Santa Fe 2-10-4's on the Pennsylvania Railroad

Nice Video! Thanks for posting. Think it might have been Don Krofta footage.

At this time, PRR leased Reading T-1 s as well.

hello Bryan Smith.......

Thank you !!!!!!!!!!!! for the Santa Fe 2-10-4's videos as i am a S.F. 5011 fan, it MADE my evening and i really enjoyed viewing them .  I have a "O"gauge 3 rail model of that.   Is there a videos or pictures of the 5011 ?  I wondered how the S.F. 5011 ended up in ST. Louis Museum of Transportation ?

the woman who loves the S.F.5011

Tiffany

Bryan,

Thanks for the links.  I just spent 40 minutes looking.

Dave

Bryan, the video to which you linked at the end of your post always interested me because of the rolling bell on the 5035, see 3:30 of the YouTube clip.  I always thought that would be a neat feature on an o gauge engine.

Thanks Bryan.  I've looked at many, many pictures of Santa Fe 5011 Class 2-10-4's, but have never seen so many color photos of those engines in one place.  

They leased a handful of Reading T-1s at the same time.

Yeah Dave, I know what you mean. I hate coming on here.....it is so easy to "waste" an hour just looking at stuff.

If you take the buildings and the sky out of them, isn't it amazing how "black and white" those color photos are??!!!!! Railroading was pretty bleak looking, unlike the boards/layouts we seem to create.

Thank you for posting your links Bryan. Really neat to view.

Greg

Bryan !!! thanks so much for the links......very informative.....now I can run Santa Fe steam here in Pennsy Country.....Tom in PGH

Back in the early 1970's I heard that one of the Santa Fe's 2-10-4's pulled up to a water column and a hapless PRR fireman accidentally filled the oil bunker with water, being unfamiliar with oil burning locos and the layout of the tender.

Thanks for the show.  I was raised in Central Kansas about a half mile north of the Hutchinson cut off which is 20 some miles South of the Santa Fe Trail.  I never saw any of the 5000's as the grades were very gentle.  The 5000's were used in the flint hills and only the smaller engines engines were used on the cut off.  I have a mag in my collection that features the 5000s and that they finished their life on the Pennsy,

Al

Also, the PRR might have been looking at something else.  Due to various banking and tax rules, it is cheaper to rent or lease than to repair what you have.

Ah yes, PRR under Pevler, at that time wanted to lease Diesels, and he was successful to a degree, hence Wabash F units and TrainMonsters on the Sandusky line.  This is the only place where these units and the AT&SF 5011s could really operate...because of the lack of cab signals.  Leasing foreign power was cheaper than fixing stored PRR steam, which would be dying the death soon enough. Even so, the Penn did fix some steam in this period, as the demand was great enough and they could use cab signal equipped power anywhere it would fit. It's true that the PRR flogged whatever foreign power they got their hands on, and it was not limited to the 5011 class 2-10-4s.  OTOH, the PRR Big Jay was expected to take all manner of abuse and still deliver the goods...which they did.  No Pennsy steamer was going to be treated with respect after 1952, and the Diesels began to suffer the same neglect not long afterwards.  This is when PRR's huge collection of minority builder power started to become a real liability.  The old heads I've talked to over the years in the Columbus area have all pretty much agreed that the 6400s could start a heavier train, but that the 5011s would roll whatever they started faster.  Not surprising perhaps, as the AT&SF machines were stored, and received,  in far better condition than PRR kept their engines, especially by that time. Santa Fe kept the leased 5011s around in a group for a couple of years after, in case the  Penn wanted to lease them again, by that time, the PRR was delaying the delivery of their billion unit GP9 order into 1959...there was too much power and not enough dough to pay for it all !  Once the Penn started installing nose MU on most of their cab Diesel units,around 1959-60,  most of the power shortages went away.

hello jaygee.......

That is very interesting story about the S.F. 5011's and PRR 6400's keep the stories coming

the woman who loves the S.F.5011

Tiffany

I'd be interested to learn how PRR fuled the Santa Fe engines.  Santa Fe had an oil standpipe at every engine terminal, but I would not think any such thing existed on Pennsy.  They must have had a lot of tank cars full of Bunker C connected to steam so they could pump it.

Does anybody know for sure what the Pennsy Bunker C fuel process was for these engines? 

