>>1214296>if the T1 had issues with hammer-down forces on the rails I don't believe this was the case. In fact, the reduced hammer forces were the reason the PRR opted for the experimental duplex locomotive designs in the first place.
>and violent wheelslip, I can only imagine what its even larger and more powerful big brother was like.The wheelslip was the big issue. Like I said earlier, It's vague how much of it was from inexperienced train engineers going hard on the throttle, and how much of it was due to design issues.
The consensus as I've heard it is that the early PRR T1 models did suffer from incorrect equalization of the train's weight, and issues with the poppet valves, but that those issues had been all-but resolved through extensive rehab work near the end of the locomotives' lives, and the issues past that point were due to inexperienced crew.
The T1 was like the Ferrari of steam engines. If you opened up the throttle, the T1 would respond almost instantly. Thus when crewmembers used to smaller, less powerful locomotives were assigned to it, they'd often "peel out" since they weren't expecting the engine to be so responsive.
I don't know as much about the S1, but I don't think it ever received the modifications the T1 did. The T1 was a little less beefy, and yes, the primary concern in designing it was to make what was essentially a smaller S1, but by the end of the T1's lifespan, it's design had been greatly improved. I don't believe the S1 ever got the same level of attention.
They're both absolutely beautiful locomotives, though, and it's a shame neither type was saved from the scrap heap.
