Astounding no one has brought this up, even though covered (in open access) by the Newswire: I actually had to find out about it from a post to a Mark Twain literary list!
The Mark Twain Zephyr consist, plus the car from the Pioneer Zephyr taken out for reasons if limited space at the Museum of Science and Industry (how many of you knew that?), have been purchased by an operating railroad, and effective restoration is being started.
http://www.marktwainzephyr.com/
Or, pinching my nose,
https://m.facebook.com/MarkTwainZephyr/
Current plan is to re-engine with a 6-567, which could be interesting; somewhere I picked up the impression that the early Wintons in at least some of these motor trains were inline 6s and 8s? (Anyway, the story says they have checked and the transplant engine will fit, so the issue is not severe.)
I confess I'd have gone straight to a modular Tier 4 plus engine and generator on a 'skid' designed to fit the legacy Winton footprint, but I think part of the decision is that they already have the 567 and electrical gear on hand 'free'. And I'm among the LAST people to complain about putting a running 567 in anything...
May the restoration live long and prosper! (And may media and public interest in it result in resumption and successful completion of work on the Flying Yankee...)
Ordinarily I am not a preservationist, but breaking up the articulated trainset of the Pioneer Zephyr?
I am as much of a steam enthusiast these days as anyone, but the Pioneer Zephyr is to diesel locomotion as Stephenson's Rocket is to steam. Yes, there were earlier diesels and other diesel/distillate engined articulated trains just as the Rocket was not the first steam locomotive. But the Pioneer Zephyr is iconic in the way it captured the public imagination.
I am OK operating the Pioneer Zephyr with a 567 engine, but are they talking about tacking the Pioneer Zephyr cars on the back of the Mark Twain Zephyr power car?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Paul Milenkovicbreaking up the articulated trainset of the Pioneer Zephyr? ... are they talking about tacking the Pioneer Zephyr cars on the back of the Mark Twain Zephyr power car?
The thing I did not know is that a car was removed from the Pioneer Zephyr BEFORE that train was put on display. Think of it as an analogue to Overland Trail in the M10000 consist. This extra car (and presumably its associated truck) will go into the Mark Twain consist easily, and enhance the available space in the train as well as represent a good use of the historic fabric (at any rate a better use than as an orphan car sitting in some dealer's yard or other for nearly 60 years...)
Perhaps that would be 'too much train' for a 6-567 to accelerate to 100+mph with a full passenger load. However I expect actual service peak speed to be much less...
Quite a story of its history after it was removed from revenue service.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
I hope they have been and will continue to exchange tips with the Flying Yankee group.
Short of an actual operating Winton or Cleveland (very, very rare these days, and not a single 201A is left running), a 6-567C is the best possible choice. It will sound very similar, will produce the right amount of power, is low-tech and from the same general era, and can be rebuilt with many 645 series parts, which are still in production and should continue to be for many years to come.
Overmod is correct that the 8 cylinder Winton 201 and 201A's were inline engines (was there ever a 6 cylinder version?). But the narrow V angle of the 567 was specifically chosen so it would fit into locomotives, and even without looking at the measurements I see no reason why it shouldn't fit, as a Zephyr power car should have the same interior width as an E or F-unit.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Only a few purists will even note the difference. I am one but in this case it is more important to guarantee that this restortion will run most of the time. A couple well place rescue engines might be well worth the effort. We want the general public to pass the word around that this is a good lesson in history.
The previous post about low tech has many advanages for the volunteers.
SD70Dude... even without looking at the measurements I see no reason why it shouldn't fit
Lateral fit in the carbody isn't the issue -- matching the new engine up with the legacy bedplate or bearers, while carefully preserving the 'historic fabric' of what is there, is the issue. If the conversion 'sled' has to be of any particular height, you may start to run into vertical clearance issues as even short 567s are 'just as tall' as longer ones... plus the required manifolding. I don't think the prospect of needing a height 'blister' or hatch bulge is attractive to contemplate...
Incidentally anyone who thinks a 567 is 'low tech' evidently hasn't had much to do with one. The design and metallurgy of many of the pieces is critical, and as Cook has noted may not be even reproduceable today at any sane price. When I was in high school, a friend's father who had maintained the Navy 567s pointed out that a fingerprint on part of the injector would prevent its assembly -- this just as critical a detail as ensuring DLC coating integrity in somewhat more modern injectors. Wear or breakage in the geartrains can become its own need for unobtanium -- no one remembers how to replicate the combination of tooth facing and overall hardening/case in making those gears.