Tom,

I never thought of that!  I have an oil burning Northern that I can pull from the shelf and keep on the layout.

Dave

I'm not entirely sure that the Penn didn't make the adjustments on the 5011s to be able to burn Diesel fuel, or at least a mixture like the number 6 fuel that UP burned in their big turbines.  Would have made certain operations a lot simpler.  FWIW, the 5011 class dialed in at 5660 DBHP on test in AT&SF freight service. The PRR J1 was good for about 1K HP less than their Q2 Duplex on the Altoona plant...a figure that's virtually useless for anything other than comparing PRR test plant results! What it actually means is that the Big Jay was good for around 53-54K DBHP on the road.  By 1956, when the lease went down, there were only a handful of J1 locomotives in the Columbus area still in decent enough shape to effectively compete with the 5011s in any kind of road test comparison.  Most of those units were transfered to the main line as the leased 5011s and various Diesels showed up.  This operation is well documented on several DVDs and tapes.

Number 6 fuel still has to be heated to even move/pump it. That is why all the UP turbines all had both steam and electric heating systems within the tenders.

Local reports from a long time fan in Piqua, Ohio, was that the ATSF 2-10-4's initially were assigned from Columbus west to Urbana, Piqua, and Logansport, Ind.  There was too much trouble with the 8 wheel tender trucks derailing on crossovers and they were then assigned from Columbus north to Bellevue and Sandusky.

Fun thread for me, as growing up in a railfan/PRR railroad family house in Columbus, I was fed stories of the 5011's in Columbus for breakfast.   Ancestors worked in the 20th street shops (where a great uncle once witnessed a PRR H dropped from an over head crane).  My father as a young boy was taken by relatives to the shops to see "The Big Engine" (the S-1) while in was in town for some work.

I can ask about the fuel.  The J's, as I was told, were long in the tooth, but I believe the next year, more J's were ready and used during the annual "rush."  The Santa Fe locomotives were certainly the local railfan's "bees knees" since they were so foreign and so different from the normal traffic.  

Bob

The cab signal thing was not a set in stone perogative, as seen by the use of RDG T1 and RF&P 4-8-4s on some PRR mainlines in the same time frame.  It wouldn't suprise me to find put that the Penn tried to use 5011s on the Toledo line for a spell.  Not to worry about the oil flow issue, as the AT&SF tanks certainly had steam heat for fuel oil use...OTOH, #6 will flow easier than straight Bunker C in frigid temps, and leaves less residuals in the handling equipment.  These were not the only oil burners Pennsy ever had, but again it's not really clear exactly what fuel oil was used in those earlier examples.  (L1s, E6s) Kinda odd that the eight axle tanks of the 5011 class would cause turnout issues, where the eight axle 210 F series PRR tanks would be OK. The Buckeyes had to be more flexible that the PRR cast solid pedestal trucks used on the T, J, I, Q, and M classes.

hello jaygee, guys and gals..........

I wonder if anyone knew or how the S.F.#5011 ended up in St. Louis Museum of transportation as it seems to be in the best condition of the other 3 that were saved (5017,5021, 5030).  The #5011 was not any where near in the Columbus/Sandusky Ohio runs so how it end up in St. Louis ? 

the woman who loves the S.F.5011

Tiffany

Yes, it is the Krofta video narrated by the wonderful voice of Ralph Morse.Lew Schneider

Congrats to you blessed folks who have the Sunset 3rd model of the 5011 class, as this one is the correct size and captures the immensity of this huge beast quite well. Sadly, many other models of this loco use the 3776 boiler, which gives you a massively undersized chooch.  Rule of thumb: If your 5011 looks like the SMS Hindenburg  on wheels you're about right!  These guys, along with the B&O EM1 of 1944-'45, had to be Baldwin's best power ever.  Then too, yunz have four of these surviving today...us SPFs have an EXTREMILY slim chance of finding 6435 intact, hiding out somewhere...someday.

The National Museum of Transportation, in the St Louis area, was, and still is, a private collection, NOT a "Government funded" museum. Thus, all they really had to do was simply ask the Santa Fe for a 5011 class locomotive, and the Santa Fe would have towed it dead to their museum. That is how #2925 and #5021 eventually wound up in Sacramento, the Santa Fe wanted to "donate" their own collection housed in the Belen, NM roundhouse, and everything went to the California State Railroad Museum. All towed dead, of course.

