To clarify what I am trying to ask in the title... I have been wondering do we need more mainline steam programs/restorations than what we currently have going on right now? With the success of Big Boy this week I have been starting to wonder, "what's next?" and I began to sort of tally in my mind some of the 'big steam' that has ran mainline runs in the last ten years or so, or is currently under restoration/replication. To sort of show what I mean a list of ongoing programs I can think of include:UP Steam (UP 844, UP 4014 both under steam; with UP 3985 sidelined for possible rebuild down the line)Oregon Rail Heritage Foundation (SP 4449 operational, SPS 700 and ORN 197 under restoration/rebuild)ATSF 3751 (rebuild)
ATSF 2926 (restoration)
Milwaukee Road 261 (operational last I heard)
Iowa Interstate (two operational QJ locomotives)
Ft. Wayne Railroad Historical Society Nickel Plate 765 (operational)
NW 611 (operational)
Altoona Memorial Museum PRR 1361 (restoration)
T1 Locomotive Trust (recreation project)
Western Maryland Scenic 1309 (restoration... I don't know if this will ever see 'mainline' service but I think its worth mentioning due to its sheer size)
Tennessee Valley Railroad Museum Southern 630 (operational, last used on mainline under former 21st Century Steam program)
Nashville Steam Preservation Society 576 (restoration)
Looking at this current list, I really am struggling to think of 'that many' more steam engines to pick for restoration that I think could make strong candidates for such a program. If we go the replica route I think a NYC Hudson would be a strong candidate but I wouldn't dare suggest it take priority until the PRR T1 is finished and has proven its worth. As for mainline steam that is currently preserved the candidates seem really small... CP 2860, Reading 2101, TP 610, NW 1218, CO 614, etc. come to mind but only because they were used in mainline steam programs in the past.
This leads back to my opening question... Do we need more programs? Or is it best to focus on maintaining existing programs than chasing down the next mainline steam candidate? Sort of my opinion on the matter, with the current restrictions due to Amtrak's current policy; and UP being the only Class 1 currently supporting a steam program I really think we have hit about the max amount of mainline steam projects that can be supported in the US. Really the only thing I want to see outside of what is ongoing right now is a possible replica of a NYC Hudson someday. But, I am really curious to hear if any of you think there is still more untapped potential out there. This is definately an idea I would be happy to be proven wrong on so to speak.
As far as I'm concerned the more steam restorations the better!
However, there's one caveat as far as I'm concerned. There has to be a place to run them, otherwise it's best to just go the cosmetic restoration route and call it a day. It makes no sense to spend millions on a full-blown return-to-service restoration just to have the locomotive puttering along a mile or two of track.
The same would apply to replicas, or to be fair, "new productions."
In my opinion, the only reason 'not' to restore to operation (or at least preserve the mechanical working parts in full good condition, not just painted over or allowed to rust internally) is if it distracts funds or effort from other valuable activities that are actually funded or conducted if the restoration is scaled back to cosmetic-only.
I don't agree with the cosmetic-only restoration of PRR 460, but care was taken there to preserve all the working parts effectively.
Something that is very true is that, with the current FRA part 230 and the 1372-day inspection requirements, even if there is a full mechanical restoration it may not 'pay' to complete some of the steps to operability, most particularly putting flues and solid tubesheets in the locomotive. This comes more under the heading of 'stabilizing' the locomotive, but at a more complete state of repair than the usual kind of cosmetic restoration (especially one that leaves the locomotive in worse shape or more exposed than it was before). Even there, quite a bit of the effort may go away: at least one of the locomotives from the ATSF collection, and B&LE 643, are almost-operable examples subsequently reduced to a parlous state.
In the wake of some of the groundwork done by the T1 Trust, it becomes a matter of relatively small opportunity cost to have a Niagara instead of a Hudson. The problem is that the J1e is almost the quintessential railfan's example of a famous locomotive that got away, and it's very, very difficult to say that a Niagara has the same implicit magic. (If it's a question of a J3 vs. Niagara, not nearly as much of an issue, except perhaps to those who want a streamlined engine, which to my knowledge no one actually starting a new Hudson has considered doing.)
Hard to think of anywhere you couldn't fit a Niagara with a little additional tinkering to lateral motion devices and rear tender axles... of course, it'd be cheaper still to build a replica C1a with its bigger tender, but people would throw things at me if I pointed this out with too much logic.
