[N&W] Re: Pennsy on the N&W

[nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org]

Dear fellows,

Something just doesn't fit. The T1 development was a test book perfect. 
First the gigantic S1 (6-4-4-6) was made and tested, then the two T1 
(4-4-4-4) prototypes were made and extensively tested in war conditions. 
Then the decision to built the T1 fleet. Text book correct. All the time to 
the possible shortcomings arise and be fixed. My guess is that they were 
victims of diesels. The T1 was a passenger race horse and were early 
victims of the EDM, Alco and BLW passenger diesels and any possible 
refinement that could be made on the T1 was stopped in favor of more diesels.

Luiz Affonso
_______________________________________________________________
Correct on all points.  The T-1 has, of course, been well-discussed on the 
PRR-Talk Mailing List.  None survive today.

James Kelling


 >N&W Mailing List wrote:
 >
 >From what I have read, the PRR T-1 was not a good performer.  Consider
 >how quickly they were scrapped.  They were slippery, in part because of
 >large driver diameter and independent driver sets.  One suggestion at the
 >time they were designed was to use different driver diameters for the two 
sets.
 >Some comments say they performed best on level, tangent track, at high
 >speeds (lower steam consumption than acceleration, so less tendency to slip).
 >
 >PRR had two demos built, then went too quickly with 50 more while the
 >demos had not yet been debugged.
 >
 >Personally, I love the sight of a T-1 leading the way; but the duplex idea
 >was not really a success.
 >
 >Jerry Crosson