Making a Prototype - Colorado

[Dave V]

An Nn3 C&S Clear Creek line including both Idaho Springs and the Georgetown Loop would take surprisingly little space.  It might even be done on a 36" wide hollow core door with a backdrop divider if you keep the radius down to 11" or so on the loop.  That way you get your Rockies itch scratched with pure C&S goodness (not some C&S/PRR hybrid) and you're free to model Pennsy in its natural habitat with the remaining space.

Just a thought.

[nkalanaga]

A hill-climbing GG-1 probably wouldn't be.  The GN tried a Pennsy E2b, and it didn't like the Cascades.  Not enough weight, so limited usable tractive effort.  On the other hand, the PRR bought the GN's Y-1 electrics, and found them good for only helper service.  Too heavy, too slow, too wide.

I suspect that the PRR, if they had electrics in the western mountains, would have ended up using motor-generator units, like the GN.  Tractive effort would be more important than speed, and the GN's were definitely heavy.  "Too slow" could be fixed by changing the gearing, but anything over 60 or 70 mph would be wasted.

In fact, if they had every been made in N scale, the GN's Y and Z classes would be perfect.

[MichaelWinicki]

My thought is that the PRR would have gotten out of the steam-locomotive business going through the grade-heavy part of Colorado much like they did on the Harrisburg-Buffalo line due to the 2.6 percent grade found on Keating Summit.  Steam was gone from that line in the early 50's... Strings of RS1's were used as pushers.

[Dave V]

A hill-climbing GG-1 probably wouldn't be.  The GN tried a Pennsy E2b, and it didn't like the Cascades.  Not enough weight, so limited usable tractive effort.  On the other hand, the PRR bought the GN's Y-1 electrics, and found them good for only helper service.  Too heavy, too slow, too wide.

I suspect that the PRR, if they had electrics in the western mountains, would have ended up using motor-generator units, like the GN.  Tractive effort would be more important than speed, and the GN's were definitely heavy.  "Too slow" could be fixed by changing the gearing, but anything over 60 or 70 mph would be wasted.

In fact, if they had every been made in N scale, the GN's Y and Z classes would be perfect.

Funny, when the GN Ys came to the PRR to be helpers under the wires out of Thorndale, their slow gearing was their undoing.  They spend about a year and some change there before they were done.  Guys used to running GG1s and P5as would often spin the wheels right out of the tires.  In one of the Pennsy Electric Years books there's a photo where an FF-2 (what the Pennsy called the GN engines) had spun out and literally melted wheel ruts into the rails, LOL.  FWIW, some of the Kato/Tomix Japanese box electrics would make decent stand-ins for the GN/PRR units.

[Cajonpassfan]

Uh... that's not a real latin phrase.   

I've been sitting here with my bag o' popcorn watching the repartee, thinking to myself "there were some awfully good reasons the UP and ATSF went around Colorado."
...

Umm, the ATSF didn’t exactly go “around” Colorado, it did cross a portion of the state via its 3% Raton Pass route, but granted, it did try to avoid the front range and headed south to easier territory....
Otto K.

[nkalanaga]

"Funny, when the GN Ys came to the PRR to be helpers under the wires out of Thorndale, their slow gearing was their undoing. "

Exactly.  The PRR didn't want, or understand, "drag freight" motors.  The electrical systems were the same, but the GN and PRR had entirely different operating needs.  I'm surprised they didn't regear the Y's/FFs.  As far as I know they had regular traction motors, so it seems that would have been possible.  With a faster top speed, they would have been better helpers, for the PRR, although they'd never have been NEC speedsters.