The J -- correctly designed or no?

Tue Aug 18 01:42:10 EDT 2015

I've seen the following comment or similar statements in a few places during the recent discussions of the N&W steam locomotive triumvirate.

>>>>   The J seems to have been over designed   <<<<

Often, writers of this phrase would point out the J's excursion experience and talk about the longer trains the Js pulled in the 80s and 90s than in the 50s and 60s. 

Frankly, I believe that this data makes our case. It is proof that the lady was not "over designed," but instead, more perfectly designed than for which she has been given credit.

First ... I go back to why the J was created ... to haul passenger trains ... more of them and longer ones, too. When the last 3 Js were built I have to believe that the company was caught up in the people-will-be-riding-more-and-more-trains theory. I mean, why else would they have directed 3 more Js be built? 

Secondly ... Considering the experience of the Ks and Js, the bosses could have gone for less powerful, probably less expensive passenger locos ... save a buck or two for less passenger performance? Does that really sound like N&W thinking?  

In the end -- juggling the two possibilities for their passengers ... 'good-enough is OK' or 'only the best will do' -- the execs decided on Js. 

It is my guess, that not only did they briefly believe that "more and more people would be riding more and more trains," but that the company would need to provide both more passenger trains and longer passenger trains.

So, knowing what the Js could do with longer trains -- and I have no doubt there were many times in the 40s that the Js pulled longer than normal passenger trains --  and believing that longer trains would be in demand, the top dogs chose the loco that was prescribed, designed and built for such service as 16-to-20 car first class trains would require. 

That passenger demand flopped, only made the J's work less stressful and less eventful. Had the passenger demand instead climbed in the early 50s, the Js would have been the perfect match for the 16-to-20-car trains that the demand might have called for ... close to exactly the role for which she was designed. 

It is my guess that with more folks wanting to ride N&W trains, the company, instead of shortening the second J order, would have lengthened it. Goodness, they may even have out-shopped a Super-J. I have no doubt the designers had a few betterments in mind.

Let's take a quick look at a similar situation that is in process in today's world.

Lots of smart folks say the Airbus 380 was over designed, but, in fact, it was designed exactly for the market Airbus presumed would be there. However, instead of knocking on the 380's door every day, most of those probable 380 passengers surprised the prognosticators and chose other, smaller airplanes for their travel needs (as did the J's passengers chose other means of transportation [... idiots!]).

The 380's designs matched the projections -- as they did for the J locomotives -- and in both cases the two excellent transportation devices never got to see their projections come true and thereby the devices never got to show off their full worth on a daily scheduled basis. 

The 380, of course, may yet see her dreams come true. As for the J, every time the 611 pulls 22 excursion cars up a hill, I'm sure she's thinking, "This is exactly what I was made for! Thank you."

Yes, indeed ... the A, J & Y were some triumvirate! ... love 'em ... Bob

... now then, on the Clinchfield ... 

Bob Loehne
7028 Tallent Court
Sherrill's Ford, NC 28673
800-611-1218 
oezbob at aol.com 

-**********************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist6.pair.net/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/attachments/20150818/ba1fa41d/attachment.html>