Steam & Excursion > Reading Railroad T-1 #2101 Controversy

With the Reading & Northern Railroad now operating their former Reading T-1 #2102 in excursion service over their lines, and the original T-1 #2100 now in the process of being rebuilt for operations, there have been some folks talking about the former T-1 #2101, which pulled the American Freedom Train in the Eastern Part of the USA in 1976, and then became the engine for the Chessie Steam Special in 1977 & 78 for the celebration of the B&O Railroad's 150th Birthday.  Like so many other stories over the years, most rail enthusiasts have been concerned about the 2101 sitting outside in the front yard of the B&O Railroad Museum, rusting away.  Well, the locomotive was moved up to the museum's repair facility last October 2023 where it was supposed to be undergoing a complete cosmetic restoration.  The museum has not updated any information about the engine other than it is in the repair shop.  But since it has been there now for almost a year, all the Reading Steam Fans are wondering why it is taking so long for this restoration.  Also, there are steam enthusiasts who would really like to see this engine re-evaluated for return to service, though a very daunting and expensive task.  However, it would first have to be inspected by the FRA to make sure that when the engine was damaged in the roundhouse fire in Russell, Kentucky in 1979, beyond the cosmetic damages, was the engine's frame in any way damaged to where it definitely can not be restored.  I have attached a photo of a letter from the late William J. Howes, Jr., who was the Vice President of Casualty Prevention of the Chessie System back in the days when the ex-Reading 2101 was in operation with the Chessie Steam Special.  I obtained a copy of this letter written by Mr. Howes as he sent it to the passenger car organization called Railroad Passenger Cars, Inc. (RRP) concerning a news letter article that was written about the 2101.  In reading what was written in this letter back then, apparently the 2101 was not actually determined that it could not be restored for any operations in the future.  Here attached is a copy of that letter.  Unfortunately, Mr. Howes is now deceased and also the person who had the original letter has also passed away.  
John in White Marsh, Maryland.

---

The fire was not at Russell, it was in Silver Grove, KY (south of Cincinnati, OH).

ClubCar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But since it has been there now
> for almost a year,
In your estimation, how long should a cosmetic restoration take on an engine the size of a T-1?

> Also, there are steam enthusiasts
> who would really like to see this engine
> re-evaluated for return to service
Are there actually though?  This feels like part of your long-running vendetta against the museum.

Moreover, with a T-1 running wild in neighboring Pennsylvania, and another under restoration in Ohio, I'm betting RDG fans can easily satisfy their desire to see one.  So is a third T-1 really the best use of restoration dollars?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/03/24 08:55 by pennsy3750.

Gimme a break!

Roundhouses are brick walls, totally outside the inspection pit area, 
Glass windows at the head of each pit (cheaper to replace from damage 
due to errant steamers), and wood roof & doors.

A roaring fire of the roof has NO EFFECT on any area of a massive, cold,
steel steam locomotive. --- especially if the fire is the roof of the structure.
there maybe interior wooden poles supporting the roof, but there's no
appreciable heat there.

A heavy, cast, one-piece steel frame damaged by a wood fire of the roof?
Are you kidding me?  
The frame makes up 50% of the locos mass.

Its not reasonable to presume that anything got 'hot.  The most vulnerable 
were the oil-filled Hennesy Lubricators, of the driver journal boxes, but they 
remained unscathed by the burning roof.  The oil they contained never got 
warm enough....subsequently, the engine got dragged around many miles,
with no problem with the Hennesys.  The cab interior was unscathed, and 
the crew seats were untouched by fire.

The entire boiler is wrapped in 4 to 6 inches of fiberglass insulation.
The heavy metal jacket, covering the insulation, was not affected,
by the burning roof!

It's total B.S. that the engine suffered any fire-caused damage, other than superficial.
The more recent damage caused by exposure to the weather, and the parts robbed-off
the loco has done WAY more damage than any wooden roof-fire!
The wooden cab windows weren't bothered! Peeling paint is more weather-related.

A 1472-day, complete boiler work-up + replacement of the borrowed parts, etc,
would return the loco to service.  And, no, you don't have to yank all the flues and 
tubes in order to survey all the boiler seams and rivets, below the water-line.

( The real advantage of total flue/tube replacement, is the muscle-memory created 
by the young labor force learning the boiler-making skills of re-installing the flues
and tubes ---and each end has to be rolled-in.  
Thats a lots of muscle training with 300 to 400 flues/tubes.  
Doyle didn't yank all the flues and tubes at the 4449's last 1472-day boiler certification..
Just enough to allow inspectors safe access around the lower, boiler-shell interior).

It's a shame 2101 has been 'abused' and exposed to the weather,
for decades.   Recovery in the future is a very dim reality.  
Ain't gonna' happen ...

​W.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/03/24 13:59 by wcamp1472.

John -  Thank you for posting this interesting information.  I have to agree that two running Reading T-1 is more than sufficient.  Money would be better spent on a different locomotive.

Ron

What's up with Steamtown's nice, ex-B&M Lima Pacific, 3713?
It's  sad story is running a close match to PRR K4 , 1361, 4-6-2, 

It would be nice to see the 2 of them in good shape and running.
Each has burned through enough mis-spent cash to have accomplished 
multiple 1472-day tear-downs and re-builds.
Millions of dollars down rat-holes.

Un-lucky "13s" ?

​W.

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/03/24 10:39 by wcamp1472.

The reason we went with swapping the cosmetically restored 2101 ( AFT 1 ) for the 614 was that the 614 represents the state of the locomotive builders art ) ALL roller bearing, lightweight high speed running gear etc. ) whereas the T-1 was really a 1930's technology engine. Plus the fact the 614 was CSX boss Hays Watkins favorite engine and he was willing to kick in $ 100K towards her restoration.  

    Wes is more right than wrong although the fire was hot enough to ignite the coal in the tender and the heat from that badly warpped the sides of the tender.

    The ease of operating an all roller bearing engine vs. a plain bearing engine is HUGE in favor of the roller bearing type. Not even close.

    Ross Rowland 

When we first moved ex-NKP 759, from Bellows Falls, Vt. to Conneaut, Ohio,
in June 1968.  a Timken field engineer visited the roundhouse where 759 was 
being prepared for reuurn to service, and he wanted to ensure the 'rollers' were 
in good condition.  He had read an article in an Ohio paper about the 759's return 
to service.

We were glad to have his input and the check-up.  He introduced himself, and 
wanted to inspect the 'rollers' before we moved the engine.  He was startled 
when I told him that we had towed it 600 miles from Vermont!

So, we removed the cover from the pilot truck's, end-cap to inspect the condition.
The bearing and the white grease were as fresh as when applied in 1958.
Then we checked the bottom fill-plugs of the driver axles --- all were pristine, and 
like new quality.

At the completion of his inspection, he instructed us to add about 12 ounces of new 
white grease ( AAR Grade B, type ) to each driver axle, and he gave us specific 
instructions to replace the 'safety wires' to all axle plugs, AND to Never Again
to remove the fill plugs.  Obviously, the instructions related to the dangers of 
dropped and dirty plugs, by the curious, being replaced --- endangering the bearings.
Timkens can go for millions of miles, "excursion service" locos are lucky if it 
does 10k a year ...

The 759 was a 1944-order engine and was restricted to rollers only on the pilot 
truck and the 4 axles of the driver wheels.  All the rest were plain bearings.
Timkens were far superior and ELIMINATED over-the-road problems associated 
with plain bearing axles and lubrication problems.

Timken tapered rollers are used in pairs, because the races and rollers are tapered---
and only carry weight in the direction of an axle that tends to drive the rollers tighter 
into the taper.  So, a loco axle has rollers, back-to-back in order to confine the end-wise
thrusts, in either direction.  It's the same on all rubber-tired vehicles and rail cars around 
the World.

On steam locos, the axles that gave the most problems were the plain
bearings on the pilot truck axles, 1 or 2 axles, the left and right battering 
beat the plain bearings to death, plus the mass of the front of the engine....
Timkens solved those problems quickly. End-wise thrusts were smoothly
transferred to the truck  frame, as the truck guided locos through curves
and track switches.

Plain-bearing driver axles are smooth and cylindrical--- no end-wise control.
The inner face of the drive wheels is flat and circular wear-surface, called
the "wheel-hub". The rotating wheel hubs are spaced a few fractions of an inch
from the the brass hub-liner, and on straight, flat track, the hubs should not be
in continuous contact with the brass hub-liner that mates to the hub.  The hub-liners
are part of the brass axle bearing,  Hub liners are broad, brass 180-deg. arcs 
over the axle, and they face the broad circular surface of the inner-face of each 
drive wheel.  There are several schemes to libticate that area, none very adequate.

The wheel hubs move side-to-side as the engine and it's axkes, rolls down the track.
The wheel hubs rub the adjacent 'hub-liner' & they were always a problem to keep
adequately lubricated by RRs.

Timkens solved all those problems... it didn't make sense, even back then, to use plain bearings 
on the driver axles --- a certain percentage of plain bearing axles for the drivers and the 
pilot truck were going to fail, every day.  Timkens could solve that problem 100%.
Even the War Production Board acknowledged THAT!  So, the WPB would authorized Timken 
rollers on tte pilot truck and driver axles for that order of Berks, and many other loco classes.

Timkens were SO SUPERIOR to older methods of axle bearings, and the WPB
wanted to commit as many bearings from Timken, to tanks, 'planes, and ships..
because they were so reliable.  RR loco builders had to apply to the WPB in order 
for Timken to be authorized to allocate recourses to railroad customers.

The other axles at trailer trucks and tender trucks were not as battered, end-to-end,
as the axles of the drivers and pony-trucks.  
So, WPB had less impetus to authorize rollers, for trailer & tender trucks 
Another factor is that there was a greater need by the military for large diameter 
roller bearings, so, that was a factor in WPB's decision.  There was a lot of competition 
for the larger bearing types.

So, the Reading T-1s, 4-8-4 locos, built during WW2, were allowed to use rollers on all axles,
EXCEPT the driver axles.  So, Reading went with oil-lubricated driver axles, using 
a self-contained pumping system.  Slight side-to-side axle movements operated 
pump-plungers, and pumped axle oil up to the axle lube-pads, and also pumped oil
to the wheel hubs.  It was a better than grease blocks, across a whole class of engines.

With grease blocks, under each axle, every day the fleet was subjected to spurious
grease blocks were wearing  thin, and those were replaced, during daily pit-inspections.  
There were always a few engines that needed one or more grease blocks replaced.
About and hour's labor, for each replaced block.  
Hennessy's were a lot quicker to refill with oil...A loco could have all the oil-cellars
refilled in 15 minutes.

Henneseys were delicate, and in cases of driver derailments, they were always damaged to 
some extent.  In Fan trip service, derailments happen -- but there's no supplier of new Hennesy 
oil cellars.  Repairs to them are difficult & rarely successful....

Timken has been contacted by the Team building the new PRR T-1 loco, and Timken
stands ready to equip the 5550 with 4 new RB axles, bearings and 'housings' ---- similar
to the 1940's products, but up graded and improved to today's new processes and current 
practices.   Also, Timken can produce the roller bearing rods, hollow piston rods and crankpin
rollers.  Obviously, the wheels, axkes & bearings for the smaller --- truck--- axles are available,
off-the-shelf..

​W.



 



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 09/03/24 18:55 by wcamp1472.

co614 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The reason we went with swapping the cosmetically
> restored 2101 ( AFT 1 ) for the 614 was that the
> 614 represents the state of the locomotive
> builders art ) ALL roller bearing, lightweight
> high speed running gear etc. ) whereas the T-1 was
> really a 1930's technology engine. Plus the fact
> the 614 was CSX boss Hays Watkins favorite engine
> and he was willing to kick in $ 100K towards her
> restoration.  
>
>     Wes is more right than wrong although the
> fire was hot enough to ignite the coal in the
> tender and the heat from that badly warped the
> sides of the tender.
>
>     The ease of operating an all roller bearing
> engine vs. a plain bearing engine is HUGE in favor
> of the roller bearing type. Not even close.
>
>     Ross Rowland 
Hi Ross:
Thank you for your clarification and I agree with the decision that was made.  I knew Bill Howes personally and he too explained the decision back then about the fact that the 614 was a much better locomotive with the roller bearing wheels and other newer technology.  But there are always people who are not satisfied no matter what you or anyone else does.  Nothing will change with some rail fans.  My only regret right now is that the 614 is not in operation at this time.  But hopefully this will soon change.  We are all not getting any younger for sure.
John in White Marsh, Maryland

As far as 3713 goes, not much progress on it. The few people they have working on equipment have their hands full keeping the operating equipment running. 

Remember that the final batch of Reading T-1 locomotives were built with roller bearing driving axles, and therefore were roller-bearing-equipped on all axles.  RDG 2124 (now at Steamtown), the first of the T-1s to be in excursion service on the Iron Horse Rambles, is one of those locomotives.  There is no question that roller bearings on steam locomotive driving and truck axles is a far superior technology.  However, they need to be purpose-designed; there was an attempt to use Timken AP "cartridge" bearings on the driving axles of a large 2-8-0 about 20 years ago, which was not successful-- the locomotive was put back on plain "traditional" driving boxes with crown brasses.