Same here friend. Sure the T1 Duplex has its problems. However problems can be fix and with a well trained and more experience crew. I believe it should to just fine. Not to mention it is a rather good looking locomotive. This thing was designed for speed and it has the looks for it. This is what I imagine pulling a 1st class express train. 😊 And so what if it ends up breaking the Mallard's world speed record. If that happens maybe it's spark new competition between nations. Maybe bring about a renaissance for steam locomotive. Though perhaps that is wishful thinking. But one can only dream, yes? 😅😏

@Big Boy 4014 although that wasn't a verified claim I still think it can beat mallard's record

@Polar Express yeah but mallard as going to go 140mph as well it just never got the chance because of ww2

@@em3876if pushed to the max,the A4s could go 130 MPH

Same goes for me no matter if it is a t1 s1 or an uss new Mexico(bb-40)

The T1 wheelslip was largely due to improper operation by the crews. The trick to operating the T1s was that they had to accelerate VERY gradually in order to maintain their adhesion. The passenger steam locos the Pennsy traditionally used (Atlantics, K4s, etc.) were engines that designed for quick acceleration on commuter runs, and as a result many crews tended to operate the T1s in the same manner. Interesting fact at one point the Norfolk and Western, a railroad that specialized in slow, drag freight, tested a T1 on their trains and concluded that the engine had no design flaws and that all they required was proper training.

Patrick3751 yes, that sounds right. Sure, when starting a train the weight shifts backwards, especially because of the water in the boiler, which is not a problem on a 4-8-4, but on a duplex that has a different outcome. And the engine produced 6552 hp (some say up to 6760 hp), that is more than 3250 hp per cylinder-set, which is about the same as a K4s, but the K4s has 6 drivers, one set of the T1 only had 4 drivers. If you would handle a T1 the same way as a K4s it would act not like a K4s.

The new one will have the new valve gear they tried out to resolve the wheel Slip issue

​@@Patrick_3751 you mean a slow and steady pace?

5500 had diffrent valves fited after an accident, that became the best in the fleet

A piece of tech needs to be at least 70 years old to be easily recreated. A cycle really just like history.

You might be able to see that again in a few years they are making an improved version

@@mazdaman2315 You are referring to the T1 trust project right? They are building a T1 from scratch like they did with the tornado in the UK, they plan to have it finished by 2030

sticklift Yep. I'll be in my thirties but I can wait.

Streamlined Steamroller it will take 20 million bucks and15 years to build. That,s a big ask for a trust to hold together to build a T1 on which they will never offset the costs

Old but the trust initiative had obtained a full tender so it was reduced to 7 million

Peter Ronney WAIT WHAT

I'll be 26

Yeah, instead they saved a damn B4a!

What happened to the PRR program that saved all the PRR power that ended up at Strasburg? Hat's off to the PRR for that effort for sure, but why no PRR T-1??

Probably because they were given so much publicity when they were introduced, then they started having all those problems, the PRR perhaps though of them as a failure so didn't want to draw attention to them by the late '50s.

I think you'll be happy to learn they're building a new one! Look up the T1 Trust. They're doing what the Brits did with the 60163 A1 Tornado, and building a new T1 from scratch. It'll be numbered #5550, and already they have the tender, front piece, cab, some of the wheels, and part of the boiler. They hope to have it finished by 2030.

Oakview Films 2030?!?! Wow that's long

with the T1 my all time favorite.

I have my doubts based on the era. The prototype T1's absolutely raced Hudsons, J-3's and J-1's. The production T1's would've been more likely to race an S-1 or S-2

well until the engine is finished we can not prove those stories are true or not

If this were true, England would NOT hold the speed record at 124 MPH

@@organbuilder272 you mean Mallard

the claims are dubious at best

Where are these stories, who wrote them and based on what? You're saying they hold the world speed record but were scrapped? The Brits had more respect for their locos

Lenny Hendricks actually PRR leased N&W J class locomotives as well. It was found that the J class locomotives performed better. they don't have the wheel slip problems like T-1 and can do better on rougher terrain. I am a big fan of the NW J. I think if Pennsy would have kept the T-1 with a more conventional northern design it would have performed better..

Lenny Hendricks do you know reading 2100, 2101, 2102, & 2124 will be in the story of PRR 5550 and also 2101 will run again this year and also there is gonna be a C&O J1 built and it will be completed in 2023 and it will have a new speed limit and it will be up to 140mph and it can travel from 70mph to 125mph and also it will run from Charlotte, NC to The first stop of the Train to Thomaston, CT from the N&W line to the Nagatuck railroad line to thomaston, CT and it will run every, day, week, & month, & year, and it will be reliable and it will pull the American freedom train by doubleheading with Santa Fe 5011 every 4th of July

N&W let PRR borrow ONE for testing, and somewhere over 100mph the valve gear blew out. The book Rails Remembered (#6) talks about the engineers from Roanoke went and brought her back on 1 cylinder.

I knew PRR leased ATSF 2-10-4's, I didn't know they leased N&W J's. They probably would have been better of with N&W A's, but they had already rejected A's back in the beginning of WWII when they accepted the C&O 2-10-4 design for the PRR J-1's. But they did lease the RDG T-1's also. Check out David P. Morgan's STEAM'S FINEST HOUR. Also many others about this period on the RDG. Some of the first RDG 4-8-4's to be scrapped were the one's PRR had used and ruined. ATSF and RDG were dieseling at this point, so nobody cared as long as they got the lease payments and got the carcass back to be scrapped.

