I'm not trying to be mean to anyone who believes in the fact that steam locomotives run until they stop working properly. But I think we should rethink this over, for I believe that it's not the loco, it's the owners or the museum who owns the engine who is responsible. What about we look into what was recently reported of British steam locomotive "Flying Scotsman."
The brand-new news in the report talks about how "Flying Scotsman" won't be running until 2014, according to "Rail.co.uk," who also talks about why she's not running until middle or the end of next year. And who does it say as the one who is to blame? The National Railway Museum in York, the current owner of the engine. It's the NRM's fault of over-working Flying Scotsman. It's their fault, for messing up an alingment on one of her cylinders.
So do you see what I'm trying to say? The owner is the one to blame if a steam locomotive is taken out of service, or has a very long overhaul. Here's one more example, this time with City of Truo. She has been taken of service, but maybe, at some point before she stopped running so fine, the NRM might have messed up during a repair or an overhaul.
So what do I believe? I believe that steam locomotives can be seen running in the future, but if the owner isn't careful, and the mistake is costly to the engine, then they are to blame. It's not like they are bad. They just weren't careful at that time, and made a big problem a lot bigger.
So the next time a steam locomotive is taken out of service for repairs or restoration, I would be careful with the owner if I were you.
As Don Colangelo, the "Alco Doctor" of the Delaware-Lackawanna railroad says:
"Anything's a piece of junk if you don't take care of it!"
That's what I'm trying to say. Because when I posted about City of Truo being taken out of service, one of the users said that it just runs until it can't run anymore. Which I agree with you on things being junk, but not everyone gets that, that's all I'm saying. I'm just throwing what I believe out there due to seeing this one user being that way. I didn't mean to judge it on one user here, but maybe there are some who think that when really it's the "Alco Doctor's" way.
I am afraid you are not completely correct with your statement - for a couple of reasons.
First, all steam locos (just like any other loco) are subject to a rigid schedule of maintenance and inspection. Once the loco is up for inspection, it will go out of service automatically until it has passed the inspection, for which the cost can easily run up to several hundred thousands of $. This has nothing to do with the state of repair the loco is in.
Second, we are talking about locos which have an age of anything between 70 to 125 years or even older. What´s OK today, can break tomorrow, for no apparent reason. There is no way to find that out ahead of time, other than doing a full inspection each time you run the engine. Who is going to pay for that?
No one would pay every time the engine is used. They probably do it when the engine is in for repairs or for restoration work. The museum would have to pay for all the inspections, and if it's costly, then they'll probably do it when the engine is being fixed.I do see your point, Sir Madog.
Can we PLEASE stop showing our ignorance by spelling it 'Truo'? The locomotive is sigificant enough that we should at least get her name right: City of TRURO.
Almost anything 'damaged' on an operable locomotive can be restored... with enough funding. These are machines, not art 'pieces', for the most part, and (as I noted) after many years of running and maintenance, not much of the 'original' locomotive material when it was constructed may still be there. Al Staufer specifically mentioned the 'grandfather's hatchet' argument (sometimes essayed as an Irish slur) -- this is my grandfather's hatchet -- it's had three new heads and five new handles, and it's as good as ever -- specifically in reference to some of the NYC Hudsons. (You will find it in Thoroughbreds, better expressed than I could paraphrase.
Where I would 'peg' this argument is not so much rebuilding historic artifacts for operation, but those cases where (intentionally or unintentionally) the restoration process is corrupted. I will not mention 1361 except in passing, and 3463 less, as I don't want political aspects to dominate, but the Australian 38 class rebuild with the deflicted Meiningen boiler follies is fairer game. There are intermediate examples where this is not so bad -- consider 1218 being put back to a displayable state -- but I'd still rather have had all the internals and mechanicals put back...
In some cases, accommodations have to be made to keep a locomotive 'operating' even with damage, a good example being the British 2-6-2 that operated for years at reduced pressure because the cylinder block was cracked. Frankly, I admired them for it, because in my opinion steam locomotives are best admired when 'alive and breathing' rather than sitting cold.