Now with luck the source of spare takeoffs at places like LTE that have large numbers of SWs in their deadlines will remain reasonable. But that may not last indefinitely.
The real horror is in engines from the '80s, heavily dependent on fragile, obsolescent proprietary hardware with firmware and software often imperfectly documented and with repair information effectively lost. As the last factory FRUs disappear or are scrapped for their valuable elements you may easily wind up with something that can't be low-tech kludged but is far too complex to rewire with emulated electronics. When you then have units that at the best of times were dogs, like the EMD 50 series... the chance of operating preservation becomes indeed grim.
Overmod SD70Dude ... even without looking at the measurements I see no reason why it shouldn't fit Lateral fit in the carbody isn't the issue -- matching the new engine up with the legacy bedplate or bearers, while carefully preserving the 'historic fabric' of what is there, is the issue. If the conversion 'sled' has to be of any particular height, you may start to run into vertical clearance issues as even short 567s are 'just as tall' as longer ones... plus the required manifolding. I don't think the prospect of needing a height 'blister' or hatch bulge is attractive to contemplate...
SD70Dude ... even without looking at the measurements I see no reason why it shouldn't fit
I've never seen measurements, but from photos it looks like the Winton engines aren't exactly short either.
Overmod Incidentally anyone who thinks a 567 is 'low tech' evidently hasn't had much to do with one. The design and metallurgy of many of the pieces is critical, and as Cook has noted may not be even reproduceable today at any sane price. When I was in high school, a friend's father who had maintained the Navy 567s pointed out that a fingerprint on part of the injector would prevent its assembly -- this just as critical a detail as ensuring DLC coating integrity in somewhat more modern injectors. Wear or breakage in the geartrains can become its own need for unobtanium -- no one remembers how to replicate the combination of tooth facing and overall hardening/case in making those gears.
I was referencing the lack of computerized or electronic controls of any kind on the engine. And no expensive, complex and sensitive high pressure injection pump, as found on so many other diesels.
This is a 6-567C engine out of a SW600 (a rare unit in its own right), not one of the earlier 567's that would be found in a SW1. Obtaining replacement geartrain and power assembly parts should not be an issue, indeed, one day this could be rebuilt into a 6-645C if so desired. I, too have read Cook's article over on RYPN (it should be required reading for railroad museum operating departments), you'll also recall that he states how rare replacement 6 cylinder crankshafts are, while simultaneously noting that they seldom fail.
For the rest of you, here's the article:
http://rypn.org/articles/single.php?filename=060228215551.txt
I'll think about how little I have to do with 567's while I start our F3A tomorrow morning.
Point taken on the metallurgy and sensitivity of the injector parts.
As it happens, another 6-567C engine (round access covers, only one blower) came up for sale last month. I saw it on the "RR Locomotive Parts For Sale" Facebook group, and I imagine the seller has probably posted it elsewhere too.
SD70Dude Obtaining replacement geartrain and power assembly parts should not be an issue, indeed, one day this could be rebuilt into a 6-645C if so desired.
Of course with the very short crank, if any engine would tolerate a little rack advance with a C block the 6 would be it; I certainly don't have the experience you guys have with the physical engines to say yes or no. But everyone I trust has said not to try for higher horsepower with the 645 power-assembly swap and rebalance.
I'd like to think there are enough cranks 'around' (isn't the blower one-half of the pair on a 12-567?) that there will be no difficulties with the occasional spun bearing or other 'issue'.
Overmod If we are talking about the Pioneer Zephyr extra train car, I am OK with that -- it wasn't part of the original trainset. Paul Milenkovic breaking up the articulated trainset of the Pioneer Zephyr? ... are they talking about tacking the Pioneer Zephyr cars on the back of the Mark Twain Zephyr power car? Let me assure you that the train in the Museum of Science and Industry will remain safe and intact -- not that I would mind it getting a full operational overhaul even if, as Preston Cook and some others note, even a few minutes operating a Winton 201 is like repeatedly ringing the Liberty Bell in asking for catastrophic consequences. The thing I did not know is that a car was removed from the Pioneer Zephyr BEFORE that train was put on display. Think of it as an analogue to Overland Trail in the M10000 consist. This extra car (and presumably its associated truck) will go into the Mark Twain consist easily, and enhance the available space in the train as well as represent a good use of the historic fabric (at any rate a better use than as an orphan car sitting in some dealer's yard or other for nearly 60 years...) Perhaps that would be 'too much train' for a 6-567 to accelerate to 100+mph with a full passenger load. However I expect actual service peak speed to be much less...
