Fall 2017 newsletter has been made public. The trust seems to be be on a roll for the last year, when it comes to getting things done.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
The people on the Board give me some confidence about the project.
Great stuff - Americas very own "Tornado" !!
What they have accomplished to date is very impressive.
Now what valves are they going to put in this thing? The pic on the newsletter look like the exterior rotary cam. And if my terms are not correct, please correct.
This statement is troubling, at least to me.
The T1 Trust has also made arrangements to store the tender at the WNYRHS’s museum site, the Heritage Discovery Center, in Buffalo, NY for up to 30 years at a cost of $1 per year where it will be displayed alongside the PRR I1
If they're storing the tender for the T1 for up to 30 years, I'll be on the wrong side of the grass before they ever get this running! Tell me again why I'd want to spend money for this project that I'll never see completed. There are many other deserving locomotives that could be restored at a fraction of the cost and a whole lot sooner. I'd at least like to have a chance of seeing a project that I contribute to completed in my lifetime!
a lot of groups get arrangements to lease/store an item for $1 for a set time. 30 years just means that the movement of the tender isn't an issue or expense the T1 group doesn't need to worry about while they concentrate on the engine.
I'd like to keep an open mind on some things. Years ago, nobody thought 2 parks in the New York area ever had a chance, yet lo and behold, there is The High Line and The Walkway Over The Hudson. Yes, parks are much different than building a costly locomotive mostly from scratch, but if someone has the vision to try and it takes 10 years or 40 years, my personal opinion is more power to them!
Tom
and when Steam ended in the '50s, it was done, never to see the rails again. When NS pulled the plug on their Steam Program in the '90s, 611 was never to run again....etc...
gunrunnerjohn posted:This statement is troubling, at least to me.
The T1 Trust has also made arrangements to store the tender at the WNYRHS’s museum site, the Heritage Discovery Center, in Buffalo, NY for up to 30 years at a cost of $1 per year where it will be displayed alongside the PRR I1
If they're storing the tender for the T1 for up to 30 years, I'll be on the wrong side of the grass before they ever get this running! Tell me again why I'd want to spend money for this project that I'll never see completed. There are many other deserving locomotives that could be restored at a fraction of the cost and a whole lot sooner. I'd at least like to have a chance of seeing a project that I contribute to completed in my lifetime!
You are correct Gunny, as this is the main reason, that donation dollars to "Steam", I'm going with the new Group in Lexington, Ky thats doing an over haul on the C&O #2716. I'll be able to see it in my life time, along with the restoration to run of the N C & St.L, 4-8-4 that Jason is working with...............I hope???
I must admit to being ever an optimist so I wish these guys everything needed to pull this off. Anything that big and that pretty that is capable of such speed deserves to be resurrected!
C.Sam, I agree with you, on a "New York Central Hudson", as if one would think not, just look at how many times this engine has been produced in toy train line, and how many different gauges....?
I love the New York Central Hudson, but owing to clearance limits on the east end (Hudson Division) of the railroad, the J1, B&A J2 and J3 Classes were among the smaller 4-6-4s built.
The Hudson type had limited practicality and required the right circumstances to be a success. On most railroads other than the Central they were limited to the flatter portions of the line.
The New York Central had the most main line trackage with gradients conducive to the operation of a 4-6-4 in heavy passenger service, and even at that the New York Central built dual-service Mohawks and Niagaras because the Hudson was being stretched to the limits of its ability by the 1940s.
An eight coupled locomotive is far more capable of handling heavy mainline excursion trains than a 6 coupled design.
Yes, I know a T1 is not technically an 8 coupled design (dual 4 coupled?) but it serves the same purpose.
Bottom line, the guys behind the project have chosen to build a Pennsy T1, whatever their reasons. It's their baby and they are entitled to attempt anything they want.
The rest of us can vote yea or nay with our donations etc., but to complain that they did not choose your particular favorite engine to build sounds like unjustified sour grapes to me.
As things presently stand, there is a much higher likelihood of getting the cooperation of NS to operate a T1 on the most iconic portion of the former PRR (Middle and Pittsburgh Divisions) than there is of getting CSX's acquiescence to operate any reciprocating steam locomotive of any kind on the the former NYC east of Cleveland, which is presently under their control.
Is a brand new T1 a pipe dream? Maybe, maybe not, but bless them for trying.
