K-4 crew uncovers another problem

[traintownofcowee]

Sad...Very Sad...

I live near the Great Smoky Mountains Railroad.

1702 has been out of service for 5 years now.

It really upsets me when they restore steam locomotives and they uncover another problem, or money is a issue.

[TomDiehl]

"It's not clear whether it will delay the return of the K-4, which
Railroaders Memorial Museum director Scott Cessna hoped would occur by
July."

That's always been pretty clear to anyone who's seen the K4 in Scranton, it's not going to be in Altoona July of this year (at least not completely assembled), even before this latest problem was discovered. One of the reasons Mike avoids the calls from the Altoona Mirror is that they always sensationalize and outright misreport what they're told by the person being interviewed.

Probably the reporter trying to do a smoke and mirrors to cover the misreporting back in January.

Remember the report that the boiler would be hydro tested in February?

[dldance]

Brass was originally used for a reason.  Cast iron is brittle and brass is mallable.  Makes a lot of difference.

dd

Now, wait just a cotton-pickin' minute! 

1. The "bad" parts are cast steel, not cast iron.

2. Steel is generally less brittle than cast iron.

3.  The issue was wear.  Brass is required because is the sacrificial piece - more economically replaced.  The steel parts would work fine, they'd just cause more expensive repairs down the road.

As I read it, these are boxes that hold the driver journals that slide up and down in the locomotive frame.  Steel boxes will wear the frame, which would eventually have to be built back up with weld, perhaps stress relieved, and then machined.  Better to have the brass boxes and wedges wear and just replace them when worn to the limit.

Good points.  We actually dropped the wedges on one locomotive this spring as part of an axle/bearing inspection.  I was not thinking about the frame wear - which would require the drivers be dropped to repair - I was thinking about the lateral forces on the frame from those drivers.  Steel would withstand these forces well - but I would worry about cast iron.

However the sliding against the frame that you mention is a real problem.  Much easier to replace brass boxes and wedges than build up a worn frame.

dd

[oltmannd]

Brass was originally used for a reason.  Cast iron is brittle and brass is mallable.  Makes a lot of difference.

dd

Now, wait just a cotton-pickin' minute! 

1. The "bad" parts are cast steel, not cast iron.

2. Steel is generally less brittle than cast iron.

3.  The issue was wear.  Brass is required because is the sacrificial piece - more economically replaced.  The steel parts would work fine, they'd just cause more expensive repairs down the road.

As I read it, these are boxes that hold the driver journals that slide up and down in the locomotive frame.  Steel boxes will wear the frame, which would eventually have to be built back up with weld, perhaps stress relieved, and then machined.  Better to have the brass boxes and wedges wear and just replace them when worn to the limit.

[Anonymous]

Poor decisions poor results.

Build it right the very first time.

[dldance]

Brass was originally used for a reason.  Cast iron is brittle and brass is mallable.  Makes a lot of difference.

dd

[Anonymous]

"The restoration of the K-4 steam locomotive in Scranton has
encountered another problem - again because of a decision made early
in the project, which so far has taken more than 10 years.

"It's not clear whether it will delay the return of the K-4, which
Railroaders Memorial Museum director Scott Cessna hoped would occur by
July."

http://www.altoonamirror.com/News/articles.asp?articleID=11471

Dave