PRR steam rant

I will most likely be out of sync with this progressive thread.

After reading the original rant I thought about this:

[video=youtube_share;t0TzTsKZ-0U]http://youtu.be/t0TzTsKZ-0U[/video]

Check it out.

 

I was just reading the book "Pennsy Power" which I recently picked up used, and learned that the PRR Mikado and K4 Pacific shared the exact same boiler. Makes you wonder if this might make it easier for a manufacturer to make both of these models.

 

This one of the reasons why the Pennsy was known as the "Standard Railroad of the World" There are other items/parts that were common as well.

Using one boiler for differnt locomotives is sort of what Minitrix did years ago with their K-4 and Decapod, except the chassis for the Decapod did not line up with the shell at the cylinders and the shell for the model did not match the prototype. Those are just a couple of the inaccuracies in their Decapod model.

Scott

Scott

 

I thought I would throw out a few stats culled from off the WWW on steam types and numbers in the 1 to 1 world that were made in the USA. Of the 4-6-6-4 type only 252 were made. The 4-8-4 only had about 1200, and there were 2500 4-8-2s made. Of the 4-6-2 type there were 6800 made. And the real class winner was the steam equivalent of the diesel roadswitcher, maid of all work, the 2-8-2, with 9500 made during production. So if the modeling world was to follow the real world we would have a lot more variety of 2-8-2s instead of the few examples we have had that have almost dried up in supply. I didn't dig for stats on some of the smaller steam but the 2-8-0s, 4-6-0s, 2-6-2s, 4-6-4s, and the real production queen of the pack the 4-4-0 had some impressive numbers also. As far as big steam goes there were almost as many Yellowstone types as Challengers and the numbers of the work a day 2-8-8-2s, or varients of that wheel arrangement were numerous. Unfortunately the N scale world has but one basic model of the latter but at least it can be somewhat modified for other roads. It is interesting to note that the other scale now has a 2-8-8-4 and a whole bevy of small tank and geared types that all evidently have sold or are selling well while we have but one geared loco that currently doesn't appear to be in production at this time, and only one tank type that is still out there by LL.

And as far as the term small steam that probably isn't correct. When as a youngster standing alongside the track and looking at a loco whose driving wheels were at least 5 feet or more, from rail top to top of wheel that is one big impressive piece of machinery, even if it was a 2-8-2.

And throwing one more stat out the 4-6-4 type had 445 produced counting both Canadian Roads in the count. At least in that wheel arrangement we did get some variety once upon a time.

 

The term "Beating a dead horse" comes to mind.................seems to me if we keep "ragging" on the manufactures, instead of being grateful for what we DO have (SO MUCH MORE than we even dared dream 10 yrs. ago), it may come to the point where they just get tired of hearing it, and release ONLY what is easy and profitable ("hand writing on the wall", perhaps??)

 

The P&WV also had a class of 2-6-6-2 with Belpaire fireboxes. They were beautiful machines.

 

They were 2-6-6-4's. Which were like red haired orphan children. Very few were built. Seems most RR's didn't see a need for an engine between a 2-6-6-2 and a 4-6-6-4. But they did yeoman service on the P&WV until replaced by FM H20-44's, a diesel far ahead of its time. 2,000 HP in a switcher body it was like a switcher on steroids.

 

To add to the Standard Railroad of the World in describing the PRR, let's look at the items common to PRR steamers and realize the cost savings to a manufacturer in making several different PRR locomotives. The boiler for the K4 4-6-2 and the L1 2-8-2 was the same. The trailing truck was the same on all single axle trailing trucks as was the wheel [50"] . Drivers on a K4 and an E6 [4-6-2] were 80 inches. Pony truck was the same and pony truck wheels were 33" no matter if four wheels or two wheels. Drivers on the L1 [2-8-2], H8,9,10 [2-8-0] and I1 [2-10-0] were the same. In fact the L1 and the H series consolidation drivers, valve gearing and pony wheels were identical. The I1 [2-10-0] shared a boiler with another Pennsy engine [I think an E6 (4-6-2)]. There is more, like tenders. But get the point. All this standardization means the model manufacturer does not have to reinvent the wheel with each locomotive. Make a H 8,9,10 [they were externally identical] consolidation and you have about 90% of the parts needed for a L 1 [2-8-2] Add one driver set to an H 8,9,10 and you have an I1 [2-10-2]. Can anyone say COST SAVINGS?

Someone quipped about the Hiawatha and said there were a lot of people interested in the Milwaukee Road. Did you know that the PRR has the largest historical society of any US railroad. Some of them do not publish their figures. But for reference the membership numbers for PRR historical society is over twice that of the B&O and the N&W. Now I don't know where any of you studied marketing but I think it is safe to say that no business can ignore a sizeable portion of its market and expect continued success. What N scale is doing is telling PRR modelers that they are not wanted in N scale. HO has a large percentage of PRR fans. Five manufacturers have done K4's in HO and every one has sold out and some more than once. So it is not that PRR does not sell. It does and quite well, in HO where it is made.