If we are talking about the Pioneer Zephyr extra train car, I am OK with that -- it wasn't part of the original trainset.
Paul Milenkovic breaking up the articulated trainset of the Pioneer Zephyr? ... are they talking about tacking the Pioneer Zephyr cars on the back of the Mark Twain Zephyr power car?
Let me assure you that the train in the Museum of Science and Industry will remain safe and intact -- not that I would mind it getting a full operational overhaul even if, as Preston Cook and some others note, even a few minutes operating a Winton 201 is like repeatedly ringing the Liberty Bell in asking for catastrophic consequences.
On the subject of engines for the Budd shovel-nosed power cars, there appeared to be a skeleton-frame along with its accompanying engine in the Lot 17 parking lot being treated as junk during the renovation of the Mechanical Engineering building at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
I believe I took some photos, but that was around the time film became obsolete with the switch to digital cameras, and I must have the exposed film either in the camera or in a 35 mm film canister, someplace. I know one shouldn't leave exposed film without developing it that long, but maybe it can be salvaged.
As far as salvage value, the buildings on the Engineering Campus have collected various study-discipline related artifacts. Engineering Hall has an original-style Edison DC generator, and at least the Electrical and Computer Engineering put some effort into its preservation in a glass case in a prominent location in the building. In the case of the Mechanical Engineering Department and that Burlington Zephyr artifact, not so much -- I am thinking it was unceremoniously junked, the powers-that-be hnot knowing anything about where it came from.
If this is of any help narrowing it down to which generation of shovel-nosed power car, memory indicates that it was an inline 8-cylinder engine.
Overmod SD70Dude Obtaining replacement geartrain and power assembly parts should not be an issue, indeed, one day this could be rebuilt into a 6-645C if so desired. It was my impression that any 645 conversions on C-blocks were done predominantly for parts compatibility and not power-adding; you'd either need to go to the E-block or duplicate the structural improvements in it to make the effort of improving to a 'real' 645 worthwhile. Now I'd invite Peter Clark to comment specifically because I think he is familiar with the export 8-cylinder "645-C" engines that I think made more (but not too much more) horsepower. Of course with the very short crank, if any engine would tolerate a little rack advance with a C block the 6 would be it; I certainly don't have the experience you guys have with the physical engines to say yes or no. But everyone I trust has said not to try for higher horsepower with the 645 power-assembly swap and rebalance. I'd like to think there are enough cranks 'around' (isn't the blower one-half of the pair on a 12-567?) that there will be no difficulties with the occasional spun bearing or other 'issue'.
It was my impression that any 645 conversions on C-blocks were done predominantly for parts compatibility and not power-adding; you'd either need to go to the E-block or duplicate the structural improvements in it to make the effort of improving to a 'real' 645 worthwhile. Now I'd invite Peter Clark to comment specifically because I think he is familiar with the export 8-cylinder "645-C" engines that I think made more (but not too much more) horsepower.
That is my understanding as well. Many 645C engined locomotives do see a slight horsepower increase but it is not absolutely required.
I suspect most 645 series parts will continue to be produced for many years to come, due to the sheer number of engines still running all over the world.
From the photos on the ad for the other 6-567C, the single blower appeared to be the standard EMD one. It simply had a plate covering the space where the other blower would have been mounted on a larger engine.
Something else to keep in mind when rebuilding a 567 is that it is possible to have a mix of different types of 567 and 645 power assemblies in the same block, but they need to be paired correctly or the engine will be unbalanced and have vibration problems (I don't think I'd recommend doing this on a 6 cylinder engine). We currently have a dead SW9 onsite with a 12-567BC that shattered its harmonic balancer not long after being rebuilt with a improper mix of 567C and 567D power assemblies. It is not ours, and the owner is currently using it as a parts source for the rest of his fleet.
Paul Milenkovic I am OK operating the Pioneer Zephyr with a 567 engine, but are they talking about tacking the Pioneer Zephyr cars on the back of the Mark Twain Zephyr power car?
Some years ago, one of our machinists was changing a power assembly in sections. After inserting the liner, he proceeded with the piston and rod, but they simply fell into the hole. The 645 liner had to come back out and a 567 liner put back, for which he was ribbed for several days..
Paul Milenkovic (B)reaking up the articulated trainset of the Pioneer Zephyr?