Overmod In my opinion, the only reason 'not' to restore to operation (or at least preserve the mechanical working parts in full good condition, not just painted over or allowed to rust internally) is if it distracts funds or effort from other valuable activities that are actually funded or conducted if the restoration is scaled back to cosmetic-only.
I completely agree, in the long term it is far easier and cheaper to keep something in operational condition as opposed to allowing it to deteriorate and then attempt a restoration later. This goes for diesels and cars as well as steam.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Your list does miss a few other mainline steam engines undergoing restoration at the moment...and I realize it wasn't meant to be a comprehensive list. So I'd say that any mainline engine that can be restored should be restored...there are plenty of Regional/Class 2 carriers that could easily host mainline steam, they would just need to be convinced of the benefits.
P.S. - There's a Mexican Niagara at the New Hope and Ivyland in PA.
I don't mean to rain on the parade, but one major issue is being avoided. There is only a finite amount of money available for these restorations. I hate to think of the number of restorations of any type of locomotive or cars that were never completed because the money ran out. Somebody has to be the villain and ask: Are the cost estimates reasonably accurate and do we have enough cash to get the job done?
CSSHEGEWISCHSomebody has to be the villain and ask: Are the cost estimates reasonably accurate and do we have enough cash to get the job done?
After you get the 'experts' estimate of the cost of restoration - multiply it by 10 and then look at you funding sources, if they fall short you don't have enough funding to proceed. Restorations - of anything - always cost vastly more than the original estimate.
Before you begin a restoration - make sure you have a written agreement with some rail property that will agree to let the machine operate on their property. Class 1's aren't big on letting steam operating on their properties. While the UP does operate their own steam, I doubt they are so accepting of other parties steamers.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
GERALD L MCFARLANE JRP.S. - There's a Mexican Niagara at the New Hope and Ivyland in PA.
And thank you for spelling its name correctly. (Technically it should be "Niágara", as with the Brazilian 4-8-4s in Portuguese, but I am generally too lazy to mess with accents on keyboard layouts...)
It's in what I consider remarkably 'restorable' shape, too, and is a nifty size for practical excursion work. It does have to be said that Dixie 576 is reasonably close to the dimensions, and that's being restored and will be operated 'for sure' so there is less urgency about doing the work -- but I would happily commute up to work on stabilizing it if we can get a 'quorum' together, and supplies and tool access from NH&I or other local source...
Now, without laughing too hard (and carefully dodging any 'heritage' issues including those from south of our famous wall border) it should be possible to re-create most of the technological improvements that made the NYC Niagara so stunning an advance on the somewhat sow's-ear D&H and CRI&P locomotives from which it was derived. The T1 Trust is essentially 'commoditizing' the design and provision of the necessary lightweight rods and other reciprocating components; the drivers are of a construction amenable to proper balancing; implementing proper lateral control for higher speed will require some care and new components, but is scarcely 'a drop in the bucket' of overall rebuilding expense. And much of the 'optimization' of the steam delivery system to accommodate low NYC clearances does not need to be as slavishly replicated...
Be interesting to have two 110mph-capable 70"-drivered Northerns running, wouldn't it?
(Of course, this whole idea has been roundly disparaged and despised on RyPN, and I can't say I blame them.)
Lots of people questioned the necessity of funding NASA after the goal of reaching the moon had been accomplished. But stop and think for a moment. There are thousands of devices and materials in your life today that were direct byproducts of our efforts to explore space. OK, the world could probably survive just fine without mylar party balloons, but how many of us want to go back to life without smoke detectors?
In a similar sense, locomotive restoration products generate byproducts. Although they are much more intangible and thus exponentially more difficult to quantify. But chief among them are experience and a type of knowledge that will be lost without real life hands-on experience. If we want future generations to experience live steam locomtives, we have to keep them going so today's children can become tomorrow's mentors.
Trains, trains, wonderful trains. The more you get, the more you toot!
There is also the PM 1225 which is scheduled to run in October. It's the 50th year of the start of its restoration.
