Just wondering

[wm3798]

Nor does it translate well to the new 2-8-0 mechanism.  I recall right before the new Connie was introduced, the old Reading model was being blown out at under $20.
Lee

[inkaneer]

Just an aside...  I'm not sayin' it didn't happen, but by 1948, which is when the Kato version of the Broadway Limited was delivered to Pennsy property, most of the K4s had been bumped from first class trains.  T1s were still running and one could be found at the head of the Kato Broadway.  They were bumped by diesels pretty quickly so that by the 50s there were no steam locos involved with the Broadway beyond possible snapping over the hill.

However, if you wanted an iconic, really neat-looking Pennsy steam engine that lots of people would buy just for looks and the "cool factor" and would be good for the 1948 Broadway, the T1 4-4-4-4 would be it.

C'mon...  This thing is cooler than a GG1.

Yeah the T1 looked cool but very slippery and easy to get the two engines out of sync.  It also had an extremely long frame as it was not articulated.   That's the reason why it only ran west of Pittsburgh because it could not negotiate the curve in the station at Pittsburgh.  Now If it could not do that then how do you expect a model of one to manage a 9 3/4" turn that a lot of people would want to run them on?    Pennsy's later designs like the T1 and the steam turbine S1 never came close to matching the earlier steam.   When Pennsy was closing down its steam operations it was the newer engines that had their fires dropped first.   The H's, I's, L's and M's all labored on.  The last steam operated train was pulled by a 1917 design L1.

[Bsklarski]

Just an aside...  I'm not sayin' it didn't happen, but by 1948, which is when the Kato version of the Broadway Limited was delivered to Pennsy property, most of the K4s had been bumped from first class trains.  T1s were still running and one could be found at the head of the Kato Broadway.  They were bumped by diesels pretty quickly so that by the 50s there were no steam locos involved with the Broadway beyond possible snapping over the hill.

However, if you wanted an iconic, really neat-looking Pennsy steam engine that lots of people would buy just for looks and the "cool factor" and would be good for the 1948 Broadway, the T1 4-4-4-4 would be it.

C'mon...  This thing is cooler than a GG1.

Dud I NEED one, I mean 2 of those in N scale!

[Dave V]

Yeah the T1 looked cool but very slippery and easy to get the two engines out of sync.  It also had an extremely long frame as it was not articulated.   That's the reason why it only ran west of Pittsburgh because it could not negotiate the curve in the station at Pittsburgh.  Now If it could not do that then how do you expect a model of one to manage a 9 3/4" turn that a lot of people would want to run them on? 

OK, two things here...

1.  Models can be articulated more than the prototype; look at how the Walthers/Life-Like2-8-8-2s are double-articulated unlike their prototype.  Conversely, Bachmann's been cranking out 4-8-2s that they recommend not to operate below a 19" radius!  Mine barely makes it around 15" without complaining.  Bachmann wasn't worried about the 9 3/4" crowd.  I wouldn't soil myself if my model T1 had some minor articulation to help me out a bit.

2.  The T1s ran all the way to Harrisburg.  They show up in all of my PRR steam books as having served the Middle and Pittsburgh Divisions east of Pittsburgh.

http://www.billspennsyphotos.com/apps/photos/photo?photoid=96794880
http://prrsteam.pennsyrr.com/images/t15548.JPG
http://prrsteam.pennsyrr.com/prrt1.php

I think you may be thinking of the J1...  It did not run east of Altoona because it was too large to fit through the duckunders at Rockville Bridge to enter Enola Yard.

EDIT:  The BLI HO model of the T1 suggests a 22" radius, which is about our 11" radius...  Hardly unreasonable.  And I would expect the model would not attempt to replicate the wheel-slippage issue, which was as much a function of incomplete engineer training for the new design as it was the design itself.

[inkaneer]

I did some internet research trying to gage interest in different railroads.  Specifically I wanted to find out how large of a historical society each had.  I think there is a logical correlation of interest in a given railroad and its potential market.  I could not locate any numbers for the UP, NYC, SP, Southern, Milwaukee or ATSF but I did for the B&O, C&O, N&W, GN, New Haven, CB&Q and PRR.   Both B&O and N&W boast of having approx 1500 members.  The C&O claims 2,500 members and the GN 2,000 members.   The New Haven claims 1900 members while the CB&Q only 1200.   The Pennsy states it has 2906 members of whom 180 joined this year.  That tells me there are more people interested in the PRR than any of those other RR's.   I would love to have the UP's membership number but the numbers I do have tell me that the comment made by the Intermountain exec of PRR being a fifth tier railroad maybe reflective of personal bias rather than market research.  But I'll keep an open mind about this awaiting the evidence of all this alleged market research I have been hearing about. 