The take-home point, perhaps, is that it's the owner's or the owning entity's call what to do. We saw this vividly with 1522. Why should it be different with NRM? (I also feel personally that it's a shame not to run Mallard, but I understand that risking an iconic national treasure is perceived as too great a breach of proper stewardship.) It is always possible that with enough will, and enough funding, City of Truro can be made to run again... and I for one would welcome the day. In the meantime, she'll be safe and stable.
I'm not sure why one would look to place "blame". Clearly, if a historical artifact was subjected to abuse when the caretaker had the means to preserve it better, one could point out that deficiency. The maintenance standards that require boiler maintenance or similar work were developed to keep everyone safe. Should we "blame" the legislature for giving such regulatory authority to a Department of Transportation or other agency? Should we blame entropy? Should we blame rust? What have we done individually to contribute to our hobby by supporting the museums with our finances to allow them to continue the needed maintenance? Things get old and become inoperable (including human bodies), and those processes aren't always something that is a matter of "blame".
Bill
Reminds me of a You Tube video I watched of the Nevada State Railroad Musem's "Inyo" being run. Just an simple "excursion" around the museum tracks at slow speed, but everyone was having a ball.
In the "Comments" some wiseacre said, in effect, "BFD! They only run it on light steam and never faster than a crawl!" Well you know, good for them! They're treating an irreplaceable historic artifact with the respect it deserves, not acting like a bunch of yahoos with a hot rod.
This post really explores the seldom seen forces behind fielding a steam locomotive repair.
Hats off! to Union Pacific Railroad and they should be proud to be such great Americans. Here is a 4-8-4 that is backed by a corporation, funded and operated by the best talent. It has an entire fleet of equipment to pull, and an entire Class 1 railroad to run on. Doesn't get better than this! - and yes, we are still wondering why you put 4023 4-8-8-4 out to pasture in the park where I can't be gotten in for repair. And yes we all want to see you restore the drag era UP 2-10-2 the engine #5511 that you have. This is entirely what steam railroading was about for most of its history. I want to see Willy Guthry singing from one of those boxcars as it goes by me. A truely historic if un heroic engine but oh so necessary to American history! We all need to see her hauling a drag load of boxcars with caboose. You have her right there in your backshop. Don't sell her! never! tomorrow's railroaders and film makers need her.
Unfortunately most steam locomotive are not so nearly fortunate as UP844. NW611 lived through such an era with the Claytors. Still there is no excuse for what has become of the PRR K4s in Pennsylvania would we allow this to happen to a NYC hudson? Strasburg RR should have been the first choice contact for K4 repairs and it would have been done long ago. And of course how could we have let Rio Grande narrow gauge come to what it has. It was an entire railroad system with backshops miles of track - historic beyond measure. It should never have gone to scrap the way it did. And the state of Pennsylvania - East Broad Top narrow gauge is an equal treasure! Are we ever going to figure that out?
Actually any machine has a history written into its parts. Examination of any machine can tell you how well it was cared for. Who repaired it and did they have any tallent. Crudness of repair - broken bolts hammer and chisel witness marks. Broken parts - damaged parts - missing parts all tell the story of who did what where and why. I remember when we were restoring PM1225 back in the 1980s and had the journal plate off of the bottom of the axle journal of the trailing truck. We brought up a front-end-loader and tried to move the engine by pushing on the truck. And we sprung it our of alignment because the bearing plate was removed. How ya going to unspring a cast steel truck of tons weight? And yes the rear truck bearing blocks are missing from GTW 5632 pacific in Durand, MI cause years ago Richard Jensen got town permission to borrow the brasses for extras on GTW 5629 - wonder where they went?
I loved the report on the boiler explosion of Gettysburg Railroad. The water glass of the boiler was entirely clogged and the lifting injector did not work as it had the wrong valve disc in it. Wow a boiler explosion!
Whenever I buy a used car I always go by the motto - "Built by engineers, repaired by God knows who! Guess it is amazing we have what great steam that survives here! Its just a boiler on wheels, thats all! Hats off to Union Pacific RR!
Dr. D
As my boss likes to say, "Operating steam is easy. Just open the firebox doors and shovel in dollar bills!" Steam is an expensive proposition. There are good reasons why we don't use them in the main anymore. It is that very rare operation that can operate steam and cover all their costs. It is also a fickle business. Just because you made money this year doesn't mean you will cover your costs next year.
Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak
Any machine, whether it be a 125 year old steam loco of great historical value or a 19 year old Toyota pickup of no historical significance, is subject to wear and tear and requires regular maintenance. The steamer is also subject to more, and more stringent, regulations in this context. Also, even the least complex repairs on a steamer are costly, and the $$$ have to either come out of operating revenues or be raised by other means.
So, who's responsible? The owner of record.
As for blame, lawyers, politicians and media types worry about placing it,accenting who. Maintenance technicians would rather spend that time/effort/money keeping the equipment in top condition and repairing it when it isn't. Part of the latter involves determining what failed, and why. Two very different mindsets.
Chuck (Retired aircraft maintenance tech)
tomikawaTTAny machine, whether it be a 125 year old steam loco of great historical value or a 19 year old Toyota pickup of no historical significance, is subject to wear and tear and requires regular maintenance.
If I own a 19 year old Toyota that needs major repairs and I decide that the truck simply isn't worth it so I decide to sell it to the junk yard for scrap no one would question my right to do so. So why do we raise any question if the owner of a steam locomotive makes the same decision?
John WR tomikawaTTAny machine, whether it be a 125 year old steam loco of great historical value or a 19 year old Toyota pickup of no historical significance, is subject to wear and tear and requires regular maintenance. If I own a 19 year old Toyota that needs major repairs and I decide that the truck simply isn't worth it so I decide to sell it to the junk yard for scrap no one would question my right to do so. So why do we raise any question if the owner of a steam locomotive makes the same decision?
That's a good question John, maybe I've got an answer. First, there's no shortage of Toyotas around, the same can't be said for steam engines. They're still making Toyotas. The same can't be said for steam engines. The "Tornado" over in Britain and David Klokes 4-4-0's are the exception, not the rule. A 19 year old Toyota isn't likely to be a historic artifact, but a surviving steam engine just by virtue of it's age cetainly is an historic artifact. I'm sure you see where I'm going with this.
Certainly the owner of a steam engine has the right to do with it whatever he wants, but if he scraps it he's got to be ready for the rage of some people, the same as if he scrapped a B-17, or an M-4 Sherman, or tore down a house General Washington slept in. Steam engines, B-17's, Sherman tanks, or 18th Century houses, they ain't makin' 'em anymore and once they're gone, that's it brother!
Wayne
Firelock76got to be ready for the rage of some people, the same as if he scrapped a B-17, or an M-4 Sherman, or tore down a house General Washington slept in. Steam engines, B-17's, Sherman tanks, or 18th Century houses, they ain't makin' 'em anymore and once they're gone, that's it brother!
Wayne,
I was actually thinking of Alfred Perlman who scrapped a lot of the New York Central's steam engines including some famous ones. To this day there are people who cannot forgive him.
John
Hi John!
Yeah, I can't forgive "Big Al" Perlman for that one either, although I do consider him one of the great railroaders.
It's incomprehensable to me that a 'road like the New York Central which had expressed so much pride in its Hudsons, Niagaras, and Mohawks didn't think to save at least one of each. It wouldn't have affected the bottom line all that much, scrap values for these engines was pennies on the pound. Possibly a prreservation agreement with ALCO could have been reached. Who knows?
But, that's what I mean when I say when an original's gone it's gone forever, no power on Earth can bring it back. So if you've got an "original" of anything historic, you better be careful with it!
PS: I just remembered there's a Mohawk still in existance. It's at the New York Central Historic Society museum in Elkhart, Indiana.
Firelock76I just remembered there's a Mohawk still in existance. It's at the New York Central Historic Society museum in Elkhart, Indiana.
Do you know if it was Al Perlman who saved the Mohawk? I not only agree with you about him; I'm surprised. If there was ever anyone who loved railroads it certainly was Alfred Perlman. He was a car cleaner when he was 16 and from there on the sky was the limit. So, as you point out, the scrap value of one example of each locomotive would not have made very much of a difference in his bottom line at all. Harold Vanderbilt would have saved the engines had he still been on the Board.
The lonesome Mohawk was bought from the NYC (at scrap prices) to replace a T&P 2-10-4 which had been vandalized beyond recovery while on display in the Dallas area. It was still there, and relatively undamaged, when the great NYC locomotive hunt started.