Penny Trains Lots of people questioned the necessity of funding NASA after the goal of reaching the moon had been accomplished. But stop and think for a moment. There are thousands of devices and materials in your life today that were direct byproducts of our efforts to explore space. OK, the world could probably survive just fine without mylar party balloons, but how many of us want to go back to life without smoke detectors? In a similar sense, locomotive restoration products generate byproducts. Although they are much more intangible and thus exponentially more difficult to quantify. But chief among them are experience and a type of knowledge that will be lost without real life hands-on experience. If we want future generations to experience live steam locomtives, we have to keep them going so today's children can become tomorrow's mentors.
Well said Becky! I quoted the whole thing because it's worth everyone reading again.
Oh, and when do we hit a saturation point with real, live steam engines?
When I get tired of them!
Wayne
From THe "GeeWhiz" Dept.
I recall a conversation with some of the guys in the UPRR Steam Crew; and the question a railfan put to Steve Lee, in regards to UPRR putting a Big Boy back on the rails 'running'. Response was " It will not happen"...BUT Here we are in 2019, and it DID HAPPEN!
SO! Here we are, and in that vein: HOW ABOUT #1218 ? "My memory of #1218 and her paricipation in the events of the 90's, and specifically, the triple-head train from Chattanooga to Atlanta with J-611,A-1218, and M-4501, and train of some 25 passenger cars..." It sure would be nice to see #1218 polishing the rails again.
Corporate sponsorship is helpful, as shown by three large steam locomotives on UP. Unfortunately, it's quite uncommon and money for restorations will always be tight. Another factor that hasn't been mentioned is the cost of maintenance and upkeep. There have been any number of locomotives that were fully restored, made a handful of trips and were never heard from again as operating locomotives.
The analogy with the space program is flawed for a variety of reasons, primarily over the source of funding and the value of spinoffs.
samfp1943I recall a conversation with some of the guys in the UPRR Steam Crew; and the question a railfan put to Steve Lee, in regards to UPRR putting a Big Boy back on the rails 'running'. Reaponse was " It will not happen"...BUT Here we are in 2019, and it DID HAPPEN!
Much of the occasionally-vicious controversy over the 'recent' UP steam shop (and its occasional foibles) that continues to this day in places like RyPN concerns Steve Lee's somewhat autocratic ways regarding "his" program. I think he's notorious for ensuring that Cotton Belt 819 would remain idle even for ferry moves following UP's acquisition of SP in the mid-Nineties, too.
I don't think Penny intended to draw more of an explicit 'comparison' with the space program than to note that spinoff benefits exist from both, and can be substantial and not directly predictable from an initial 'practical' analysis.
It seems to be getting a little fashionable to bash Steve Lee lately, not from all quarters of course, but from some quarters.
Quite honestly, it's due to Big Steve's efforts and in-house corporate politicking that the UP steam program survived as long as it did. Could he done things differently? Possibly, but I'm not one for "Monday-morning quarterbacking."
If he wasn't interested in restoring a Big Boy it's because he had his hands full for so many years keeping what he had. The case had to be made every year for keeping the steam program alive, there were plenty of others in the UP who wanted the money spent on other things.
And remember, Steve could have walked away any time he wanted to.
Leave Steve alone.
Before we critisize anyone involved in steam restoration or preservation, we'd all do well to remember the wise words of President Theodore Roosevelt...
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7-it-is-not-the-critic-who-counts-not-the-man
And concerning N&W 1218? Anything's possible of course, but remember my comment where I mentioned "...a place to run?" There's the rub! Mighty 611 has a problem with that now, "All dressed up and no place to go." Certainly there's the Strasburg gig coming up, and than goodness for it, but running on Strasburg's nine mile 'road is hardly a demonstration of 611's capabilities. Still, it's better than nothing.
It just makes no sense to put a ton of money into 1218 at this time. At least it's under cover and cared for instead of rotting away.
Flintlock76but running on Strasburg's nine mile 'road is hardly a demonstration of 611's capabilities. Still, it's better than nothing.
Only nine miles if you count each rail separately!
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
zugmann Flintlock76 but running on Strasburg's nine mile 'road is hardly a demonstration of 611's capabilities. Still, it's better than nothing. Only nine miles if you count each rail separately!
Flintlock76 but running on Strasburg's nine mile 'road is hardly a demonstration of 611's capabilities. Still, it's better than nothing.
Like I said Zug, better than nothin'!
Reading back in this Thread.. Let me state that my comment re:a conversation with Steve Lee. I absolutely, meant no disrespect to either the UPRR Steam Crew[Program!] or to Steve Lee.
