It may have been a practical failure, but it was an aesthetic success. A work of industrial fine art really. It boggles my mind how something designed by a man as well regarded as Raymond Loewy failed to be preserved not only for its historical value, but it's artistic value as well. Industrial art is one of the most underappreciated forms of artistic expression.
Too bad it wasn't preserved, in mind it's one of the best looking streamlined steam engines, and like you said, it's a better showcase locomotive than a workhorse.
@@synckronix honestly times like these i wish i had an insane ammount of wealth and was born during that time period specifically to buy the s1 off for preservation
It's a shame how many examples of steam locomotives were destroyed. In some cases these locomotives were perfectly operational when destroyed. The 100+ vice-presidents of the Pennsylvania Railroad were ornamental, I guess. Remember was completed years before the Penn Central merger.
The start of the video was GREEEEAAAAT. You were honest to yourself. (Ment as a compliment.) Also I debate that the S1 should be replicated but ONLY for display for fans.
I enjoyed this video much more then the first one. I like how you pointed out that the S1 was in fact larger with tender then the Big boy, many people forget about that part. However, as a very good point that you also made it was experimental and a "show piece" and what better way to gain attention then to brag that it was the biggest combo ever built. The S1 holds a special place in my heart because it was used in the war effort to transport our nations troops and what better way to travel then on a grand flagship such as this one. It is very easy to fantasize as you hinted on about a better outcome than being scrapped and I think we all would have loved for the S1 to have been sold then scrapped. I am truly grateful that we have so many films to see just how massive this train truly was. But as lessons have taught us bigger isn't always better. Again great job on this video!
@@AndrewTheRocketCityRailfan4014 as we wait for prr t1 5550 and all the technical advancements to be added over 8 more years, what engine would you want to be built again?
@aranimation7933 you are right, i read many high speeds of the S1. But what is possible??? I believe the Story from march 1946, the S1 running the trail blaizer to Chicago and made a speed of 141.27mph. I calculated this and there was a little difference. So small ,10mph wind from the right direction could make it possible
@@widodoakrom3938 oversize is only a problem at the time you look. The UP need 140 feet turntables and enlarged roundhouses for their Big Boys. But for "1" S1 it is really expensive to build.
Great remaster of one of the largest engines on the east coast! I also agree that this remaster is much better than the original, and that your videos are improving over time.
Honestly, I like the T1's sharknose just fine. It's far less glamorous, but at the same time it makes the T1s look extremely badass in a way that the S1 simply doesn't.
The S1 was hugely impressive. It was more a statement project, built as an example of what could be achieved rather than as a practical locomotive that could work day in, day out. The T1 was different. It built on the lessons learned from developing the S1 and was capable of working commercially. I do think the fact that not a single T1 was preserved was terrible. It was one of the most advanced steam locomotives ever built and one should have been saved for posterity. I wish the T1 Trust all the best in their attempts to build a new one from scratch.
I am so glad I have found your channel. I live in the UK and love US locomotives, you have shown me locomotives I didn't know existed. Keep up the good work
I'd say that 6100 the S1 Duplex was a definitive success. Seeing as how, despite being so big and heavy, she was still a reliable, free steamer, and could comfortably outperform even the S1 Niagaras and the S2 Super Niagara from the old New York Central Railroad in spite of the fact she only ran between Chicago and Crestline.
Fascinating. Screw the channel naysayers. You have a very animated yet real voice and I enjoy listening to it. Remarkable talent for one so young. Keep these coming!!
also, Gwr 4600 class 4-4-2t is another George Jackson Churchward's another failure locomotive like great bear. I understand your message in the trailer, Andrew Raila ‘Bammers! good luck in college!
