Re: Photo: PRR Boxcar 570062 (1941)


Bruce Smith
 

Guy, 

Correct. They were changed out, probably for reasons of standardization. After all, the PRR didn't want to stock parts for two different systems, and couldn't count on other railroads to have parts either. So a non-standard system was a real problem.

I'm also not sure why you think that this is a one or the other situation. The PRR did both, convert KD to AB and upgrade existing AB.

Regards,
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Guy Wilber via groups.io <guycwilber@...>
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2022 3:47 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io <main@realstmfc.groups.io>
Subject: [EXT] Re: [RealSTMFC] Photo: PRR Boxcar 570062 (1941)
 
CAUTION: Email Originated Outside of Auburn.
Bruce Smith wrote:

“The last batch of X29s built, post 1930, were built with experimental AB brakes with a transverse mounted reservoir. When these were upgraded to the more conventional AB brakes, by and large they retained the transverse mounting.”

What was a “more conventional” “AB” brake system?  The PRR changed out the existing system on 925 cars due to minor changes in the control valve and the later cast steel reservoir?  Seems as though the money would have been better spent towards converting “K” brakes to “AB” systems on older cars.  When was that program implemented?  

Regards,

Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada


Join main@RealSTMFC.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.