His statement was made in the context of #3985 which had lost its' smokebox 'draft nozzle', and was laid-over in Memphis,Tn,; while in-transit to run as Clinchfield RR#676, for the CRR's 50th Anniversary{1992] Christmas Santa Special in the Kingsport, Tn area.
Steve Lee was 'on the ground' with the puiblic, and Steam Crew for close to 48 hours, while #3985 was cooled down, and her smokebox opened for the repair to be made. He was a real ambassador for the UP and the Steam Crew, and he fielded a barrage of all sorts of questions from the by-standing crowd there, at the site of the L&N's old Lenox Station { at the junction at the Eastern end of former MoPac and then CSX track }. Not only did they accomplish the repair, but the engine was refuled by tanker trucks, and the Fire Dept provided water for the locomotive as well. It was a really interesting couple of days!
Oh, I'm sure you didn't Sam. The thing is, as the time has gone by since Steve's retirement I'm struck, if not amused, by the change in attitudes toward him, as I said, from some quarters.
Back in 2008 with his retirement from UP imminent the concern in the railfan world was the UP steam program was going to fall apart without him, he'd been such a driving force and the "face" of the program for so long. He assured his followers and fans that wasn't going to happen, and it didn't.
Seems in some people's minds the attitude's gone from "Steve Lee can do no wrong" to "Steve did a good job, BUT..."
I suppose getting a concensus from railfans is like herding cats.
Anyway, I rmember Ed Dickens getting grief from some people when he took over the program, but now post-Big Boy restoration he's a hero! Oh well.
General Patton said it best, "This is the craziest country in the world! We love to put people up on pedestals, and then we love to knock 'em off!"
There are many steam locomotives that I personally would like to see brought back from the dead. Who wouldn't want see an AC-12 locomotive running?
As other posters have stated, are there enough resources and competent leaders? We're lucky that the UP program still exists.
I have heard some people ask why the UP took six years to get the 4014 running. They say in the old days, steam locomotives were rebuilt in a matter weeks.
Of course, in the 1940s a typical class 1 railroad had thousands of people working 3 shifts rebuilding steamers. Because of the advent of the diesel locomotive, the number of steam locomotive rebuilders drastically declined.
It is easy to say lets do something. The fund raising, problem solving and managing different people who know how rebuild a steam locomotive, some of whom might not get along, is the tough part.
Well said Joe!
The only thing I could add is back in the old days backshops had bins of replacement parts ready to hand. That situation doesn't exist anymore either. Many have to be fabricated from old drawings or using the old parts as patterns.
Any good machine shop can do it, but that takes time and costs probably more money than it did years back when there was a steady market for said parts.
Has anyone done a serious study to examine the size of the steam locomotive market?
Suppose money were no object I started a company for new build steam?
How many locomotives (standard gauge) could I sell in a year, or two?
Kevin
Realistically, the market would probably come to two or less locomotives in a given year. Lining up subcontractors to manufacture the necessary parts might be possible but their prices would be high for what is basically a custom job.
There was an outfit building new steam engines. Ever hear of Crown Metal Products? They're not around anymore, but here's the story.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Metal_Products
They have a fansite, but most of it's under construction, here's the link...
www.trainweb.org/crownmetalproducts/
As to whether there's a market for standard guage steamers that's anyone's guess. Changing tastes, for lack of a better term, in amusement parks are one of the things I believe led to the fall of Crown Metal that the Wiki article doesn't mention. For example, about 25 miles up the road there's an amusement park called "Kings Dominion." They had a steam railroad there, but when Paramount bought the park 30 or so years ago they altered the park with a "sci-fi" vibe that a steam railroad didn't fit with, so they sold it off. Paramount doesn't own the park anymore but the steam railroad never came back.
C.K. Holliday of the S.F. & D.L.
The sooner the better and cheaper.
Costs just go up with time.
It would be difficult to produce a locomotive for mass production in the US and hope to make a profit.
There is a group in England that is working on a new-build 2-6-2T with the idea of building more copies over time for the numerous small operating tourist railroads in England.
http://www.82045.org.uk/
Of course, over in the UK steam locomotives are much smaller units than most US steam locomotives. Consider that the P2 three-cylindered 2-8-2 with 43,462 lbs of tractive effort were the most powerful locomotives in the UK and the Class 9F 2-10-0 had the most tractive effort of any UK locomotive at 53,328 lbs of tractive effort.