"Bammers" is an unusual colloquial name. Experimental in nature, this S-1 locomotive served as a test bed for high pressure boilers and unarticulated solid frame locomotives to save the railroad from using two locomotive engine crews. If memory serves, articulated locomotives, in some cases, could be used to require two engine crews because of the dual frames and local union agreements. From a management perspective, it was in principle, not one, but two locomotives using one engine crew in the dawn of the concept of a multiple unit diesel locomotive technology. It was resisting change from steam. At this point the fireman no longer hand shoveled coal into the locomotive firebox, but were part of the operation of the locomotives. Superheating boilers with 300 lbs sq. inch operational pressure could be very deadly in a boiler explosion and had to be monitored closely because of the pressures involved. The S-1 and it's succesor, the T-1 were unique locomotives when locomotives were still being built by rail carriers. Labelling ANY steam locomotive, especially experimental made in small numbers, is tantamount to labelling the Saturn V multistage rocket that carried the first American Astronauts to the moon as a FAILURE because of Apollo 13 near disaster and they're outdated and no longer used. It's simply unacceptable to slam a big, red FAILURE on any locomotive. Saying whatever he wants to in print or in video text, is entirely acceptable. But not a BIG, RED, FAILURE ON THE DISPLAY. It also demonstrates a disrespect for history, progress and experimental design. This was a DUPLEX type. It was NOT a Mallet'. The difference being, that a Mallet' took steam from the first set of drivers and directed it to the second set of drivers before discharge. A Mallet' was articulated. A Duplex, however, used superheated steam directly to both sets of drivers. It WAS NOT articulated, it had a single piece frame. The problem with curve radius was never properly evaluated. Thus, design differences, in itself, created a locomotive capable of higher speeds, as well as high traction power, as long as the curves were not too sharp. The passenger service of the Pennsylvania Railroad was where the S-1 achieved 157 - 160 mph timed in between control towers. If it were official it would still be a speed record in commercial passenger record in passenger service .Thus, the Mallet' could not deliver the speed component, although both had similar tractive effort and pulling power. The curve of tractive effort could not be matched in the high speed range. It has still not been determined if this is the reason that made the Duplex superior in speed to the Mallet'. It is also why the engineers (both operating and designers) of the day did not seem to understand if this could be why the Duplex wheel spin was a characteristic of a locomotive capable of higher speed. The wheel spin was not an operational issue with some locomotive Engineers. Especially in the light of the T-1 Trust building a NEW T-1 TRUST locomotive for historical and historical purposes. Causing a failure in this project funded by contribitions by allowing displays in this manner by an individual with no scientific evidence or experiencep in steam boiler applications or locomotive design, which could, indeed, affect contributions and could open up RUclips to damage litigation, in addition to Mr. Bammers, who I truly believe means no harm, would indeed be a compound tragedy for all involved. www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=prrt1steamlocomotivetrust.org/&ved=2ahUKEwjh5qnV-s76AhW0rYkEHaFZC6EQFnoECAgQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0mLEpDlEGbx5PhaOaKhMRA
My M.S. is in Physics. My PhD is in education. I had 13 years of Seniority on Penn Central and Conrail, plus I was a UTU #1399 Local Chairman of Yards. I was employed from 1974 until 1987 when I took a severance pay due to a Crew Consist agreement.
Much much better than the original. Thank you, maybe you SHOULD approach the T-1 Trust and make a series about how the new T-1 is being built. Put a big red success on the new T-1 being built. Unlike me, you'll probably be around for it's first run.
People forget what a PR bonanza something like the S1 was. Even if only one, they'd have (and did) use it in print ads. Railroads/steam locomotives and ocean liners were the high tech of their day, and their parent companies were household names.
In the short term the PRR S1 and other Duplex types were impractical for the network it was supposed to operate on. However, despite some general minor design flaws as well as no real experience with crews on such an extraordinary type of locomotive, keeping in mind most crews on the PRR were used to running their power to its limits and some, means that the PRR pretty much made a locomotive that does technically work and can perform to expectations. However, the main issue falls more on the PRR itself rather than the locomotive. For a long-term investment and if it was actually thought through on the system it was supposed to run on, the S1 and other Duplex types would do way better on railroads that tend to have more smoother curved trackage so a fair amount of the US outside of say the PRR and the general Northeastern region. I will say this though. Despite its flaws, it is an honest testament to the extents of which steam power can go and, in all honesty, I would like to see a real modern designed steam locomotive with the tech advances and knowledge we have. I think we could easily create a feasible as well as reliable steam locomotive that could rival even the most advanced heavy haulers out there today. But that's just my thoughts, nice video and keep up the great work man, best wishes.
If it's running environment was built to withstand it, it would have been a different story. As far as the T1 wheel slip problem. It was later found out that many of the crews feared layoffs because fewer crews would be needed. Sabotage by engine men pulling the throttle too fast would cause the front engine to spin wildly.
Its easier to change the locomotive rather than the environment. Also, how does intentionally spinning the wheels on the locomotive keep people from getting laid off? If anything wouldn't it have been in their benefit to drive the locomotive correctly?
@@drosera88I know it's a little late ,,, by intentionally spinning the front drivers ,, the crosshead bearings and equalizing springs from engineer's side to fireman's sides gets out equalization and into the shop for a whole front end suspension rework ... Could take up to a month ,,,, The PENNSY did at one time double up (( 2 )) K4 Pacific's on longer through trains ,, a crew in each locomotive .. The 1-- S1 and 52 -- T1 were to replace 2 K4's on the long passenger trains ....
@@drosera88 It's a complicated problem. You have had to work on the Railroad and known the ways at the union men thought. Will you have a locomotive that can do the work of two locomotives the requires one crew, then that means you are able to get by with less employees. Of course any business in America because of the philosophy of management looks at employees has something that can be reduced to make profits. However they have no problem spending money on physical things that are not people. They have no concept of the thing that's called human capital. And they continuously refused to look at their employees as Investments and spend money taking care of the employees in many ways. Until they lose this attitude the work relationship between management and labor is going to have a lot of problems. Historically the railroad was the worst but I don't think they are in modern times, the worst part of it now is in politics. In the outfit called the right to work committee.
Hard to resist a beautiful Lowey design but beauty doesn't get the job done. Crazy that they didn't redesign early on when it became clear that this loco couldn't run on almost any of their lines so it would probably never pay for itself. Should have sold it off to a western line who could use it instead of scrapping it.