Near the back of the revised edition of Tom Dressler's "Classic Power 3A - the USRA 2-8-8-2 Series" is a photo of N&W Y-6b 2185 (if I recall correctly) running northbound somewhere around Troyton on the Sandusky Line with a train of loads for the Lake.

Anybody know anything about this?  Was it a lease, a borrow, or what?  Information must not have been available to Dressler when the book was written.  But the engine is NOT on the N&W (N&W's characteristic pole lines are not present).

EdKiing

Sometime around 1950, IIRC.  This development was covered briefly in vol.2 Black Diamonds/ Black Gold, by Hirsimaki.  Would have been the most potent steamer ever used on the PRR...with even more sauce than the HC1s 2-8-8-0!  Too bad they didn't cut the 2185 loose on the Pittsburgh Div.

Hi Ed,

Is this the photo?..According to the title is states it was leased to the PRR.

http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=69378

The CNJ Mike thingie sounds about right... what with the arrival of the new F3s.  Just one A-B-B-A set of those phase 2s would have KO'ed half the steam in C'paw roundhouse!  Anthracite road steam was absolutely pasted in the late '40s by EMD, and a lesser extent - Baldwin/Alco.

They burned bunker c.  There were tank cars with steam in Columbus, and tank cars in Sandusky, although not sure about the steam.  It apparently was a hot summer and the steam was not needed all that much.  

The PPR J's had "bucket" seats in the cab.  The 5011's had seat backs, so they might have been liked by the PRR crews.  The Santa Fe's also had a third seat in the cab for the brakeman.  The J's of course had the dog house for the brakeman.

The 5011's were slippery and more difficult to start, but were faster because of the larger drivers.  It might be difficult, as Ed K. has said many times, to compare them since they were built for different roads. "About all they had in common was the number of wheels," was the way it was phrased to me.  

As the OP commented, it was an exciting time.  It was not uncommon for the local fans to get cab rides out of Columbus with one of the fans detailed to pick up at some point north.

The 5011's were extra work in Columbus since they could not be turned on the table, but had to be taken taken to the AC&Y interchange to be turned on a wye.  To be turned on the table, with the special rail, the tender had to be mostly empty of both oil and water, and spotting was difficult.

Bob

That's it.  Omar - Troyton - well, I was close.

The 2185 has not been rebuilt with a relocated hot water pump; she still has the "Andy Gump" look.

I doubt PRR crews liked her very much; they liked smaller engines in multiples that weren't as much a threat to jobs . . .

EdKing

I don't know Ed

The PRR had 598 decapods and the starting tractive effort wasn't that much different.

Yeah, Andy Gump is right.

Charlie, what were the decapods rated at?....About 100,000 lbs wasn't it?

the decapods did nott have a booster and improvements were made over the years.

The tractive effort of the final example the I1sa was 96,000 lbs.

i think initial design was around 86,000 lbs.

Starting tractive effort of the N&W Y6b, as built was something over 152,000 pounds, then "increased" to about 166,000 pounds.

I'd call that MUCH different from a PRR Decapod class that didn't quite reach 100,000 pounds! 

Hot water

I was refering to the remark [I doubt PRR crews liked her very much; they liked smaller engines in multiples that weren't as much a threat to jobs] and thought  the 2-10-4's which were the topic of discussion.

By the way, the Pennsy owned 125 TEXAS types, how many railroads could claim that?

FYI, I have seen a photo of the fueling station at Sandusky, two tracks of tank cars and a steam heated pipe leading to a sort of stand pipe.  The photo is in the Autumn 1999 "The Keystone."   5014 is being fueled in the photo.

Very true, and the only REAL steam locomotive the PRR ever had!

But if you want to go that route, how come the PRR had ONLY one 4-8-4, and THAT was an electric? Many, many other railroads throughout the North American Continent had fleets of 4-8-4s (even the poor little TP&W had a few 4-8-4s) for both passenger and freight.

The Pennsy had 139 GG1's, that may be more 4-8-4's than the UP, NYC, SP & N&W combined.

 You forgot the 125 T1, 4-4-4-4 duplex's, which were held up and hindered by the war effort.