[bbussey]

Still beating that dead horse.

[wcfn100]

I did some internet research trying to gage interest in different railroads.  Specifically I wanted to find out how large of a historical society each had.

You can make absolutely no correlation as to how many modelers or people that would buy a model of a certain RR based on the membership of a historical group. Zero.  None.

Take it from a guy who had to start his own modeling forum even though there was an established history group.

Jason

[sirenwerks]

You can make absolutely no correlation as to how many modelers or people that would buy a model of a certain RR based on the membership of a historical group. Zero.  None.

Take it from a guy who had to start his own modeling forum even though there was an established history group.

Jason

Not sure why you bothered trying, that's kind of a no-brainer, with as many variables as are possible in defining 'size', interests of membership, and the demo- and psychographics within a membership body. It's highly likely even the leadership of said organizations don't know who their membership is, they just think they do.

[inkaneer]

OK, two things here...

1.  Models can be articulated more than the prototype; look at how the Walthers/Life-Like2-8-8-2s are double-articulated unlike their prototype.  Conversely, Bachmann's been cranking out 4-8-2s that they recommend not to operate below a 19" radius!  Mine barely makes it around 15" without complaining.  Bachmann wasn't worried about the 9 3/4" crowd.  I wouldn't soil myself if my model T1 had some minor articulation to help me out a bit.

2.  The T1s ran all the way to Harrisburg.  They show up in all of my PRR steam books as having served the Middle and Pittsburgh Divisions east of Pittsburgh.

I think you may be thinking of the J1...  It did not run east of Altoona because it was too large to fit through the duckunders at Rockville Bridge to enter Enola Yard.

Okay, you made me go down two flights of stairs to get my books.  But I'm glad you did.   You are correct the T1'a did run through to Harrisburg.  My error,  got my engine letters mixed up.   The T1 was a 4-4-4-4.  It was the S-1 duplex which was a 6-4-4-6 that only was used west of Pittsburgh.   There was only one engine in this class #6100 and only one engine in class S-2 which was the steam turbine.   By the way there are two photos in my Pennsy Power book by Alvin Stauffer that show train 28, the Broadway Limited, being pulled by the S-2 turbine #6200. 

Another thought here.  You mentioned the J-1 class.  This was not a Pennsy designed engine but rather a C&O [C&O designation was T-1] engine that Pennsy adopted.  Pennsy built 125 of them, the largest fleet of 2-10-4's in the nation.  It operated west of Altoona  as you state.   But here is a locomotive that could be used for both C&O and PRR.  Railroads that just happen to have the largest historical societies.   

[wazzou]

Ink -
I really don't have a dog in this fight, however your assumptions based on your research are flawed somewhat.
Now, it could be argued like this...the Pennsylvania RR had a high number of largely populated cities along it's routes.  This certainly plays a role today in their large Society membership numbers.
Sure, the same thing could be said about the B&O, C&O or the NH but conversely these railroads were much smaller than the Pennsylvania and probably didn't make as large an impression. 
Now take the CB&Q...there was Chicago, Minneapolis, Denver...I'll give you those, but after that it's Council Bluffs, Billings and Omaha.
The GN is even worse.  You've got Minneapolis and Seattle but what then?  Havre, Kalispell or Klamath Falls?
There simply aren't the same population centers on these Railroads to share the Historical Association membership numbers of the Pennsylvania.
I am a member of both the Northern Pacific Railway Historical Association and the Milwaukee Road Historical Association.  I know that the NP has been making a push to get to 2,000 members. 
Until just recently, the Milwaukee Road had what amounted to two separate groups, a fledgling "West End" group and a more robust and more recognized "East End" group.  The "West" has since disbanded and only the MRHA remains, so I cannot tell you today what the numbers are.
I can tell you this, the Milwaukee is a pretty popular Railroad, largely due to...well several factors really...the only transcontinental railroad to be abandoned and the "Resourcefulness" of its employees to name a couple.

The bottom line is you cannot associate "more popular railroad" with the size of its Historical Association, pure and simple.