I can say as an autistic person that the concept of properly wording sentences is very difficult and you are brave for building a youtube channel around specific history. I think your views on the Penney s1, at least from the original video are harsh. The locomotive was an experiment to build a ultra large scale steam locomotive that travelled at high speeds. The engine was non-articulated to keep the engine more stable at very high speeds. When It was concluded that the wheelbase was to long for turns and that not enough weight was supported by the drive wheels the pennsy had smaller engines with the rigid frames built which reduced the wheel-slip issues that the s1 had. The s1 lasted 7 years in service which for something this experimentery is quite a long time. The s1 served a important roll in penny’s history and should be scene as just that. A prototype duplex locomotive from which better designs were based off of.
Yeah, I listened too much to Jim Van Der Kolk, but after I listened to what History in The Dark had to say, my thoughts changed forever. I did point out as much positive points of the S1 as I could in this remake
A failure only because of it's length and it wasn't articulated. In the east here the track system was the same as it was from the nineteenth century. The track curvature radius couldn't handle this locomotive and no turntable in the east was long enough to handle it. The locomotive ran between Crestline, Ohio and Chicago. The locomotive performed well between Ohio and Chicago. Are you aware that a Pennsy T1 is being built from scratch and hopefully on the road in a couple of years. I think it's called the T1 Project or T1 Foundation, look it up. Yes, soon we will see a T1 traversing the rails again. They found an original tender from a J1a or M1a, all they have to do is add the streamline skirting which is saving a lot of time and money. The engineers on this project say that the legendary slippage on this locomotive wasn't as bad as reported and s lot of it was caused by the loco engineer's themselves in the way they operated them. They are making some adjustments to the valve gear and a tweak here and there and it will perform great. They have all of this computer software now that they didn't have back then and can easily make adjustments as needed. When you think about it, all of those magnificent machines were pretty much designed and laid out with a simple slide rule. These people had to be geniuses on some type of level. I've always only had one big regret in my life and that's that I missed steam superpower by a few years. Steam power, the greatest and most beautiful machines ever built by man. Also, steam is the closest machine that man ever built that's almost alive. Coal (sometimes oil), water and a fire, all forces of nature which makes them machines that are kind of alive. Long live Pennsy Steam Power ! No fancy gadgets, just brute force. The I1s 2-10-0. class is a fine example. Another railroad that I admire is the N&W, amazing steam power and all designed and built in their Roanoke Shops. Whole lot of pride with that railroad and deservedly so.
Wheelslip on late era pennsy locomotives is not really caused by the steamers being poorly designed. The engines were not only more powerful than crews knew how to handle, but also made with new and experimental technology and thus had kinks that had to be worked out.
Compared side by side, UP Big Boy has a visibly larger (longer) boiler. That is even more prominent once you remove the streamlined "bullet" section of S1 in front, which gives at least 2 meters of added length. For a fair comparison the boiler of S1 should be stripped of the streamlining as the Big Boys' boiler is. In actuality the lenght of PRR S1 boiler is quite similar to that of H-8 Allegheny. S1 sure is a powerful icon of a locomotive from a visual perspective. But I am under the impression that they've tried everything they could to make it as large as possible for the sake of being large and visually striking for the World Fair (where it was exhibited), hence it turned out to be a failure. Impressive to look at, but almost useless as a working locomotive. Big Boy on the other hand is just the opposite concept. It is the largest thing that can normally operate on a regular track. It is the most efficient design for it's purpose and it was built to be as compact as possible, not the other way around! So in conclusion: Big Boy was designed to be as small as possible for the task and still turned out to be the largest steam locomotive while remaining very practical. PRR S1 was designed to be as large and impressive as possible and turned out to be impractical and still smaller than UP 4000. But the S1 surely did it's job on the World Fair impressing everyone in 1939.
@@generalprincecodyhedgewolf2944 well duplex engines are only good for express passenger trains really UP could fix the problems with the PRR duplexes but mallets are better mixed traffic locomotives mainly for fraight turns
Great job on the video. This is much better than the original. As someone with autism, I now how you felt at the time. Also, even though the locomotive did have its downsides, it’s still one of my favorite engines. Good luck in college.
I don’t think UP would have been a realistic buyer due to its horrible tractive effort; maybe on some lines, but it would have been the solution to a problem that never existed for UP - they already had some of the best locomotives out there. This thing is kinda the ugly stepchild of the N&W J-Class, though it’s sheer size made the aesthetics grow on me a bit. The 611 looked like an absolute monster when she was performing her first excursions near me a couple years ago - I can’t even imagine what it would have been like to see this thing in service.
Specifically, 5 were built in 1910, and they were all retired (and presumably scrapped) in 1924. In overall performance, they were worse than the X1 0-8-8-0's they had, only having better stability.
