is Philladelphia & Reading in same class as B&O

Trains Magazine General Discussion
1

When I read about the early history of American railroads there is often little or no mention of the Philladelphia & Reading.

In A History of the American Locomotive, John White seems to mention the Philadelphia & Reading just as often as the B&O when it came to importing locomotives from England or new locomotives developments by American builders.

Wikipedia’s description of the Reading describes the Reading once “as one of the most prosperous corporation in the United States”. In other books, the Philly & Rdg is described as one of the largest corporations in America, at that time.

I realize the Reading Company is a coal company and the railroad, or collection of railroads,
were assembled to haul coal from the anthracite fields.

It is not like the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western which also developed as a coal hauler
but became a more widespread transportation railroad. It is similarly unlike the Pennsylvania which it competed with and the B&O.

2

In answer to your question about how the Reading compared to the Baltimore and Ohio I went into the archives here at the Fortress Firelock, and then realizing I didn’t have much on the Reading went a little deeper and pulled out my copy of “This Fascinating Railroad Business” by Rober Selph Henry. Certainly the book’s’ an oldie, dating from 1942, but as a snapshot of the time when we can say both 'roads were at the height of their power we can get a pretty good comparison of the two.

For example:

B&O Miles of track (all track, mind you) 12, 282. The Reading, all track 3,651

B&O employees, 37,306. Reading, 15,112

B&O locomotives, 2,025. Reading, 728

B&O freight cars, all types, 81,248. Reading, 33,353

B&O passenger cars, 1,189. Reading, 813.

Operating revenue for the B&O: Freight, $140,455,928. Passenger revenue, $16,006,122

Operating revenue for the Reading: Freight, $50,999,086. Passenger, $4,721,651.

So we can see back then even though the Reading was a Class 1 railroad, and a classy one at that, it wasn’t in the same league with the Baltimore and Ohio.

As an aside, neither were in the same league as the Pennsylvania or New York Central, but that’s another story.

Hope this helps.

3

When saying a railroad is a Class one, two, etc., it is a designation from the former Inter State Commerce Commission which assigned the classification by revenues and not mileage or equipment. Today the Class ones are few and their revenues into the hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Track Class is also a more contemporary which the Federal Railroad Administration assigns to track speed limits for safety reasons. So little Reading, DL&W, LV, Long Island, CNJ, all were Class Ones like the NYC, PRR, Sante Fe, and Union Pacific. So don’t get historical designations mixed up with today’s railroads nor the designations mixed up with other social and cultural values.

4

Oh, I know what a Class One was then and what a Class One is now, Henry.

That’s if your comment was directed at me. If it wasn’t, never mind.

Dipping back into R.S. Henry’s book these were the Class breakdowns as of 1942:

Class One, revenues of more than $1,000,000 per year.

Class Two, revenues between $100,000 and $1,000.000 per year.

Class Three, revenues of less than $100,000 per year.

5

No, your reply was not present when I posted…

6

OK Henry, good enough!

By the way, GregC, are you gettin’ all of this?

7

Sorry, but I didn’t mean “class” in terms of railroads.

As I said, the Philly & Rdg was once one of the largest corporations in the the United States. This was probably before 1900. And I would think such a railroad should be included in a history of U.S. railroads.

The Camden and Perth Amboy should probably as well.

8

Greg, all I can say or surmise is if the Reading had a bigger fan base it would probably get more attention. There were a lot of 'roads that were class acts like the Delaware and Hudson, the Bangor and Aroostock, and quite a few others that for whatever reasons just don’t light anyones fire, and who knows why? Your guess is as good as mine.

I’d assume that anyone writing a general railroad history of the US is going to have to cut someone out of the story, so only the big name 'roads are going to get top billing, so a smallish 'road like the Reading just isn’t going to make the cut.

The Camden and Amboy? Certainly an important pioneer railroad, but as it was absorbed into the Pennsylvania before the 19th Century was out it usually will get a mention, but just a mention. Too bad, because I agree with you, it was a bit more important than just to be accorded footnote status.

9

The Reading started out as a major railroad, the leading carrier of anthracite. It was the first road to light a station with electricity, the first to use “Stop Look and Listen” as crossing warning, Had other superlatives and records in engines.

If was briefly the largest corporation in the US (including coal and steel operations) however the financial machination to achieve that left the P&R exposed and ultimately the financial arrangements fell through, bankrupting the P&R and put it under the control of the B&O. After that it never regained its glory although it was a key part of the mid Atlantic rail network.

