Petticoat Junction Railroad Locomotive

[Tommy Gray]

Just found out that PJRR locomotive #7, ex-Argent #1, a Porter built 2-6-0, is now at the Midwest Central Railroad. I hope they can eventually get this locomotive running again. I'm going to miss seeing her under the pole barn at Warrior, Alabama as I pass by the Hallmark estate. I understand the other two Porters were sold and moved, too. As a child growing up riding behind these locomotives, I dreamed that one day I'd buy one of them. Well, at least they will be taken care of.

[Cannonball7]

Tommy, I am glad to hear that ol' #7 has been sold and hopefully will be restored, even if it is cosmetically. Like you, I grew up riding behind the Petticoat Junction & Ghost Town RR locomotives. It broke my heart when I came across this picture recently: http://www.steamlocomotive.info/vlocomo ... Display=29 I believe that is #9.

I know the Hallmarks bought the locos with the hope of running them...but all they wound up doing is letting them set out in the elements and let them rust away. It is twice as sad given that all the locomotives were operational when they bought them.

[Tommy Gray]

I've watched these locomotives sit for the past 22 years I've lived in North Alabama. LIke you, I was greatly saddened to see the two little 0-4-0's sit out in the elements rusting and rotting. I so wished I had the money to purchase the little 5, just a pipe dream. As for operational, yes, 7 was operational as was 9, but the little 5 had been placed on a short display track out by Highway 98 for the last few years of the parks' operations. According to Mr. Wilbur Golson, who worked as an engineer at PJRR for a couple of seasons, the little 5 suffered from two things, first an old boiler which caused it to be used very little. I've only seen two photos where the little 5 was pulling the train. The second issue with 5 was the oil burner. Mr. Golson told me due to the poor design, the locomotive would run out of steam when working hard. He was convinced if the burner had been redesigned, it would have made a big difference. He did state 5 was a good runner with plenty of power. If you have seen the triple header photo he took, he stated the 5 pulled both locomotives, the three coaches and the caboose all by itself. I just hope the new owners of 5 & 9 will post photos somewhere. The young man at Midwest Central RR states he will try to keep up with these two locomotives while MCRR evaluates the 7 in the future. I'm glad the three locomotives are in good hands. I'm sure we'll never see these locomotives looking like they did at PJ, most likely, they will be returned to their as designed looks. I think I would like PJ look better, but that's just me. What's wrong with red drivers, brass bands, and diamond stacks? (I know, they never worn them when built.....so?)

[Tommy Gray]

First, Happy New Year to everyone! Just posted the other day on Facebook was a video clip of PJRR #5 running under steam. The new owner has been working on the locomotive and now has it operating on a short section of track. You can find the clip in the Petticoat Junction Amusement Park group or on my facebook page, Hartselle Santa Tommy. This is something I thought I'd never see happen. I've never seen #5 under steam until now.

[Bruce R Pier]

Yes, I saw the video. That's one of the many Carbon Limestone locomotives that escaped the cutting torch. It's a Porter, and they are hard to kill....

[Cannonball7]

While I am pleased to see #5 in operation...given its exterior appearance and how badly #9 faired in the weather, I would leery of taking that boiler to full pressure. I am hoping they did a full assessment prior to firing her up!

On a personal note, I rode the Petticoat Junction & Ghost Town RR for 16 years straight - and never had #5 pull. I was either behind #7 or #9 each year. #5 was always on the siding by the station when I visited. If I remember correctly, one of the engineers told me that #5 was not big enough to pull the full train once they went to 3 coaches and the caboose.

[Steve DeGaetano]

While I am pleased to see #5 in operation...given its exterior appearance and how badly #9 faired in the weather, I would leery of taking that boiler to full pressure. I am hoping they did a full assessment prior to firing her up!

A little surface rust isn't a problem. Don't forget, boilers are built to a safety factor of at least four, so if that engine operates at 150 psi, it could conceivably be brought up to 600 psi before it goes boom!

[Murph]

For those of us without social media, does anyone have photos of the locomotive operating, or current photos of the former Petticoat equipment?

[Bruce R Pier]

While I am pleased to see #5 in operation...given its exterior appearance and how badly #9 faired in the weather, I would leery of taking that boiler to full pressure. I am hoping they did a full assessment prior to firing her up!

A little surface rust isn't a problem. Don't forget, boilers are built to a safety factor of at least four, so if that engine operates at 150 psi, it could conceivably be brought up to 600 psi before it goes boom!

Plus it is well known that Porter boilers were way overbuilt, especially when compared to their competition. They were about as turnkey a steam locomotive as you could get.

[Cannonball7]

A little surface rust isn't a problem. Don't forget, boilers are built to a safety factor of at least four, so if that engine operates at 150 psi, it could conceivably be brought up to 600 psi before it goes boom!

Thanks for the explanation Steve. I didn't know that, and it makes a lot of sense.