This video makes a lot of sense when you look at when Union Pacific bought up 3985 to West Virginia to pull the Santa Claus train. They had issues with the space here on the rails on the east coast, even with 3985 being articulated . What about the t-1 trust building a new t-1 a locomotive that cannot negotiate the rails here on the east coast
i used your title sort of but with the world on got out my series is the same as yours but my series is called dead arrival if you dont mind if i used 2 worlds of your title
Even though some say the S1 shloud have been saved, i actually dissagre! 1st: you need to find a place big enough for it, 2: i dont wish to take Big Boy's status as the largest steam engine (both before and in preservation)
If they had gone for a 4_8_4 with the extra two cylinders being mounted between the frames it may have worked Maybe Lowry convinced them to build a white elephant I don't know
@@DavidKehleyIt's not so much having large separations between refueling facilities mandating it, as it is minimizing the number of times you have to stop the locomotive to top up on fuel. This is especially important for something like the S1, which was meant to pull heavy and fast express passenger trains. Constantly stopping to refill the smaller tender with coal and water would bring down the average speed quite significantly. Conversely, the larger tender increased the distance the massive fuel and water hungry engine could go on a single fuel and water load.
Raymond Lowey didn't really do as much design as you would think. The T1 according to HIS design was going to be a camel back if you look up his patent drawing. The GG1 was also similarly modified because he insisted on rivets to make it look more rugged. His designs were ALWAYS changed. They always ended up looking better after his designs were scrapped.
From a practical standpoint the T-1s were better, for multiple reasons. Still, the S-1 was larger, heavier and therefore so.ewhat more powerful, at least in theory. Superheated boilers operating at 300lbs/sq. in. plus the duplex "4 4" drivers with "poppet valves" instead of more conventional pparts like on a "mallet" articulated frame. Also, it's a difficult engineering challenge in a mallet to get the same Tractive effort out of both such a drivers when you're feeding the second set of drivers used Steam. It dictates using something like different sized Steam Pistons and cylinders. Of course the size and the power differences cause the locomotive to exhibit weird vibrations because the Driving Systems do not operate in the same manner. A vibrational analysis such a piece of equipment could yield problematic vibrations that would affect a whole range of cost increaces for maintenance. If you want to know what I'm talking about you need to go Google "vibrational modal analysis".
This isnt a new vid about locomotives WELL THE S1 LIONEL MODEL IS GREAT. AND EVEN HISTORY IN THE DARK DID PUT IT ON GREAT REVELOUTINARY LOCMOMOTIVES THAT FAILED WITH THE HUSH HUSH AND M-10001 PS.WHAT ABOUT AN EMD DEADE ON ARIVAL.
It may have been a practical failure, but it was an aesthetic success. A work of industrial fine art really. It boggles my mind how something designed by a man as well regarded as Raymond Loewy failed to be preserved not only for its historical value, but it's artistic value as well. Industrial art is one of the most underappreciated forms of artistic expression.
...because it wasn't 50 years later.
@@wintersbattleofbands1144 Yep, there's a lot of art that isn't appreciated until it's too late.
Too bad it wasn't preserved, in mind it's one of the best looking streamlined steam engines, and like you said, it's a better showcase locomotive than a workhorse.
@@synckronix yeah I know
@@synckronix honestly times like these i wish i had an insane ammount of wealth and was born during that time period specifically to buy the s1 off for preservation
It's a shame how many examples of steam locomotives were destroyed. In some cases these locomotives were perfectly operational when destroyed. The 100+ vice-presidents of the Pennsylvania Railroad were ornamental, I guess. Remember was completed years before the Penn Central merger.
The start of the video was GREEEEAAAAT. You were honest to yourself. (Ment as a compliment.)
Also I debate that the S1 should be replicated but ONLY for display for fans.
Thank you for your message in the trailer, Andrew. As someone with Autism, I can relate somewhat. Hope you are well, and good luck in college!
I LOVE the intro! Really like a locomotive you'd discuss! Well done!💖💝💕
The S1: Good lookin' locomotive, but a performance nightmare.
The closest we'll ever see this thing in person is in model train form.
I enjoyed this video much more then the first one. I like how you pointed out that the S1 was in fact larger with tender then the Big boy, many people forget about that part. However, as a very good point that you also made it was experimental and a "show piece" and what better way to gain attention then to brag that it was the biggest combo ever built. The S1 holds a special place in my heart because it was used in the war effort to transport our nations troops and what better way to travel then on a grand flagship such as this one. It is very easy to fantasize as you hinted on about a better outcome than being scrapped and I think we all would have loved for the S1 to have been sold then scrapped. I am truly grateful that we have so many films to see just how massive this train truly was. But as lessons have taught us bigger isn't always better. Again great job on this video!
Very good. On the K4, I've always had a soft spot for them - as did Gresley of the GNR in England.
Mallard: my top speed was 126mph so I'm the fastest!! :D
Prr S1: hold my beer
many people were split on this beast, it was a great show piece and heavy worker, but it was truly built before it's time
Makes sense. There are many other reasons as well to why the T1 was chosen for mass production over the S1
@@AndrewTheRocketCityRailfan4014 as we wait for prr t1 5550 and all the technical advancements to be added over 8 more years, what engine would you want to be built again?
New York central Hudson
@@AndrewTheRocketCityRailfan4014 perfect. maybe there's a way to bring the mohawk back. also could you make a video on the best engines on arrival?
@@cykablyatman6242 there's two Mohawk's still around, I think you meant the Niagara's
Cool video! The "Darth Vader" Music, along with Offenbach, was a nice touch.
i thought i heard imperial march! XD
@@kathyhenderson824 You're right, good catch!