10

I suggest several books to spread light on the topic and both support and alter your perceptions and conceptions of railroad yesterday and today: The histories of any railroad, especially those you’ve mentioned, in addition to the likes of Oliver Jensen’s American Heritage History of the Railroads of America (still the best history pre 1980 than any other I think). See the pictorial spreads of Clegg and Beebe, Ball, Wood, W.S. Young…etc. for the fun of what railroading and railfanning has been over the past 100 years…The D&H, today just a piece of paper, is still the oldest transportation company in the US and the B&O the oldest railroad company…and there are all other kinds of fun facts to be found. The P&R at one time ran most of the way from Philadelphia and Reading to Boston before the trust busters took it apart. But the Rdg eventually was controlled by the B&O and controlled the CNJ itself. So much fun to be covered…and confuse and confound!

11

Wow … history by popularity.

I enjoyed reading the White book (but I’m an engineer). It had separate sections for various components of a steam locomotive and was meticulous in describing the many innovations and failures involved. He limited his history from 1830-1880 and the book is 528 pages.

12

I like that: History by Popularity. The likes of New York, Ontario and Western, CNJ, Rio Grande and Western Pacific. The Long Island, Boston and Maine and Maine Central. Colorado Southern, Colorado Midland, and the Silverton and Durango. The shortest and familiar probably has to be the Richmond, Fredericksburg, and Potomac. And we all know the likes of the Morristown and Erie, Trona, SP&S, Elgin and Joliet, Buffalo Creek and Gauley, Virginia and Truckee. Just to name a few off the top of my head.

13

“History by Popularity” is old news fellas. The big names get all the attention, the smaller ones are just supporting cast. Just the way it is.

I mean, just how many of you have ever heard of “The War of Devolution”?

14

Hey, the Reading is the only railroad on “Monopoly” where you’re invited to take a ride…that has to count for something. And I’d venture to say that in Philadelphia the Reading was almost as classy as that other Keystone railroad…

15

It is not like the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western which also developed as a coal hauler
but became a more widespread transportation railroad.

The Reading was an “X” shaped system, with the crux at Reading. While the line to the NW into the anthracite area was primarily coal, but the line that connected with the WM, and ran thru Harrisburg an Reading to Allentown, was part of the “Alphabet Route” between Chicago and NY/Boston. That line along with the Phily connecting line, was busier than the combined Erie-Lackawanna, in the pre-Conrail era according to USRA. Today the Harrisburg-Reading line is busy double track, and part of NS’s primary freight line to Phily/NY.

16

For anyone really interested in the Reading RR, may I suggest the two volumes “The Reading Railroad, History of a Coal Age Empire” by James L. Houlton. It is published by Garrigues House Publishers. The ISBN 0-9620844-1-7 for the first volume. This is not a picture book, though there are many. Each volume is 300+ pages, plus Appendixes. I have both volumes and they are excellent.

17

You can’t talk about the Philadelphia and Reading without reflecting on their very distinctive steam locomotives. Like the B&O, the P&R had a fleet that couldn’t be mistaken for anything else.

It could be argued that the P&R was the only railroad to build modern locomotives with the Wootten and modified Wootten firebox required for burning anthracite economically. The book “Steam LOcomotives of the Reading and P&R Railroads” by Edward Wiswesser, published by Greenberg in 1988 is an excellent reference. It hasn’t the highest standards of production and the content is sometimes out of chronological order, but it does reproduce the technical locomotive diagrams from the earliest locomotives to the rebuilt T-1 4-8-4s of 1945 and the new G-3 Pacifics of 1948. There are many interesting and complex rebuilds described, and nothing was ever wasted. When the I-10 boilers were re-used on the T-1s, their driving wheels were used to upgrade the older I-9 2-8-0s. This sort of economical management is less common today where in-house maintenance and construction is rare.

M636C

18

I would opine that one reason the Reading doesn’t get the exposure (outside Monopoly) is that it was, in today’s terms, a regional.

Which fits in with “history by popularity” in a way.

As has been mentioned, it was well known on its home turf. But looking back, there are any number of lines which suffered a similar fate. SP&S comes to mind.

19

Not sure whether History by popularity is relevant. It’s true that the P&R and the later RDG never expanded beyond their own limited territory, but the road’s early development was strongly influenced by its ownership of much of the anthracite coal it transported. That’s one of the things that mad it so wealthy in spite of its relatively limited mileage.

20

From the standpoint of discussing railroad history and significant events and contributions, at a scholarly level, you’re absolutely correct.

Once you get below that, however, awareness is everything. For many, the only reason they know the Reading ever existed is because they landed on that square in Monopoly.

On the other hand, everybody has heard of the Santa Fe, even if they know little of it’s actual history.