Thank you everyone for sharing your first-hand travel experiences on PRR’s trains in different period! All the things I have learned from you guys and my experience on this forum is way beyond my expectations! Thank you very much! I wish I can make a longer reply tomorrow. Good Night![swg]
I guess the morale of the leadership was sinking even though the front-line staffs were still working hard in mid-50s, I guess every railroad knew that slowly retreat from passenger service was the only way out after years of struggling. Replace steam engines with diesels was so easy, but there was absolutely no easy method to fight against the challenges from airline, buses, trucks and automobiles.
A brief conclusion:
From 1938 to 1942, Penny ordered 175 new lightweight equipment (141 from Pullman and ACF, 34 from Budd) for the establishment of the “Fleet of Modernism” which included 4 named train in the first phase: The Broadway Limited, The General, The Liberty Limited and The Spirt of St. Louis
Beside new cars, Pennsy also refurbished 248 Betterment cars to expand the “Fleet of Modernism” in the second phase, named Train like
US Marine Commander James Devereux returns from Wake Island to Washington DC. HD Stock Footage
Commander James Devereux took a PRR Pullman Sleeper, which was painted with F.O.M scheme, back to DC in 1945
Updates was made today:
[Y] Adding 50 P70gsr Coach Nos. 4310-4359 (Paired Windows) on the list, base on the information provided by the Coach Yard, total number of Betterman Cars carried F.O.M scheme with actual car number provided increased from 162 to 212. (total = 248 approx.)
P70gsr Coach (Paired Windows, early design)
I forget this one: OEW 330 gas/electric car #4663, even though she didn’t carry a complete F.O.M scheme. ( Without golden strips on both side)
Before refurbishment.
(source: http://prr.railfan.net/ )
Aug 21, 1941 from HAGLEY DIGITAL ARCHIVES.
Polarized windows was used on the 24-wheel Twin-unit dining car on the Trail Blazer. LIFE 1939
I believe the success of the Trail Blazer was unexpected by the PRR. The interior design of the consist was classy, clean and tidy but it was definitely not luxury in my book, compared to coach only prime train of Santa Fe or Union Pacific.
The fare of a seat on the Trail Blazer was $30.9 for a round trip from NY to Chi-town which is equal to about $550 today, an affordable price for most of the middle class which was attractive enough to pull patrons from rival’s trains or even PRR’s own train.
PRR met their Marengo running the Broadway Limited until late 50s, but the Trail Blazer definitely redeemed them. It is always hard to draw a conclusion of why the 20th Century beat the Broadway Limited until late 50s, just as why the Trail Blazer beat the Pacemaker of NYC in terms of ridership for a decade.
Update was made on the first page, adding 88 lightweight car purchased from Pullman Standard in 2 lots from 1939-40, base on the information in the book “The Car of Pullman” by Joe Welsh.
I will confirm it by checking the actual Pullman car number from the Pullman Car list when I have time. If you have information about this topic, please feel free to post them here, thank you for your attention!
I found this little pic from the online archieve of the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania. This is actually the first time I found a color rendering of the “Unit Train” project, which was supposed to upgrade the Broadway Limited in early 30s leading by Loewy but cancelled and replaced by his new idea: the Fleet of Modernism.
Aug. 17, 1936
“Staff meeting of VP’s Charles D. Young, John F. Deasy and Walter S. Franklin considers the situation of Western railroads operating one or two “show” trains, like the Zephyr, Hiawatha, or Chief at very high speeds, reversing the trend where Eastern railroads traditionally had the edge in speed; urge placing two articulated lightweight two-car sets on the Broadway Limited, including Advance and Progress now running on the NYC; could bring weight down to under 450 tons, vs. 660 tons for existing heavyweights, and run Paoli-Chicago in 13:00; urges PRR to buy or build lightweight cars. (CMP)”
Sep. 14, 1936
“Pres. Clement presents memo on lightweight trains to Board; proposes a program to build nine lightweight trainsets, two of 12 cars for Broadway Limited, two of 10 cars for Liberty Limited, two of 12 cars for American/“Spirit of St. Louis”, and two of 13 and 14 cars for The Congressional. (CMP)”
Sep. 28, 1936 (The “Mistake”)
“Electro-Motive Corporation makes a formal proposal to furnish a 3,600 HP two-unit road passenger diesel that can haul the Broadway Limited between Paoli and Chicago, cutting the total running time from 16:30 to 15:00 flat. (CMP)”
Nov. 21, 1936
VP Charles D. Young in a memo to VP’s John F. Deasy and Walter S. Franklin questions why they are planning for 102 seats in the new Broadway Limited, when the train only carries 30-35 passengers; sugg
Note that this is right at the time period when UP and Milwaukee were discovering that separable full-size consists were preferable to lightweight motor trains of the future. I suspect that is part of what guided PRR not to make the attempt; I can’t really imagine a lightweight Broadway even with full sleeper accommodations, and of course the Trail Blazer is what actually introduced lightweight modernism in the ‘right’ context for PRR.