Why do I love the PRR S1??? It is the ultimate high speed steam locomotive. No other had enough power to run more than 120mph with a 1200ton train.
@aranimation7933 you are right, i read many high speeds of the S1. But what is possible??? I believe the Story from march 1946, the S1 running the trail blaizer to Chicago and made a speed of 141.27mph. I calculated this and there was a little difference. So small ,10mph wind from the right direction could make it possible
@@martinanschutz7410 and for its size thats really impressive
No offense but I don't like a steam locomotive having a horn.
But the train looks cool.
Oversized can't be used in standard gauge u need broad gauge
@@widodoakrom3938 oversize is only a problem at the time you look. The UP need 140 feet turntables and enlarged roundhouses for their Big Boys. But for "1" S1 it is really expensive to build.
Great remaster of one of the largest engines on the east coast! I also agree that this remaster is much better than the original, and that your videos are improving over time.
Honestly, I like the T1's sharknose just fine. It's far less glamorous, but at the same time it makes the T1s look extremely badass in a way that the S1 simply doesn't.
I'm enjoying your DoA series. Please keep making them!
The S1 was hugely impressive. It was more a statement project, built as an example of what could be achieved rather than as a practical locomotive that could work day in, day out. The T1 was different. It built on the lessons learned from developing the S1 and was capable of working commercially. I do think the fact that not a single T1 was preserved was terrible. It was one of the most advanced steam locomotives ever built and one should have been saved for posterity. I wish the T1 Trust all the best in their attempts to build a new one from scratch.
Your videos are superb. For a newb like me, learning about these wonderful locomotives, your info is invaluable! 👏👏👏👏
I am Autistic as well, and I was an Engineer on the Railroad!
What’s funny is that it was VERY functional. 150 mph top speed
Go ahead, prove that it was all documented properly like Mallard, I double dare you
I am so glad I have found your channel. I live in the UK and love US locomotives, you have shown me locomotives I didn't know existed. Keep up the good work
I'd say that 6100 the S1 Duplex was a definitive success. Seeing as how, despite being so big and heavy, she was still a reliable, free steamer, and could comfortably outperform even the S1 Niagaras and the S2 Super Niagara from the old New York Central Railroad in spite of the fact she only ran between Chicago and Crestline.
What do you think of the project to build a new T1??
It's a travesty that this isn't a museum.
Fascinating. Screw the channel naysayers. You have a very animated yet real voice and I enjoy listening to it. Remarkable talent for one so young. Keep these coming!!
Raymond Loewy said that the best designed containers were the old Coca Cola bottles and the egg.
P.S. Using the Imperial March was funny
The S1 for me looks like its a duplex version of the J-Class from N&W lol btw nice vid
also, Gwr 4600 class 4-4-2t is another George Jackson Churchward's another failure locomotive like great bear.
I understand your message in the trailer, Andrew Raila ‘Bammers!
good luck in college!
"Bammers" is an unusual colloquial name. Experimental in nature, this S-1 locomotive served as a test bed for high pressure boilers and unarticulated solid frame locomotives to save the railroad from using two locomotive engine crews. If memory serves, articulated locomotives, in some cases, could be used to require two engine crews because of the dual frames and local union agreements.
From a management perspective, it was in principle, not one, but two locomotives using one engine crew in the dawn of the concept of a multiple unit diesel locomotive technology. It was resisting change from steam. At this point the fireman no longer hand shoveled coal into the locomotive firebox, but were part of the operation of the locomotives. Superheating boilers with 300 lbs sq. inch operational pressure could be very deadly in a boiler explosion and had to be monitored closely because of the pressures involved.
The S-1 and it's succesor, the T-1 were unique locomotives when locomotives were still being built by rail carriers.
Labelling ANY steam locomotive, especially experimental made in small numbers, is tantamount to labelling the Saturn V multistage rocket that carried the first American Astronauts to the moon as a FAILURE because of Apollo 13 near disaster and they're outdated and no longer used.
It's simply unacceptable to slam a big, red FAILURE on any locomotive. Saying whatever he wants to in print or in video text, is entirely acceptable. But not a BIG, RED, FAILURE ON THE DISPLAY. It also demonstrates a disrespect for history, progress and experimental design.
This was a DUPLEX type. It was NOT a Mallet'. The difference being, that a Mallet' took steam from the first set of drivers and directed it to the second set of drivers before discharge. A Mallet' was articulated. A Duplex, however, used superheated steam directly to both sets of drivers. It WAS NOT articulated, it had a single piece frame. The problem with curve radius was never properly evaluated. Thus, design differences, in itself, created a locomotive capable of higher speeds, as well as high traction power, as long as the curves were not too sharp. The passenger service of the Pennsylvania Railroad was where the S-1 achieved 157 - 160 mph timed in between control towers. If it were official it would still be a speed record in commercial passenger record in passenger service .Thus, the Mallet' could not deliver the speed component, although both had similar tractive effort and pulling power. The curve of tractive effort could not be matched in the high speed range. It has still not been determined if this is the reason that made the Duplex superior in speed to the Mallet'. It is also why the engineers (both operating and designers) of the day did not seem to understand if this could be why the Duplex wheel spin was a characteristic of a locomotive capable of higher speed. The wheel spin was not an operational issue with some locomotive Engineers.
Especially in the light of the T-1 Trust building a NEW T-1 TRUST locomotive for historical and historical purposes. Causing a failure in this project funded by contribitions by allowing displays in this manner by an individual with no scientific evidence or experiencep in steam boiler applications or locomotive design, which could, indeed, affect contributions and could open up RUclips to damage litigation, in addition to Mr. Bammers, who I truly believe means no harm, would indeed be a compound tragedy for all involved.
www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=prrt1steamlocomotivetrust.org/&ved=2ahUKEwjh5qnV-s76AhW0rYkEHaFZC6EQFnoECAgQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0mLEpDlEGbx5PhaOaKhMRA
My M.S. is in Physics. My PhD is in education. I had 13 years of Seniority on Penn Central and Conrail, plus I was a UTU #1399 Local Chairman of Yards. I was employed from 1974 until 1987 when I took a severance pay due to a Crew Consist agreement.
Much much better than the original. Thank you, maybe you SHOULD approach the T-1 Trust and make a series about how the new T-1 is being built.
Put a big red success on the new T-1 being built. Unlike me, you'll probably be around for it's first run.
Great job!!!🎉🎉🎉❤
People forget what a PR bonanza something like the S1 was. Even if only one, they'd have (and did) use it in print ads. Railroads/steam locomotives and ocean liners were the high tech of their day, and their parent companies were household names.
I would not mind if you tackle the United Kingdom’s high pressured steam locomotives, LMS’ Fury and LNER’s Hush Hush(Galloping Sausage).
I’ve been planning those for some time. I might post out a list of future plans for episodes while I’m up in Pennsylvania
Awesome
This was a great video. Thanks for making it and sharing it.
Thanks for the message in the trailler
And i wish you good luck for college
In the short term the PRR S1 and other Duplex types were impractical for the network it was supposed to operate on.
However, despite some general minor design flaws as well as no real experience with crews on such an extraordinary type of locomotive, keeping in mind most crews on the PRR were used to running their power to its limits and some, means that the PRR pretty much made a locomotive that does technically work and can perform to expectations.
However, the main issue falls more on the PRR itself rather than the locomotive.
For a long-term investment and if it was actually thought through on the system it was supposed to run on, the S1 and other Duplex types would do way better on railroads that tend to have more smoother curved trackage so a fair amount of the US outside of say the PRR and the general Northeastern region.
I will say this though.
Despite its flaws, it is an honest testament to the extents of which steam power can go and, in all honesty, I would like to see a real modern designed steam locomotive with the tech advances and knowledge we have. I think we could easily create a feasible as well as reliable steam locomotive that could rival even the most advanced heavy haulers out there today.
But that's just my thoughts, nice video and keep up the great work man, best wishes.
If it's running environment was built to withstand it, it would have been a different story. As far as the T1 wheel slip problem. It was later found out that many of the crews feared layoffs because fewer crews would be needed. Sabotage by engine men pulling the throttle too fast would cause the front engine to spin wildly.
Its easier to change the locomotive rather than the environment. Also, how does intentionally spinning the wheels on the locomotive keep people from getting laid off? If anything wouldn't it have been in their benefit to drive the locomotive correctly?
@@drosera88I know it's a little late ,,, by intentionally spinning the front drivers ,, the crosshead bearings and equalizing springs from engineer's side to fireman's sides gets out equalization and into the shop for a whole front end suspension rework ...
Could take up to a month ,,,,
The PENNSY did at one time double up (( 2 )) K4 Pacific's on longer through trains ,, a crew in each locomotive ..
The 1-- S1 and 52 -- T1 were to replace 2 K4's on the long passenger trains ....
@@drosera88
It's a complicated problem. You have had to work on the Railroad and known the ways at the union men thought. Will you have a locomotive that can do the work of two locomotives the requires one crew, then that means you are able to get by with less employees. Of course any business in America because of the philosophy of management looks at employees has something that can be reduced to make profits. However they have no problem spending money on physical things that are not people. They have no concept of the thing that's called human capital. And they continuously refused to look at their employees as Investments and spend money taking care of the employees in many ways. Until they lose this attitude the work relationship between management and labor is going to have a lot of problems. Historically the railroad was the worst but I don't think they are in modern times, the worst part of it now is in politics. In the outfit called the right to work committee.
wait...what? The Imperial March from Star Wars! Great way to represent this beast.
Hard to resist a beautiful Lowey design but beauty doesn't get the job done. Crazy that they didn't redesign early on when it became clear that this loco couldn't run on almost any of their lines so it would probably never pay for itself. Should have sold it off to a western line who could use it instead of scrapping it.
I like the two prototype PRR T1s.
I can say as an autistic person that the concept of properly wording sentences is very difficult and you are brave for building a youtube channel around specific history.
