken HO stuff and go, 'This is useless' when, in reality, they can still be used for modeling whether it's as a prop on your layout or a cool project to make something old new again."
Edited by - kovacste000 on March 28 2014 6:14:52 PM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 3533 ~
Member Since: February 17 2014 ~
Last Visit: January 11 2023
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 8:56:33 PM
|
Not downplaying the Big Boy project, it's going to be a huge and expensive undertaking - but at least they have what seems to me to be a big advantage: they are rebuilding an existing locomotive. This T1 group, if I understand it right, is building a T1 from scratch. I'm assuming they have blueprints and all that, but wow....what an undertaking and it boggles the mind. Aside from the money it would take, just think about fabricating every single part of a T1. 
http://tycodepot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 9:45:39 PM
|
quote:Not downplaying the Big Boy project, it's going to be a huge and expensive undertaking - but at least they have what seems to me to be a big advantage: they are rebuilding an existing locomotive. This T1 group, if I understand it right, is building a T1 from scratch. I'm assuming they have blueprints and all that, but wow....what an undertaking and it boggles the mind. Aside from the money it would take, just think about fabricating every single part of a T1.
Originally posted by JNXT 7707Â -Â March 28 2014Â :Â 8:56:33 PM
|
That's what I'm wondering about. How are they going to do that? With the Tornado, it's a smaller, more simple locomotive but it took them almost 20 years or so to finish it. Just imagine how much time it's gonna take to finish the T1. Again, I'm not against the idea or anything, I think it's cool but I don't see how it can be achieved without getting help from a ton of people which means more money spent. I'm sure the end amount is gonna be in the million dollar range.
-Steve
"A lot of modellers out there who go to these train shows see broken HO stuff and go, 'This is useless' when, in reality, they can still be used for modeling whether it's as a prop on your layout or a cool project to make something old new again."
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 3533 ~
Member Since: February 17 2014 ~
Last Visit: January 11 2023
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 28 2014 : 11:02:27 PM
|
According to what ChrisC posted, estimates in the 11 million range.
http://tycodepot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 29 2014 : 11:18:49 AM
|
| Would've been better to rebuild a PRR J1, there's a coast to coast tender up in New York that can be used. There, project halfway done.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 239 ~
Member Since: September 17 2012 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 29 2014 : 12:36:58 PM
|
On general principles, I am all for anything that resurrects the glory of massive American steam locomotive technology, but...in this case, you have a design with inherent engineering operability problems that resulted in the T-1's rapid demise, irrespective of the advent of dieselization. These issues are better-described elsewhere, but as nice as it would be, how about a Northern or other more "durable and proven" design, instead of one where- if replicated from blueprints- would create the same set of problems the second time around? Would an alternative design be a better goal- and, perhaps, more likely to come to be?
Siouxlake Ron
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 510 ~
Member Since: September 21 2011 ~
Last Visit: December 21 2014
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 29 2014 : 4:53:53 PM
|
I am all for the NYC Dreyfuss design as well, I agree wholeheartedly that it is indeed the more handsome and practical of the two. I just think the T-1 was so incredibly audacious a design that given the choice I would pick the T-1 hands down as a dream machine candidate for a new build.
Edited by - metalsmith1 on March 29 2014 4:54:42 PM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 867 ~
Member Since: December 21 2013 ~
Last Visit: December 08 2016
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 29 2014 : 7:55:03 PM
|
quote:I am all for the NYC Dreyfuss design as well, I agree wholeheartedly that it is indeed the more handsome and practical of the two. I just think the T-1 was so incredibly audacious a design that given the choice I would pick the T-1 hands down as a dream machine candidate for a new build.
Originally posted by metalsmith1Â -Â March 29 2014Â :Â 4:53:53 PM
|
I would go for the T1 too, given a choice. If you're going to shoot high, shoot as high as you can. This thing really fires the imagination.
http://tycodepot.com/
|
|
|
Home
Forums
Events Calendar
Forum Admins & Mods
Register