I rode the Chessie Steam Special when it came to Pittsburgh. I was about 9 years old at the time.

Not a chance! UP does not allow non-UP steam engines on their tracks, BNSF isn't exactly friendly to mainline steam excursions in general, and due to Amtrak's new policy on special moves they won't be able to use Amtrak's insurance policy. Basically a run to Phoenix will be outright impossible.

Patrick3751 couldn’t said it better myselg

Matt`s Mocs because they know the actual one couldn't do the record, so they are trying to unfairly change it in order to vandalise history.

If they can't make obvious updates they'll never reach their goal of beating the mallard's record. It a question the donors to the project have to ask themselves. What is more important to them? Historical accuracy or the speed record? It's a question for those putting up the $$ to make, not the railfan community at large. Ross Rowland certainly made all the changes he wanted to on the engines he restored, esp NKP 759 and RDG 2101.

Anarchy Truck Pulls Those problems have been addressed. Take a minute and read the FAQ on our website, www.t1trust.org

Ok

The T1 Trust this locomotive needs to be around long enough and you need all it's flaws to be correct and also it will never be retired and it will exist forever and remember to do the flaws and it will be correct too.

Thats actually happening

Coal

Mummies. Oh, no, that was Egypt.

I'm no expert but maybe the engine's side rods were damaged, so the PRR found whatever they could use to repair it.

@@motormouth2472 Ah, good to know. Thanks. To be honest, that K4 kinda looks good like that

@@dracoarton94 once again, I don't know if that is the answer, but that's all I could think of. And yeah, it does look pretty nice

No, and it wasn't the y6b

Thedeoradude 2 of them being the 6100s prototypes

2 prototypes (#s 6110 & 6111) and 50 production models (#s 5500-5549).

kiwitrainguy yep, the 5500’s were the most controversial engines on the PRR.

Adrian Taylor I think many of these restorations run on fuel oil to fire the burners and heat the water.

Heh. Didn't notice that before. Yah, thats quite a dent.

adfgfds The heck did they do? Hit a truck with it?

theactioneffect Or a car; yah. That happens.

I just noticed it. Geez, such a deformity.

Minor collision with another train by the looks of it

yes no articulation

PRR T-1's (as well as the Q classes and the S-1) are duplex drive, not articulated. Duplex drives are 4 cylinder locomotives like articulateds, but the front engine cannot pivot independently on duplex drive locomotives while the front engine can pivot independently on articulateds. This is why duplex drives are called rigid frame locomotives.

noooo mallard is keeping it's record

Or will it?

Mallard never set a record. Speed records are based on time over distance, and not on a single run. A top speed with sketchy data don't mean nuttin The real steam speed record is held by Germany.

c peck According to that logic wouldn’t the record by held by PRR’s 6100?

I thought the 05 002 had been measured time/distance. I can't seem to find that source now with a quick search. I'm not sure where I saw the methodology documented. Without proper methodology it ain't a record. Besides, it's fun tweaking my cousins over in the UK about Mallard. Like a downhill run that smoked a crank bearing whereupon they claimed a speed record by using graph paper that didn't have lines at the speed they claimed anyways. All in fun really. I hadn't considered that if the 002's speed had been measured as highest observed speed on an onboard speedometer it would have been essentially the same as LNER claim. I did a quick looksee and didn't find any daya on the Pennsy S1 tests. If you could point me in the right direction I'd sure appreciate it. Again, it's all in fun. Trying to break a steam speed record at this date is just silly. It is amusing to poke the Mallard guys, though. Gimme a J or Niagara any day.

From what I've read it is suspected that engineers used too much throttle at startup because they were used to their less powerful engines and the T1's poppet valves allowed more instantaneous throttle response.

"records are meant to be broken, but still" The record was never mallards to begin with. If the brits want to keep their record, they'll just have to earn it. The only reason the mallard has maintained its record is because its record is official. There are stories of T1s going 140. While these can't be confirmed, you'd have to be pretty stupid to doubt it. Considering an E6 atlantic, a piddly locomotive dwarfed by the sheer scale and power of a T1, could manage 115 mph, the notion that the T1 is incapable of 128 mph is asinine. Should the T1 be completed, and a flat enough section of track found, you better believe that a free steaming rigid frame duplex is going to shatter the record of a pacific covered in shiny sheet metal. I'd even wager that a T1 pulling a train of heavy weight cars could beat the mallards record. With that being said, the Mallard can probably go even faster than it's own record. Bear in mind it was hauling cars behind it, and with a downhill grade steep enough just about any locomotive can be a speed demon.

No-one will ever beat Mallard's record.

@@Xenogeek2 On the contrary: There are credible sources behind the notion that Mallard's speed has already been bested. One of the goals of the T1 trust is to investigate these claims. Also, keep in mind that Mallard severely damaged itself during the record setting run. The A4's didn't do commercial service at 128 mph.

@@Mrcake0103 thing is tho if they go for the record and somehow break it (which is highly unlikely) that T1 wouldve killed a legend. When it comes to steam engines 4468 is one of the all time greats and breaking that record would basically kill it.

@@ajf3202 what about Scotsman? Usually he gives the image of what a steam engine is: a larger loco with a tender pulling a rake of coaches

These, like the Union Pacific Big Boys, were built during World War II because the diesel electric engines that locomotives had begun using were needed for Navy submarines and LSTs and railroads couldn't get any. The steam era probably would have ended 10 years earlier if not for WWII.

It was the crew that were the problem as the Norfolk and Western tested one with their crew and it was fine they just made the locomotives accelerate too fast