I think your views on the Penney s1, at least from the original video are harsh. The locomotive was an experiment to build a ultra large scale steam locomotive that travelled at high speeds. The engine was non-articulated to keep the engine more stable at very high speeds. When It was concluded that the wheelbase was to long for turns and that not enough weight was supported by the drive wheels the pennsy had smaller engines with the rigid frames built which reduced the wheel-slip issues that the s1 had. The s1 lasted 7 years in service which for something this experimentery is quite a long time. The s1 served a important roll in penny’s history and should be scene as just that. A prototype duplex locomotive from which better designs were based off of.
Yeah, I listened too much to Jim Van Der Kolk, but after I listened to what History in The Dark had to say, my thoughts changed forever. I did point out as much positive points of the S1 as I could in this remake
A failure only because of it's length and it wasn't articulated. In the east here the track system was the same as it was from the nineteenth century.
The track curvature radius couldn't handle this locomotive and no turntable in the east was long enough to handle it.
The locomotive ran between Crestline, Ohio and Chicago. The locomotive performed well between Ohio and Chicago. Are you aware that a Pennsy T1 is being built from scratch and hopefully on the road in a couple of years. I think it's called the T1 Project or T1 Foundation, look it up. Yes, soon we will see a T1 traversing the rails again.
They found an original tender from a J1a or M1a, all they have to do is add the streamline skirting which is saving a lot of time and money. The engineers on this project say that the legendary slippage on this locomotive wasn't as bad as reported and s lot of it was caused by the loco engineer's themselves in the way they operated them. They are making some adjustments to the valve gear and a tweak here and there and it will perform great. They have all of this computer software now that they didn't have back then and can easily make adjustments as needed.
When you think about it, all of those magnificent machines were pretty much designed and laid out with a simple slide rule. These people had to be geniuses on some type of level. I've always only had one big regret in my life and that's that I missed steam superpower by a few years. Steam power, the greatest and most beautiful machines ever built by man. Also, steam is the closest machine that man ever built that's almost alive.
Coal (sometimes oil), water and a fire, all forces of nature which makes them machines that are kind of alive. Long live Pennsy Steam Power !
No fancy gadgets, just brute force. The I1s 2-10-0. class is a fine example. Another railroad that I admire is the N&W, amazing steam power and all designed and built in their Roanoke Shops.
Whole lot of pride with that railroad and deservedly so.
it was a go looking locomotive but as a sad end for it
Seeing the photoshop of the T1 with the S1 casing, If one had existed back then, then it might get the nickname bullet due to how it looks
Wheelslip on late era pennsy locomotives is not really caused by the steamers being poorly designed. The engines were not only more powerful than crews knew how to handle, but also made with new and experimental technology and thus had kinks that had to be worked out.
If the Pennsylvania needed to pull big trains on bendy track, Garrets seem like the way to go.
Thats nice and all until you get low on fuel/water lmao xD
Compared side by side, UP Big Boy has a visibly larger (longer) boiler. That is even more prominent once you remove the streamlined "bullet" section of S1 in front, which gives at least 2 meters of added length. For a fair comparison the boiler of S1 should be stripped of the streamlining as the Big Boys' boiler is. In actuality the lenght of PRR S1 boiler is quite similar to that of H-8 Allegheny. S1 sure is a powerful icon of a locomotive from a visual perspective. But I am under the impression that they've tried everything they could to make it as large as possible for the sake of being large and visually striking for the World Fair (where it was exhibited), hence it turned out to be a failure. Impressive to look at, but almost useless as a working locomotive. Big Boy on the other hand is just the opposite concept. It is the largest thing that can normally operate on a regular track. It is the most efficient design for it's purpose and it was built to be as compact as possible, not the other way around! So in conclusion: Big Boy was designed to be as small as possible for the task and still turned out to be the largest steam locomotive while remaining very practical. PRR S1 was designed to be as large and impressive as possible and turned out to be impractical and still smaller than UP 4000. But the S1 surely did it's job on the World Fair impressing everyone in 1939.
The S1 Should be an Articulated Steam Locomotive
Same with the T1s and the Q2s
@@AlexHill1991 yeah If i was Pennsylvania RR Id ask Union Pacific if they wanted the S1, T1 and Q1 as experimental test Models for Articulation
@@generalprincecodyhedgewolf2944 well duplex engines are only good for express passenger trains really UP could fix the problems with the PRR duplexes but mallets are better mixed traffic locomotives mainly for fraight turns
@@AlexHill1991 point taken
I’d like you to make one on the PRR Q1 locomotive as well. This was another prototype duplex and only one was made just like the S1
It was only a practical failure because they forgot about their own loading gauge. It was more than capable of pulling trains.
Keep up the good work.
Great job on the video. This is much better than the original. As someone with autism, I now how you felt at the time. Also, even though the locomotive did have its downsides, it’s still one of my favorite engines. Good luck in college.
I don’t think UP would have been a realistic buyer due to its horrible tractive effort; maybe on some lines, but it would have been the solution to a problem that never existed for UP - they already had some of the best locomotives out there.
This thing is kinda the ugly stepchild of the N&W J-Class, though it’s sheer size made the aesthetics grow on me a bit.
The 611 looked like an absolute monster when she was performing her first excursions near me a couple years ago - I can’t even imagine what it would have been like to see this thing in service.