Looking back 60 years or so, it's difficult to understand the mindset that existed then. After the uphevals of WWII, it was, "Out with the old! In with the new!" not only on the rails but throughout the society. Even historically significant buildings were abandoned and razed to make way for the, "New!" - strip malls. Also, NYC was involved in a financial war - and EVERYTHING was converted to cash so the management could bribe the stockholders with dividends that couldn't be sustained. Preserving historically important locomotives wasn't the last thing on those people's minds, it never even entered their minds.
Chuck
There is another surviving NYC Mohawk at the Museum of Transportation in ST. Louis, MO.
These were taken in 2008, so I Hope that they have made progress, but it was only planned to be a Cosmetic restoration, not an operating one, unfortunately. The MOT in St. Louis has an Incredible collection of Railroad equipment, and I Highly reccomend it to anyone who has a chance to visit it. Doug
These were taken in 2008, so I Hope that they have made progress, but it was only planned to be a Cosmetic restoration, not an operating one, unfortunately.
The MOT in St. Louis has an Incredible collection of Railroad equipment, and I Highly reccomend it to anyone who has a chance to visit it.
Doug
May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails
Organizations that operate steam should budget for eventual inspections and overhauls the way aircraft owners do. The first day it rolls out of the shop you estimate the anticipated cost of the next overhaul, divide by the magic 1472, then set aside that much money for every hour it operates. It may not cover it all, but you will be way ahead of the game.
Wow, so there's TWO Mohawks out there! Interesting. I was wondering what was going on with those pictures from the MOT in St. Louis. "My Gawd, she's NEKKED!"
Hey, Wayne, Wait a darn minnit. You say there are TWO Mohawks? I just paid my income tax ann now I learn that all you bleeding heart steam liberals are using my tax dollars for TWO Mohawks? Why isn't ONE Mohawk enough? It is no wonder my streets are so full of potholes when we have to support that extra Mohawk. This is out--effing--rageious. I think we should immediately get rid of one of those Mohawks and relieve the poor burdened tax payers of this nation from our oppression.
I'll let you in on a dirty little secret of mine John. I like the Mohawk better than the Hudson.
So shoot me.
I might have known it, Wayne. All of that time you were distracting me while those other guys snuck in that extra Mohawk. It's no wonder this country has a debt crisis. When will it all end?
John WR Hey, Wayne, Wait a darn minnit. You say there are TWO Mohawks? I just paid my income tax ann now I learn that all you bleeding heart steam liberals are using my tax dollars for TWO Mohawks? Why isn't ONE Mohawk enough? It is no wonder my streets are so full of potholes when we have to support that extra Mohawk. This is out--effing--rageious. I think we should immediately get rid of one of those Mohawks and relieve the poor burdened tax payers of this nation from our oppression. John
They're not the same....
2933 is an L-2 but 3001 is an L-3
I don't think they have the same wheel diameter....
The L-3 is the one that looks like J-1 Hudson (more or less).....
M636C
If I recall correctly, #3001 never got the 72" drivers (that was #3000). Both would be 69". with the L3 having lightweight improved rodwork, roller bearings, dynamic balancing, etc. to reach the higher speed expected.
I do wish that one of the L4s had been preserved. But will happily settle for 2 NYC road power of any kind...
I'd like to see some New York Central steam power running around loose on the mainline myself. Oh well, if I ever hit the Mega-Millions or the Powerball I'll have a talk with those good people out in Elkhart.
M636Cey're not the same....
That is a dissssssspickable think to say. You are just trying to pull a fig newton of your imagination down over my eyes. Meanwhile, Wayne is taking the country to WRACK and RUIN with that extra Mohawk. But you are not fooling me. No sir ree Bob! I will immediately write a letter to my good friend Daffy Duck and we shall see that all of you bleeding heart steam liberal are exposed for the spendthrifts that you are. Just you wait and see.
John WRNo sir ree Bob!
That wasn't me, it was him!
OvermodThat wasn't me, it was him!
Yeah, Bob, but I'm suspicious of everybody. You're all alike, part of the second Mohawk conspiracy.
Yeah, well you better get ready John, one of these days you may be hearing "Drums Along The Mohawk!"
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.