Stephen Karlson, DeKalb, Illinois
This may be the right Thread to ask this on?? Some time back, there was a 'Zephyr-Type train that was in a park in the Southern area of Kansas City; it seemed to be 'on-display' (?). I knoticed over several years(?), but was never able to get down to visit it. By the time I had time..It was gone..
Is the Mark Twain Zephyr that Train? Thanks, for any info!
The answer to your question is yes.
http://rtabern.com/mtz/
then MTZ 1959-2020
But the news about the Flying Yankee is not as encouraging as that for the MTZ.
Apparently, te restration group are settling on xtatic display and not operation.
https://flyingyankee.org/
daveklepperBut the news about the Flying Yankee is not as encouraging as that for the MTZ.
That thing's been kicked around so many times. I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up in a scrapyard at this point.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
If it did, the right people, possibly Conway Scenic, would buy it from the scrapper.
And then it would be restored to run.
daveklepper The answer to your question is yes. http://rtabern.com/mtz/ then MTZ 1959-2020
That answers my question! Thank You, Dave!
Wisconsin - Great Northern is a great place for the Zephyr to go to, I am sure they will do a great job with it. I was there a year ago as part of a C&NW Historical Society meet; in fact, as part of it I got to run the SW-600 that they're going to take the motor out of to power the Zephyr. The WGN crew had repainted the engine into CNW colors the night before the meet - in fact, the handrails were still a bit 'tacky' from the paint!
daveklepperIf it did, the right people, possibly Conway Scenic, would buy it from the scrapper. And then it would be restored to run.
If they wanted it, I think they'd have it by now.
https://www.railpictures.net/showimage.php?id=752688&key=7209049
There may be politics involved or Conway Scenic has had other priorities. It would be a great match, though.
Even, all 1st-Class, food and drinks included, non-stop, Boston - Portland, ME.
daveklepperEven, all 1st-Class, food and drinks included, non-stop, Boston - Portland, ME
wjstix Wisconsin - Great Northern is a great place for the Zephyr to go to, I am sure they will do a great job with it. I was there a year ago as part of a C&NW Historical Society meet; in fact, as part of it I got to run the SW-600 that they're going to take the motor out of to power the Zephyr. The WGN crew had repainted the engine into CNW colors the night before the meet - in fact, the handrails were still a bit 'tacky' from the paint!
Purple, red, yellow and blue "seats", oh my! Check out the video... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG4I7kFAFQg
That's a nice and elegant looking train! It has a straight to the point design. I see it looks like a railcar but it really has a locomotive and cars? I guess the interior will be All-American in imaginative outfit. You only have it preserved when it runs - so let it run again!
Diesels started in a similar way on DRG with the 'Flying' series but these were really railcars. (as long as they stayed special trains like that I don't mind diesels at all - huu-huu-huu)
Here's a link to the 'Flying' series trains with contemporary ball music (very hectic to me, but perhaps fitting to the times.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJ73DZXLHjQ
It's black&white, you have to imagine the color scheme was cream along the windows part and a mild violet (!!) below, separated by a black band. For once they dared something in earnest, straight and regular Germany! Oh-oh, they had the same color scheme on the 'Rheingold' luxury train with bavarian S3/6 18-5 class four cylinder compound Pacific most of the way. No, the steam locomotive remained regular red and black. The concept was later expanded into the DB version of the 1957 TEE, Trans Europe Express. So few were electrified lines back then that the concept for the TEE trains forsaw diesel power for all these trains. Railways soon went their own ways, first the SNCF, then DB introduced electric trains as TEE, the French even left the common cream and red color scheme for stainless steel car bodies.
In 1990, year of unification, DR of (former) East Germany lent back one surviving original diesel TEE from a Swiss group and put it back in regular fast passenger service between Berlin and Hamburg as 'Max Liebermann'. To the wondering of DB engineers who had formerly been charged with maintenance of these trains, this one ran and ran and ran - and never missed a schedule. Later, one DR engineer explained how they had managed to do that: when it came back to Berlin the train was immediately taken aside in the depot of Lichtenberg where service personal awaited it and went to work, checking through all the mechanics and exchanging or repairing what showed signs of weakening. So next morning the luxury train of the 1950s was back at Berlin mainstation (formerly Ostbahnhof, former-formerly Schlesischer Bahnhof) all ready and humming to make another dash to Hamburg and back.
Here is a video of the train: (at 5:32 at last you hear the then typical DR rail joint cla-tan cla-tan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D741WHNpXD4
Have fun!
Sara
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.