For the next DoA episode, I request the N&W Y1, it had several reliability issues, and they were around for only 14 years
Specifically, 5 were built in 1910, and they were all retired (and presumably scrapped) in 1924. In overall performance, they were worse than the X1 0-8-8-0's they had, only having better stability.
This video makes a lot of sense when you look at when Union Pacific bought up 3985 to West Virginia to pull the Santa Claus train. They had issues with the space here on the rails on the east coast, even with 3985 being articulated . What about the t-1 trust building a new t-1 a locomotive that cannot negotiate the rails here on the east coast
They are atleast going to solve some of the T1’s teething troubles and figure out where to run it.
Enjoyed the video
I often wonder how they managed to bend that beast around the curve at Englewood.
So do you plan on doing the S2 as well or no?
Yep, infact all US steam turbine locomotives
If i were to think the PRR Q1 was worse than the S-1.
Fun Video!
I loved both video's
I think you meant 76 thousand, rather then 76 hundred when it comes to the tractive effort. Other then that, noice
Yep.
Nice video! Thank you!
Good video
U need 1676 mm Indian broad gauge railways for this behemoth
I know history in the dark
Ooh! It looks like a turbine-driven Name-Dropper *Blaine-Designed* train.
i used your title sort of but with the world on got out my series is the same as yours but my series is called dead arrival if you dont mind if i used 2 worlds of your title
Great video!
you know what if they built S1 as an Articulated Steam Locomotive
Even though some say the S1 shloud have been saved, i actually dissagre!
1st: you need to find a place big enough for it,
2: i dont wish to take Big Boy's status as the largest steam engine (both before and in preservation)
If they had gone for a 4_8_4 with the extra two cylinders being mounted between the frames it may have worked Maybe Lowry convinced them to build a white elephant I don't know
That’s a super long tender idk why it needs to be so long
PRR traditions for large steam locomotives
@@AndrewTheRocketCityRailfan4014 it’s just so odd cause it wasn’t like they went long distances without a water tower or coal shoot
@@DavidKehleyIt's not so much having large separations between refueling facilities mandating it, as it is minimizing the number of times you have to stop the locomotive to top up on fuel. This is especially important for something like the S1, which was meant to pull heavy and fast express passenger trains. Constantly stopping to refill the smaller tender with coal and water would bring down the average speed quite significantly. Conversely, the larger tender increased the distance the massive fuel and water hungry engine could go on a single fuel and water load.
Raymond Lowey didn't really do as much design as you would think. The T1 according to HIS design was going to be a camel back if you look up his patent drawing. The GG1 was also similarly modified because he insisted on rivets to make it look more rugged.
His designs were ALWAYS changed. They always ended up looking better after his designs were scrapped.
No matter if the s1 is dead i was hunging my best friend s1
he's okay I know he is not dead
the T1 and 1361 is builted again
I’m sorry people were so mean to you about your first video. I thought it wasn’t that bad before
1:54 in all seriusness, what music was that
It's in the credits; Dangerous Game, used by Dream(The RUclipsr)
I'm autistic as well.
It's always nice to meet a fellow person on the spectrum
The trainsit express TS2004 steam locomotive train streamline: what
That's a lot of fours.
There were tank engines running in Europe that were more powerful the 2 _12_4T amongst some of them
I Think The T-1s We’re The Better Engines Than The S-1
From a practical standpoint the T-1s were better, for multiple reasons. Still, the S-1 was larger, heavier and therefore so.ewhat more powerful, at least in theory. Superheated boilers operating at 300lbs/sq. in. plus the duplex "4 4" drivers with "poppet valves" instead of more conventional pparts like on a "mallet" articulated frame.
Also, it's a difficult engineering challenge in a mallet to get the same Tractive effort out of both such a drivers when you're feeding the second set of drivers used Steam. It dictates using something like different sized Steam Pistons and cylinders. Of course the size and the power differences cause the locomotive to exhibit weird vibrations because the Driving Systems do not operate in the same manner. A vibrational analysis such a piece of equipment could yield problematic vibrations that would affect a whole range of cost increaces for maintenance.
If you want to know what I'm talking about you need to go Google "vibrational modal analysis".
This isnt a new vid about locomotives
WELL THE S1 LIONEL MODEL IS GREAT.
AND EVEN HISTORY IN THE DARK DID PUT IT ON GREAT REVELOUTINARY LOCMOMOTIVES THAT FAILED WITH THE HUSH HUSH AND M-10001
PS.WHAT ABOUT AN EMD DEADE ON ARIVAL.
I placed The S1 the lowest at my Ranking of Duplex locomotive
PRR S1 S2 RIP
Honestly I know I’m in the minority but the looks don’t do it for me. I will admit that it looks POWERFUL though
7:10 7:11 8:39 8:40
I pretty much prefer the Pennsylvanian K2 engines over this unsuccessful piece of Rusty red scrap.
The ugliest t1 merged s1
Sadly your voice is shrill and the star war theme, loose it.
Video still sucks, sorry man
Somewhere in the Multiverse, there exists a world in which, The S1 was sold to U.P Railway and was preserved.