[inkaneer]

You can make absolutely no correlation as to how many modelers or people that would buy a model of a certain RR based on the membership of a historical group. Zero.  None.

Take it from a guy who had to start his own modeling forum even though there was an established history group.

Jason

Did I make that correlation?   I do not believe I did.   I did say those numbers show how many people have enough interest in those railroads to join the historical society.    That shows interest and, the term I used was potential market.   Now is it reasonable to expect  an alleged "fifth tier railroad" to have the largest number of people interested in it?   I don't think that is a logical conclusion.  That's why I think all this stuff about "Pennsy does not sell" is not based on market research but plain old personal BiaS.   

[Dave V]

Ink, I made that argument on another board once upon a time...  Same loco minus a few details, but two big roads.  Bachmann has done C&O steam.

[wazzou]

I did say those numbers show how many people have enough interest in those railroads to join the historical society.    That shows interest and, the term I used was potential market.   

Many, many members of Historical Associations join because they were former employees or family members of former employees. 
The ratio of members to modelers is shockingly small in most cases, less than 50%

[sirenwerks]

Did I make that correlation?   I do not believe I did.   I did say those numbers show how many people have enough interest in those railroads to join the historical society.    That shows interest and, the term I used was potential market.   Now is it reasonable to expect  an alleged "fifth tier railroad" to have the largest number of people interested in it?   I don't think that is a logical conclusion.  That's why I think all this stuff about "Pennsy does not sell" is not based on market research but plain old personal BiaS.

The size of a historical society has no correlation to a railroads modeling marketability. Historical societies are not just modelers, they're former employees and simple railfans that don't model, or even just historians. Yes, there are sometimes a lot of modelers but mostly a lot of people who just talk.

As for personal bias, that's the way the bee bumbles when you own your own company and spend your own money. The idea some ways back about creating a Pennsy N scale model capital group was a good one; companies like cash and like keeping busy employees, machinery, and facilities  that are not busy enough because of an economic slowdown, for when the slowdown picks up. Put your money where your heart is.

[inkaneer]

Ink -
I really don't have a dog in this fight, however your assumptions based on your research are flawed somewhat.
Now, it could be argued like this...the Pennsylvania RR had a high number of largely populated cities along it's routes.  This certainly plays a role today in their large Society membership numbers.
Sure, the same thing could be said about the B&O, C&O or the NH but conversely these railroads were much smaller than the Pennsylvania and probably didn't make as large an impression. 
Now take the CB&Q...there was Chicago, Minneapolis, Denver...I'll give you those, but after that it's Council Bluffs, Billings and Omaha.
The GN is even worse.  You've got Minneapolis and Seattle but what then?  Havre, Kalispell or Klamath Falls?
There simply aren't the same population centers on these Railroads to share the Historical Association membership numbers of the Pennsylvania.
I am a member of both the Northern Pacific Railway Historical Association and the Milwaukee Road Historical Association.  I know that the NP has been making a push to get to 2,000 members. 
Until just recently, the Milwaukee Road had what amounted to two separate groups, a fledgling "West End" group and a more robust and more recognized "East End" group.  The "West" has since disbanded and only the MRHA remains, so I cannot tell you today what the numbers are.
I can tell you this, the Milwaukee is a pretty popular Railroad, largely due to...well several factors really...the only transcontinental railroad to be abandoned and the "Resourcefulness" of its employees to name a couple.

The bottom line is you cannot associate "more popular railroad" with the size of its Historical Association, pure and simple.

Listen if my assumptions are flawed then show me the flaw.  Then show me where the other side's assumpoptions are not flawed.   All I am saying is that a railroad with the largest number of people interested in it to put out money to join their historical society has to represent a potential market and that potential market is larger than any of the other railroads I was able to gather numbers on.    Potential market is a marketing research term.  It doesnot mean that is the absolute size of the market nor does it mean that everyone of those people will buy a product.   What it does do is it enables one to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges.   

Now everyone here seems to believe that line about "Pennsy does not sell".  Why?   What evidence do you have?    All you have is statements made by people that, for all you know, maybe based on personal prejudice.   You do not know if it is or if it is not.   So let's see the evidence.   Is that so unreasonalble?   That is why I said before "SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE."  WOW, I'm starting to feel like Henry Fonda in the movie Twelve Angry Men!