I can’t imagine any rebuilding of PRR steam of that era that would support a 15-hour timing, even with the shorter route (vs. NYC). And a duplex ‘rightsized’ for one of those lightweight consists would be too small for alternative trains, but a T1 would be overkill at any practical increased speed outside the electrification (which presumably would have gone to Pittsburgh on the original '30s priority schedule if EMD locomotives weren’t adopted).
On the other hand we all have failed to find pictures of the proposed Pennsy '30s E8 … no, that’s not a typo, it would have been an oil-fired 84"-drivered Atlantic probably quite similar to a Baldwin version of the Milwaukee A. I’m surprised there is no mention of this being ‘preferred’ power for the PRR lightweight train service. I suspect if anyone can find pictorial references you can.
I think you are right about UP and Milwaukee’s “epiphany” that articulated lightweight trainset like M-10000s were not feasible or flexible enough during operation since they were hard to adjust the length of the train base on demand at different seasons. From what I found about the Unit Train, I really don’t think it would help PRR to turn the table for the Broadway, although I am not sure what kind of different service they were planning to provide; without increasing the fare; which would be much better than the Century and other NYC’s trains, but the Unit Train itself wasn’t something really special from inside to outside, it looked good and that was it. So yes, I think the point you mentioned was
If everyone wasn’t in such a damned hurry these days, this would be the way to go! I took Amtrak City of New Orleans in 1994, It was about 14 hours late, not counting my connection being 24 hours off, due to a stoppage at Englewood. Amtrak did put me up in a hotel in CHI for the night, but I still missed one day/night in New Orleans. Still was a good trip…
Todd
I assume you meant to write “UP and Burlington”, although there a couple of other roads using fully articulated trainsets.
Glad you caught that… although no, I did write ‘Milwaukee’ thinking about consists pulled by 4-4-2s becoming obsolescent quickly and this necessitating larger locomotives. Forgetting utterly about lightweight consists in the process.
The public reaction of MILW’s “new” Hiawatha was beyond the management’s expectation, so the “Tiny” Class A 4-4-2 which was supposed to “mimic” a short lightweight streamliner (6-car consist) like M-10000 was found inadequate to handle much longer consist and maintain fast schedule. MILW ordered six Class F7 Hudson to handle the much longer Hiawatha (12-14 car consist).
UP encountered the same situation thus the short service life of M-10000. But there were some exception case like IC’s Green Diamond. : )
For tourist-oriented train trains like City of New Orleans of Amtrak, speed is never a big problem, just as many long-distance overnight trains in the past like UP’s the City of LA, Santa Fe’s Super chief or PRR’s South Wind, their target customer were families, retired people, individuals taking holiday break or tourists from different states and countries. Unlike those trains served the North East Corridor like the PRR’s Congressional or Senator, their target costumer were businessman, executives or political figures and their retinues. Time is money in business world, so passenger on these train not only expected the trains arrive on time, they didn’t want to spend too much time on transportation neither.
Even a 2 hours and 50 mins service schedule for NY to D.C still wasn’t fast enough to save the last trump card of PRR form the challenge of regional airlines, speed is no doubt an essential factor of RRs competitiveness.
PRR K4s #5471 leading the Trail Blazer. It was probably a 8-car section of the mentioned train. A “semi-streamliner” ? (1940)
Betterment car POC70R coach-observation carrying the original Trail Blazer keystone plate. (Winter, 1939)
The Trail Blazer in early 1940s, A 12-car consist leading by K4s (S1 can’t be that small).
A rare color photo of PRR’s betterment car, probably a P70KR coach, using the same interior color scheme as the Pullman lightweight sleeper of 1938.
Note the chairback of the reclining seat was rather short! The staff was changing the direction of the seats.
I am not sure if this is a pic of the rebuilt twin unit dining car. Note the light trough above the windows.
[C]
Let me interject some ‘ambiance’ to the times to something that was taking place outside the railroads but highlights some of the thinking at the time.
Nice Video, Balt. Interesting to see comments were inclined to love the SS Normandie more than the RMS Queen Mary. I love steam powered Ocean Liner since I was a child and my father always mentioned about Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth and the Titanic. The Former never impressed me anyway. They were good ships but not progressive enough for my taste. If I can afford a first-class ticket in that era, why would I travel on the second most expensive ship instead of the best one? The SS Normandie was not only the most expensive one in terms of construction cost, but she was also beautiful, revolutionary from inside to outside.
Nevertheless, the competition between SS Normandie and RMS Queen Mary was legendary. We couldn’t experience the same style of traveling anymore. Limited trains powered by the steam engine plus steam powered Ocean liner was the best package of traveling. But both types of transportation were replaced by the Iron birds.
WELCOME TO THE BLOODY FUTURE.
</
A rare photo showing Pullman Muskingum River, an all-stainless steel 2/1/1 buffet lounge attached to a PRR F.O.M car:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/barrigerlibrary/12349544773/
A scale model of Muskingum River:
