Trains.com

Union Pacific Heritage Fleet - Next Major Project?

4586 views
35 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2014
  • 137 posts
Union Pacific Heritage Fleet - Next Major Project?
Posted by JoeBlow on Friday, June 28, 2019 5:56 PM

With the Big Boy restoration complete, does the UP have another locomotive in mind to restore? 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Friday, June 28, 2019 6:17 PM

Obviously, 3985

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Parma Heights Ohio
  • 3,442 posts
Posted by Penny Trains on Friday, June 28, 2019 6:58 PM

I'm waiting for a side-by-side-by-side appearance of the Jabelman triumvirate.

Trains, trains, wonderful trains.  The more you get, the more you toot!  Big Smile

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Friday, June 28, 2019 7:44 PM

Holy jeez, let those poor guys have a breather!   Surprise

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Friday, June 28, 2019 8:05 PM

Overmod

Obviously, 3985

 

A major rebuilding?  It just seems like yesterday it was in the western suburbs.  Actually 2003?

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, June 29, 2019 6:53 AM

charlie hebdo
A major rebuilding? It just seems like yesterday it was in the western suburbs. Actually 2003?

Strange you mention this -- I was just reformatting some of the video files I shot of 3985 north of Poplar Bluff that year.  Seems like almost yesterday.

The rebuilding, in large part, is to implement the 'quality standards' and documentation on 3985.  Everything has to be 'touched' in that process, but ongoing maintenance after that should be greatly facilitated.

  • Member since
    May 2017
  • 382 posts
Posted by xboxtravis7992 on Saturday, June 29, 2019 11:36 AM

Flintlock76

Holy jeez, let those poor guys have a breather!   Surprise

 

No kidding!

UP 3985's status is a bit of a hot topic button of dispute in some forums. My personal guess on the matter? I don't think UP has the budget to run more than two steam engines at time and 3985 will probably not see her due unless that budget expands. I would bet 3985 will get its attention eventually in the next few years; but for now the 'big project' so to speak still is caring for and running 4014 and 844. Now is time for 4014 to shine in the spotlight. That is all a dose of speculation though, really only Ed Dickens and the beancounters at the UP know what is truly next in store for the steam program. 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, June 29, 2019 12:45 PM

Mind you, I don't think UP is in a rush to do 3985 ASAP, and I expect the restoration to be complete all the way up to, but not including, tubes -- to maximize the available time between 1372-day inspection. 

But the question was about the next major locomotive to be undertaken as project.  That will be 3985.

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Saturday, June 29, 2019 1:42 PM

Unless the UP steam crew takes another few years off from running many excursions, I can't even imagine where they'd get the time to tackle another rebuild. They are all going to be sucking wind by the end of the summer with all the work of running around the system.  Long, hot days.  Lots of them.  These guys should get to take their vacation and be a home from time to time...

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Saturday, June 29, 2019 3:18 PM

Yer all correct.

But I'd still like to see/hear 9000 in operation.

 

Ed

  • Member since
    January 2015
  • 2,678 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Saturday, June 29, 2019 3:35 PM

Perhaps after the Southern California Trip and some well-deserved vacation, they may tackle 4014’s tender. While 3985’s tender is working just fine with 4014, maybe that is a project that fits well in between running and maintaining 844 and 4014. It will be fun to watch what transpires, for sure!

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Saturday, June 29, 2019 3:39 PM

7j43k

Yer all correct.

But I'd still like to see/hear 9000 in operation.

 

Ed

 

Oh, wouldn't we all!

"CHUFF, chuff-chuff! CHUFF, chuff-chuff! CHUFF. chuff-chuff!"

My attempt at reproducing the three-beat exhaust of a 9000.  Sorry.

And watching that super-long connecting rod on those six drivers per side going "Up-down-up-down-up-down..."

Ain't gonna happen.  OK, I know that's what "they" said about the Big Boy, but the 9000's another story.  I can't see the UP Steam Team being all that enthusiastic about that three-cylinder maintanance headache.  

They were cool though, in their day!

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, June 29, 2019 4:18 PM

Flintlock76
Ain't gonna happen. OK, I know that's what "they" said about the Big Boy, but the 9000's another story.

It's the TTT that's another story. Probably no one sane could make a case for operating that thing.  But a Nine is a different thing entirely.

Nines could run happily up to 60mph, have relatively low inherent augment, and have the sustained power to run trips of adequate capacity.

[quote[I can't see the UP Steam Team being all that enthusiastic about that three-cylinder maintenance headache.[/quote]

Only a major headache if run to make a buck at the lowest possible cost.  Rebuilt to documented standards, with use of modern materials in places like the conjugating-gear pins, and with regular attentive maintenance of typical 'steam team' quality, the thing will go almost anywhere -- it's really just a long one-and-a-half Mountain.  In the days of the ACE3000 an underfloor lathe to keep the driver tires properly dressed was an exotic machine ... not so today.

But still do 3985 first!

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,618 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Saturday, June 29, 2019 5:36 PM

Smile I created a Straw Poll for this, please vote here:

https://www.strawpoll.me/18246485

"Both of them" is my choice but since it is unrealistic, it is not included in this poll. I love SP's 4-10-2 so I inclined to choose the 9s. :  ) 

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Saturday, June 29, 2019 6:27 PM

Don't forget, they'd have to pry the 9000 out of the hands of that Pomona park and the historic group that "owns" the thing.  UP had their hands full getting the Big Boy out of there.

Again, it's not that I don't WANT it to happen, I love the 9000's, I just can't see it happening.  

On top of that, I'm sure the UP's good-will and PR budget only goes so far, and no farther.  Steve Lee used to say that going into a board meeting with a "Wouldn't it be cool if we did this..." suggestion would have gotten you thrown out unless you could make a solid business case for it.  Which,  as Big Steve said, was perfectly understandable.

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Parma Heights Ohio
  • 3,442 posts
Posted by Penny Trains on Saturday, June 29, 2019 7:31 PM

How about this scenario.  They get their hands on this:

Restore it and run it around the Cheyenne roundhouse.  Call it a "Grand Circle Tour"....Whistling

Trains, trains, wonderful trains.  The more you get, the more you toot!  Big Smile

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Saturday, June 29, 2019 7:55 PM

JoeBlow

With the Big Boy restoration complete, does the UP have another locomotive in mind to restore? 

Sorry to rain on the parade here in the thread but the current CEO stated publicly already that while he supported the restoration of 4014 there was going to be an evaluation of the entire Union Pacific Heritage program of restoration of cars and locomotives as he stated in his opinion it is not supporting the business in a meaningful way (bringing in new customers).    Instead he stated it seems to be primarily a railfan program that he has problems justifying at budget time to the UP board.

At least that is what I thought he said.    So after this summer or after they get their return out of the 4014 rebuild.    I believe your going to probably see a pause in the UP Steam program.    Unless they get a new Chairman.

I am really surprised TRAINS Magazine has not reported on this uncertainty on the horizon yet.   Maybe in a few more issues.   If you like the UP Steam program my advice would be to try and participate with it this Summer or Fall.

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Saturday, June 29, 2019 8:29 PM

Overmod
But still do 3985 first!

   I'll second that.   I think it's the best looking one of the bunch.

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, June 29, 2019 10:09 PM

CMStPnP
Sorry to rain on the parade here in the thread but the current CEO stated publicly already that while he supported the restoration of 4014 there was going to be an evaluation of the entire Union Pacific Heritage program of restoration of cars and locomotives as he stated in his opinion it is not supporting the business in a meaningful way (bringing in new customers).    Instead he stated it seems to be primarily a railfan program that he has problems justifying at budget time to the UP board.

With UP falling into the PSR form of illness there is nothing the Heritage Program can do to drive customers away as the PSR form of operations desires.

I am certain if UP could demonstrate that the Heritage Program drives away loose car customers the program would be fully funded in a heartbeat.  PSR's aim is to kill loose car railroading - unit trains origin to destination only, preferablly in private owner railcars.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    November 2008
  • 1,881 posts
Posted by Leo_Ames on Sunday, June 30, 2019 2:58 AM

The only thing I've read is that nothing is sacred and everything will be getting evaluated. 