Consider that the E-3 4-6-2 Pacifics of the Omaha Road had 51,567 lbs of tractive effort for comparison.
Taking up the premise of money being no object, if I were a billionaire and wanted to build new-build steam as a hobby, for the US I would probably develope an oil-fired version of the Boston & Albany D1A 4-6-6t that could be useful for "out and back" tourist operations such as the New Hope & Ivyland, Mid-Continent Railway Museum, North Shore Scenic Railroad, Boone Valley Scenic Railroad, etc.
41,651 lbs of tractive effort
63 inch drivers
215 lbs boiler pressure
1,585 gallons of oil
6,000 gallons of water
Flintlock76There was an outfit building new steam engines.
There's a long, rich history of outfits either setting up to build 'new' steam engines or proposing them, with the premier outfit (no one seems to have mentioned it yet) being SLM/DLM with Roger Waller. One thing developed in Europe that we haven't tried (enough) here is the use of 'Plandampf' both for freight and for things like commuter passenger, for which very careful economic and capital feasibility plans have been worked out. Here the use of reasonably high horsepower (or to put it a different way, relatively low factor of adhesion) makes sense even in fairly small designs, as there is some value in 'pulling any train you can start' at what might be high peak speed to clear passenger-oriented traffic.
In this country, we have David Kloke as a promising source of new engines of a particular style (which could of course be modified to suit what many operations think they'd most benefit from). I think there has been some resistance to 'foreign-looking' engines -- in part this argument hinges on whether a given operator has most of their income stream from 'railfans' or from families who love steam of even the most ridiculous kind for "passenger" service -- and some of Kloke's designs are resonant with romantic conceptions of what steam 'should look like' if you are running, say, a Western-style thing complete with daily newspaper butchered on the train and the obligatory feigned outlaw stick-up, etc.
There is a long and tattered history of people who wanted to set up companies to sell 'new steam' to the tourist market (vast and growing in England, for example) -- the whole of the 5AT project was geared toward that as practical use of their product 'most of the time', I think very intelligently. Of course the lion's share of the work both to produce that engine and to design other modern steam 'the old way' has been done, and the successors to the 5AT project have it available to vastly shorten the learning curve for anyone who wants to step up to the plate next and take a swing at it.
The practical capital and maintenance costs of anything 'new' may be out of range for most currently-running outfits here, but there is a very large potential market (this is occasionally brought up on RyPN) for low-cost operating steam in place of aging or 'historic fabric' locomotives being cobbled up or butchered to keep running, or diesel or other locomotives that are of less proven interest. Naturally a USRA-style limitation to a small range of basic designs, and manufacture of standardized parts to the greatest extent practical, and the promulgation of effective and lowest-net-cost operating manuals, all factor into breaking this market open (there is relatively little chance, in my pessimistic but practical opinion, of it doing so otherwise). Much, if not all, of the actual design and initial DFM costs of any such design had better be considered 'a labor of love' as far as capital planning would be concerned -- or had better be tax-deductible for someone or some company involved in the effort somehow.
kgbw49Taking up the premise of money being no object, if I were a billionaire and wanted to build new-build steam as a hobby, for the US I would probably develope an oil-fired version of the Boston & Albany D1A 4-6-6t that could be useful for "out and back" tourist operations
This is laudable ... but did you read down far enough to get the weight on drivers and truck axles? A great many of the out-and-back operations will NOT like the size and weight of that thing.
Meanwhile, for nearly the same amount of money (and, in fact, probably far less, considering the tender sits at Steamtown available for a pittance) you could have a full J1e modified for effective excursion service, a far better use of the money (and not that much longer, or difficult to run bidirectionally with modern and very cheap camera technology. And there would be some market for multiple production. Just resist the temptation to build a J3 rather than an advanced J1 for this historical purpose, even though the former is 'technically' a more advanced and efficient design... don't give me the 'streamlined-to-compete-with-5550' argument as there is historical precedent for the Dreyfuss streamlining on a J1e.
Don't make me grind my teeth over an 'optimized' J2 with its lower and nominally more "practical" driver diameter. Just -- if you do it -- fix whatever made the cabs sag.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.