If, so where are they and do anything of them still run?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Originally Posted by George Zander:
If, so where are they and do anything of them still run?
No, and no. All New York Central Hudson and Niagara class locomotives were cut up fro scrap.
Sad!
This has been arguably the single biggest regret within the RR preservation world as far as US locomotives go that they were all scrapped.
After a British group had a brand new replica of a 'extinct' class of 4-6-2 made a few years ago, people have discussed building a new NYC Hudson but nothing serious has ever come of it.
After all these years, no doubt fueled by the popularity of the Lionel Hudson models to some degree, the biggest dreams of train fans are mostly likely either:
- A Union Pacific 4-8-8-4 'big boy' hauling a train up Sherman Hill, or
- A NYC Hudson along the 'water level route' of the old NYC main
The former fream is a possibility. It's unlikely the latter ever will be
That and the only S-2 ever made was also cut up for scrap as the second one that was in process of being built was never finished PRR cancled it as diesel and it was not cost effective to keep
Originally Posted by rtraincollector:
That and the only S-2 ever made was also cut up for scrap as the second one that was in process of being built was never finished PRR cancled it as diesel and it was not cost effective to keep
Mainly because it didn't work very well. The darned thing used to break dozes of staybolts in the firebox area, every time it ran.
Originally Posted by CarGuyZM10:
Originally Posted by Hot Water:
Originally Posted by rtraincollector:
That and the only S-2 ever made was also cut up for scrap as the second one that was in process of being built was never finished PRR cancled it as diesel and it was not cost effective to keep
Mainly because it didn't work very well. The darned thing used to break dozes of staybolts in the firebox area, every time it ran.
Gee, maybe they should have consulted with Lionel. My Lionel S-2 runs great without issues 
Yes it low speed runs is what killed it the runs over 30 MPH it was very economical and a work horse. it was really not used what it turned out what it should of been used for higher speeds and heavy loads. at lower speeds it developed lower pressure requiring higher fuel use and higher temps which would cause the stay bolts to break.
That is very sad...heartbreaking actually
PRR did consider some possible fixes for the S2's serious boiler issues, but I have believe these were more like engineering studies / proposals than anything else. The S2 was a passenger locomotive at heart, and needed to live at speed to be anything near to economical to operate. After the late '40s modernizing jobs on the T1 and K4s (never completed)....the Penn didn't spend any serious money on steam passenger power. The public wanted Diesels; Clement and Symes wanted Diesels; the operating dept wanted Diesels......so while the S2 had a great future on your basement three rail layout, such was not the case on the PRR !
Originally Posted by jaygee:
PRR did consider some possible fixes for the S2's serious boiler issues, but I have believe these were more like engineering studies / proposals than anything else. The S2 was a passenger locomotive at heart, and needed to live at speed to be anything near to economical to operate. After the late '40s modernizing jobs on the T1 and K4s (never completed)....the Penn didn't spend any serious money on steam passenger power. The public wanted Diesels; Clement and Symes wanted Diesels; the operating dept wanted Diesels......so while the S2 had a great future on your basement three rail layout, such was not the case on the PRR !
The biggest down fall of the S2, related to massive breakage of staybolts was, being a turbine drive as soon as the main throttle was opened, boiler pressure dropped drastically and very quickly. The C&O had the same issues with their turbine-electric locomotives. Simply stated, locomotive boilers, nor ANY steam boiler for that matter, can NOT tolerate massive and rapid changes in pressure,,,,,,period.
Agree
Originally Posted by p51:
This has been arguably the single biggest regret within the RR preservation world as far as US locomotives go that they were all scrapped.
After a British group had a brand new replica of a 'extinct' class of 4-6-2 made a few years ago, people have discussed building a new NYC Hudson but nothing serious has ever come of it.
Although if the T1 Trust project makes any significant progress, that could change.
http://www.prrt1steamlocomotivetrust.org/
The obstacles seem near-insurmountable to me, but I still hope for the best.
Originally Posted by p51:
This has been arguably the single biggest regret within the RR preservation world as far as US locomotives go that they were all scrapped.
After a British group had a brand new replica of a 'extinct' class of 4-6-2 made a few years ago, people have discussed building a new NYC Hudson but nothing serious has ever come of it.
After all these years, no doubt fueled by the popularity of the Lionel Hudson models to some degree, the biggest dreams of train fans are mostly likely either:
- A Union Pacific 4-8-8-4 'big boy' hauling a train up Sherman Hill, or
- A NYC Hudson along the 'water level route' of the old NYC main
The former fream is a possibility. It's unlikely the latter ever will be
I think number three on the above list should be a GG1 running on any former PRR rails. I once heard a story of grown men crying when they retired the GG1s. Even though there are plenty of them that survived I highly doubt one will ever run again.
Originally Posted by Hudson J1e:
I think number three on the above list should be a GG1 running on any former PRR rails. I once heard a story of grown men crying when they retired the GG1s. Even though there are plenty of them that survived I highly doubt one will ever run again.
Especially since the transformers in the GG1s were full of PCB cooling fluid, and had major issues with the environmentally safe disposal of all that fluid.
The reason the GG1 died was that there was no other insulating oil that could transfer heat as well as PCBs could. There is an IEEE paper on the effort to find a substitute insulating oil. Without the PCB heat transfer rate, the GG1 would have lost about 1/3 of its HP rating.
Part of the issue of building a new NYCS Hudson would be which version to do. Everybody has their favorite! Get past that obstacle and you've really done something !