I'm not saying that CMStPnP is wrong, but that statement he cites sure has flown under my radar at least. Haven't seen it in print, mentioned here, or at Railway Preservation News.

I would think such a statement would be big news and have the railfan and historic preservation communities worried, so I'm crossing my fingers you've read a bit into it (And if not, I sure hope the recent bicentennial might be changing the CEO's mind about the value of the steam program).

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Sunday, June 30, 2019 4:51 AM

Penny Trains
How about this scenario. They get their hands on this:

On the bright side, it'll be easier to push in 'doubleheading' than 4014 was Devil

  • Member since
    January 2015
  • 2,678 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Sunday, June 30, 2019 8:28 AM

Penny Trains, what a nifty 2-8-0! Where is this unit stored? Is the number 521 or has a digit worn off?

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Sunday, June 30, 2019 9:11 AM

My God, the 521 is a horror.

If I had the money (And don't we all say that? Would that it were the case!) I'd save it myself, I wouldn't wait for the UP to do it.

Mind you, it would wind up with Erie markings.  Hey, my money, my rules! 

Looks like there's another steamer in front of it.  I wonder what that one is?

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Sunday, June 30, 2019 10:56 AM

kgbw49
Where is this unit stored? Is the number 521 or has a digit worn off?

That is not a unit, it is a locomotive. 

RyPN had a thread in 2011

that listed the 21 surviving UP 2-8-0s and discussed them a bit.  You can probably find out where Penny's example is even before she tells us.

 

  • Member since
    January 2015
  • 2,678 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Sunday, June 30, 2019 11:33 AM

Just trying to be conversational and hoping that Penny will expound for our benefit.

Yes, I did check other sources and yes I have a good idea what unit that might be.

Sometimes in a conversation it is just courteous to give others a chance to expound on their contributions.

That’s all I have to say about that, and I am out.

 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Sunday, June 30, 2019 11:37 AM

Sorry, thought you actually wanted to know.  Will be more advised next time.

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Sunday, June 30, 2019 12:36 PM

Not unusual in this age of the diesel for people to refer to locomotives as "units," it's not a mortal sin and akin to calling any paper tissue a "Kleenex" or any copier a "Xerox," even if it's a Canon or a Ricoh. 

At any rate, there's no 521 on either that short list or master list provided by RyPN, assuming that's the correct number on the engine to begin with.

There IS a 529  at the Northwest Railway Museum in Snoqualmie WA.  Maybe that's the one?

You know what impression I got from looking at that long list of donated UP steam?  Just how generous the UP was in donating locomotives, and that being the case WHY-THE-HELL couldn't the New York Central save at least one each of a Hudson and a Niagara?   Ah, no point in flogging that dead horse again...

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, June 30, 2019 2:22 PM

Flintlock76
You know what impression I got from looking at that long list of donated UP steam?  Just how generous the UP was in donating locomotives, and that being the case WHY-THE-HELL couldn't the New York Central save at least one each of a Hudson and a Niagara?   Ah, no point in flogging that dead horse again...

One company was profitable - one company wasn't and needed the scrap value.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Sunday, June 30, 2019 2:34 PM

Beg to differ Balt, respectfully, but the NYC wasn't in any financial trouble at the time, far from it.

The "pennies-on-the-pound" scrap value of one or two (or three) old steamers wouldn't have made any effect at all on the bottom line. 

I can understand why it happened, the NYC officials were businessmen, not historians, so the historic value of their steam locomotives never entered their minds, any more than a trucking company official would think twice about scrapping an old tractor unit.  

The ironic thing is ten years earlier the NYC was crowing loudly about how great their locomotives were.  Begs the question "Well if you're so proud of 'em why don't you preserve a few for posterity?"

UP sure didn't have that issue.  Neither did the Santa Fe.

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 6,199 posts
Posted by Miningman on Sunday, June 30, 2019 4:32 PM
Miningman

We know with great certainty that the $4,928.57 the Central got for 1290 and 1291 in scrap value did not change their future one bit.

That in 1957 ! Young and Perlman were zealots. 

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy