Latest newsletter is out, with some interesting tidbits. https://prrt1steamlocomotivetrust.org/store/newsletter.php?id=15

It will be quite impressive to see that long-distance tender restored and transformed into the tender for the T-1. The pieces are coming together.

-otto-

Thanks for posting update. I took a couple things from the newsletter. First, it looks like they are getting close to starting the frame and it looks like they are trying to keep it a coal burner with the acquisition of a stoker.

I always look forward to their presentation at the PRRT&HS meeting in May. That is where you get the annual updates and plans. So far they seem way ahead of their initial schedule. I hope they keep momentum. I am not getting any younger.

Here is a section of their frame engineering

Winter 2017/2018 newsletter is out. It is informative as always, and I appreciate their openness. https://prrt1steamlocomotivetrust.org/s ... .php?id=16

Someone just posted this on facebook, check out the video of the original T1s starting at around 5:00:

https://www.facebook.com/AussieSteamTra ... =2&theater

And just think what that effor could've done reassembling the 1361 kit.

Or putting a new jacket on 643.

Ed, with all due respect:

The T1 Project, by virtue of several factors that 1361 will never have (new metal, advanced engineering, uniqueness, sexy looks, etc.), has attracted donors that will not, and may never, donate to a project to re-restore 1361--or, for that matter, the far worthier LIRR G5 project at Strasburg, the roundhouse or PRR observation at the RR Museum of Pa., putting a jacket on a PRR 0-6-0, restoring any number of GG1s that need paint and/or a better home, etc.

And that's just the PRR projects.

It is a fallacy, albeit one frequently promoted for political agendas, to presume that monies allocated for one goodwill or charity project or cause MUST by necessity come from depriving another deserving project of the same funds. Rather, it is the mission of any such charitable project to demonstrate that it is worthy of a person's discretionary monies, which could be spent on anything from food to beer to cable TV fees to car restoration to concerts to animal shelters to vacations to Star Wars action figures.

The A1 Tornado Project succeeded in that with "the price of a pint a week." Other loco preservation and even recreation projects have done so or are doing so (see SP 9010).

The custodians of 1361 have not, in part because of a badly checkered past and track record.

And I say this as a cynic that contributed to 1361 and the Railroaders Memorial Museum in the 1980s, but not yet to the T1 project.

People have money for what they want.

There is no dearth of quad-runners, new trucks, SUV's, satellite and cable t.v. systems, new boats, or iPhones.

If people want a PRR T1, a rebuilt K4s 1361, or LIRR G5s #35 or 39, they will get behind it.

I have just made my first monthly donation to the T1 project. I would gladly do the same for the 1361 if Strasburg was doing the work. I'll consider joining one of the G5 projects. Strasburg knows what they're doing!

"And just think what that effor could've done reassembling the 1361 kit.

Or putting a new jacket on 643."

Assuming we manage to survive and the interest in railroad history is maintained, at some point the cost of maintaining old equipment is going to be subject not only to diminishing marginal returns, but decreasing ones. One of the most important parts of this project will be the metaknowledge gained.


I hope they succeed and I'm now at the point of opening my own modest checking account.

First two boiler courses are now on order with funding being sought for a third. https://prrt1steamlocomotivetrust.org/s ... ler/boiler

The meta-knowledge of new builds really cannot be understated, especially when it means you can handle other projects far swifter.

This is why the A1 trust and the LMS Patriot/National Memorial Locomotive Trust are branching out into tank engines after learning what they have done from their larger build/raitour projects. Never mind the aim of the 82045 Trust, who're also building a new tank engine.

The knowledge in manufacturing gained from the initial UK new builds, plus the need to 'plug' potential gaps in both the roster and offer engines to tourist lines are driving these projects. (All welded boilers and roller bearings are now standard fare.)

There's also the realisation that even some of the youngest locomotives in the UK are some 60 years old by now, which is what's going to drive more of these projects, it makes sense if you can have a new build shoulder a good portion of the day to day traffic (which is itself easier to maintain).

It is important to develop ways to build a locomotive using the technology of the present day, including the use of weldments over castings, modern steels and components etc. so that modern industry can be utilized to it's best advantage in building locomotives.

There is no doubt that a PRR T1 will someday exist again because the Trust is approaching this project in a very practical and pragmatic way. No longer do massive 100 foot long castings have to be made at one time. A welded frame can be built piecemeal. No longer do we need massive bull riveters to assemble a giant boiler. It can also be built piecemeal. That really is the key to success. Break it down into manageable chunks.

Good morning,

This latest announcement starts to approach a question. Where will the Trust assemble the T1? Scanning the FAQ's perhaps I missed this. Continental may be willing to store the shell until funding is reached (assuming they will complete the boiler).

Like the Tornado project, the Trust will need to find an assembly location which is available for a very long build process. Rick has a point. Large industrial projects can be made with subassemblies spread across multiple suppliers but at some point they will need to start assembly.

They are certainly gaining momentum.

Regards,

Randy

They have at least one location scoped out, and there are clear plans for how to develop facilities there 'when the time comes'.

I was specifically asked not to comment on the details, so you'll have to take it on faith that this has been a known and acknowledged part of the development planning since before any drawings were systematically located, let alone parts made.