 

You are correct, Sir. They were 2-6-6-4 and they only had 7 of them. They were still beautiful machines and they will also never be made by any large model company. They may never be done by any model company.

 

That statistic is meaningless. I belong to the B&O Historical Society and well over 75% of it's members have no interest in model railroading. Most of them are historians/history buffs or have some family ties to the railroad. The historical society encompases all that are interested in the railroad and model railroaders are just a small portion of that. The pennsy was huge so there were a lot of employee related members. The historical society is primarily those that truely care about the history of the line. Many modelers are just not that deep into it and don't care about history as much as they do just having fun with their models.

 

This has been an interesting thread and some great points made. Maybe to add a little more take a look at the Spookshow site for a good listing of what has been made. There has been a fairly good variety just not a lot of what I could use, but that's just me and my modeling preferences. Quite a number of the manufacturers are long gone to history and some of the early products were basically crap which is why some are gone. However if one was good with the tools and the idea of tinkering even some of those could be made to run decently. Interesting to note that the Pennsy M1 was made in brass but evidently there wasn't enough interest in the plastic version to warrant production in N scale. But we do have to be grateful to Kato, Athearn, Bachmann, Atlas, and Rivarrossi, back when it existed in N, for what we have now.

And there may be another factor that I believe was mentioned. The age of the modelers. Lets face it there are far fewer modelers today who grew up with real live work a day steam. The younger folks have been influenced by the excursion locos that are or have been out there recently. About the only three that haven't had recent models made of them are the 261, the 700, and the 844. And I believe the 844 is in the works. With the success of the Hi I would look for the 261 to be next and the 700 at some point down the line. And those excursions covered in the mags and videos help promote them amongst the younger set. And with the Southern 2-8-0 steaming again look for a renewed interest there. I am not disatisfied with what I have and will eventually cull out a few more hopeless cases of steamers to settle down with 15 or 20 decently running versions of what I model some which I have converted to Belpaire boilers. And I'm happy that LL chose to make their FA dis easels since I am an Alcophile and Atlas and Kato their RS units. Now if someone makes a 700 I will belly up and dent the card for three since they were in active freight service in my era. And on my very short list is still a decent conventional Atlantic. I'm hoping that happens before I'm too old to see them or remember how to get to the layout room. But if it doesn't, it doesn't, I'll make do, and modify if I have to. After all I'm still having fun and the world doesn't end if I don't get the loco I want. And the manufacturers are still going to make what is profitable for them.

 

Yes, the manufacturers build western roads, because that is what the people want.

 

Boxcab, the Z class was the only belpaire boiler on NP, being a direct copy of GN's. The Z-1 class was a standard NP design boiler.

As far as the rest of the thread, we need to be sure to thank the manufacturers for what they do produce, as it is all way better than the older stuff. So if any are reading this stuff, THANK YOU!!!!!! Then we need to follow that with our checkbooks.

And my only request is that the next older engine ( 2-6-0, 2-8-0, etc) be equipped with spoked wheels on the lead and trailing trucks. PLEASE!

 

I think the funniest part about all this is the PRR guys whining about not having any steam. Try modeling the Santa Fe, we have a hole 1 mass produced plastic steamer and thats the Bmann 4-8-4. I believe you guys have 2 steamers to date in plastic?

Theres a reason i kitbash and if you cant buy what you want, then make it. If you dont like that, pick a new road or move to the modern side.

 

Even modern is not that easy, want a SD70ACe with the iso cab or post 2006 (after the first 2-3 years of production) details? What about that loco that makes up a huge part of the NS roster, the C40-9W? Or even the 'flat radiator' SD70M as Kato called their one and only run in 2006? SD70M-2? Dream on....

 

Couple of things. First the Belpaire boiler, this is not the deal breaker one would think it is. I would think people would want the Belpaire boiler if the prototype had it. Make a K4 without a Belpaire boiler and how many do you think you would sell? Second, why not slap UP or ATSF on the sides of a K4? After all there were passenger sets painted in PRR that contianed a vista dome. The PRR didn't have any such animal. Good for the goose; good for the gander??? Third, about having a K4 back in excursion service. Actually there were plans to do that. PRR K4 #1361 was being rebuilt for just such a use. It has been designated as the official steam locomotive of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. However, new federal regulations on boilers ocassioned by a couple of fatal steam tractor explosions have dealt the project a significant setback. Those regulations [and the insurance companies' reaction to them] also were the cause of the Ohio Central RR ceasing their steam operations. So where that whole thing will go is undetermined. Fourth, there is a case to be made for the standardization aspect. So many parts of PRR steam locomotives were common to different classes of engines that tooling costs, which everyone says is the big expense can be shared over a series of engines.

 

Honestly, nobody cares. Build what you want or move onto to greener pastures. Nobody is going to cry for you. If you cant build it, pay someone to build it. If thats not an option, they have everything you want in HO. Im tired of hearing people whine about this crap. Deal with it, its not coming and nobody cares.