But have they really done a realistic study to see if steam can be that driver of growth. And if that answer is yes, will the increased income be greater than the increased cost of running it. I am not talking about just about the engine, but the track as well.
These are the things that, through a broad brush stroke, gives all operating organizations a bad name.
Dominic Mazoch posted:2 F units in WM Fireball wpuld have been neat. And could be running already! Or geeps.
This is scary, I actually agree with you...
2 of anything WMRY would have been acceptable, the units could have been used for photo charters/freights to help raise funds.
Given the money poured into 1309, 734 could have been rebuilt properly, and in my perfect world, Alan Maples' Everett#38 would be finished and brought to WMSR. The 2 Consolidations could doublehead the heavy trains, and for added drama, they could paint and letter #38 for the Cumberland & Pennsylvania.
No turntable access problems and #38 could probably handle the off-season trains itself.
Ed Mullan posted:I have no doubt that the 3985 could go places that the other two could not.
My favorite.
Ed
Possibly due to weight distribution and/or overhang on the 4000s, but UP engineering drawings for the 4000, 3900, and 800 classes all state the following "Locomotives designed for 20 degree maximum curvature", in spite of the erroneous information often posted here and on other sites, claiming that one class or the other could take a tighter radius curve than the others, or turn on a smaller wye. The smaller CSA-1 and CSA-2 Class Challenger drawings bear no such information but I have read that in terms of operation, tonnage ratings and clearances the UP made no distinction between the 1936 and 1942 Challenger designs. Since there aren't any remaining "small" Challengers, that is a moot point anyway.
Looks like you all missed the long-winded Jim Wrinn interview with WMSR's John Garner and contractor Gary Bensman on TRAINS MAGAZINE.com yesterday.
Main thing to take away is that although Bensman has arranged to have a crane service donated to get 1309 back on its wheels, there are "weeks" of work left on the whole engine.
Here's something you guys might be interested in. In the interview with John Garner on Trains Newswire yesterday, he said this:
"We won't announce a completion date or set an inaugural trip until after we have an operating locomotive. We are eager to get the engine into operation, but we want to do the restoration right, break in the engine, and present it so that it is safe and reliable. That's our goal, and we're sticking to it."
Looks like he finally learned how to manage a steam program! 
shoulda said that when they first started on this mess
Here's a link the to article.
In hindsight it is pretty clear simply rebuilding what they had would have been a better bet. The 1309 is soaking up cash that might have been better spent on track etc.
Kent in SD
Anyway, what a sad story. Such a great locomotive, in a really nice area of the country. I still hope to ride it someday, and take my yet-to-be conceived grandkids on it.
I wish some entity would step in. (My super-duper wish is that the train gods smile, and 1309 and UP 4014 would meet up someplace)
Two23 posted:In hindsight it is pretty clear simply rebuilding what they had would have been a better bet. The 1309 is soaking up cash that might have been better spent on track etc.
With an old steam locomotive that has been sitting out under the pigeons for decades, there is no such thing as a "simple rebuild." Every day of work on the machine can bring new discoveries of damage and repairs that are not possible to see until the locomotive is torn apart. What they are doing to the 1309 is the basic work required to make the locomotive legal and reliable. And that's about as "simple" as it gets.
With regard to the stumbles that the organization has made by announcing excursions before the locomotive was even test run, they were HUGE mistakes. The reputation of the WSMR has been severely damaged due to those actions. That's a shame because this railroad enjoys a fantastically scenic route from Cumberland up the hill to Frostburg.
I've given my modest donations to the 1309 program … very disappointed. Again, I wish that some entity would step in.
Rich Melvin posted:Two23 posted:In hindsight it is pretty clear simply rebuilding what they had would have been a better bet. The 1309 is soaking up cash that might have been better spent on track etc.
With an old steam locomotive that has been sitting out under the pigeons for decades, there is no such thing as a "simple rebuild." Every day of work on the machine can bring new discoveries of damage and repairs that are not possible to see until the locomotive is torn apart. What they are doing to the 1309 is the basic work required to make the locomotive legal and reliable. And that's about as "simple" as it gets.
With regard to the stumbles that the organization has made by announcing excursions before the locomotive was even test run, they were HUGE mistakes. The reputation of the WSMR has been severely damaged due to those actions. That's a shame because this railroad enjoys a fantastically scenic route from Cumberland up the hill to Frostburg.
I think Two23 was talking about 734, the steam locomotive that previously ran on the railroad. I think choosing to restore the 1309 was a huge mistake in its own right, considering the fact that it's been sitting in the elements for DECADES and wasn't maintained well by the C&O in the first place. Even with the apparent uncertainties with the 734's boiler, I'm sure it would at least be a better candidate than 1309. What was originally an estimated $800,000 has exploded into something like $2.7 million!
Of course, with WMSR replacing their steam guys with professional contractors (which I'm sure would require higher wages), some of that cost could be self-imposed.
Regardless, 1309 will be something to see when it runs.
Keep the political comments out of this discussion guys....I had several alerts and had to edit/delete some personal comments as well as political....
See what Ed and his crew are doing this winter! 
TrainMan1225 posted:I think Two23 was talking about 734, the steam locomotive that previously ran on the railroad...
In re-reading Two23's post, I think you're right. I had not interpreted it that way. Even so, the 734 is flat worn out and will require almost as much work as the 1309.
Over the long term, they really need two steam locomotives anyway. One loco can be in service while the other is in heavy maintenance. During the periods when they are both available for service, photo charters and doubleheaders become VERY interesting.
TrainMan1225 posted:I think Two23 was talking about 734, the steam locomotive that previously ran on the railroad.
Yes, exactly. What they had was the 734.
Kent in SD
So a news article is out from the Cumberland Times, and it has a comment from Mr Gardner that has me scratching my head in confusion. Am I misreading it or did he say that the locomotive must have 300 miles under its belt before it's allowed to be inspected by the FRA? That seems a little ridiculous and somehow completely wrong, but hey I'm just a fan who knows nothing about the workings behind the scenes of rail preservation and restoration.
Had a "What the..." moment from that myself. If that were true, how did the Big Boy get to Ogden?
Yeah, I don't think "rewheeled" means what the headline writer thinks it means...
Jon 
hullmat991 posted:So a news article is out from the Cumberland Times, and it has a comment from Mr Gardner that has me scratching my head in confusion. Am I misreading it or did he say that the locomotive must have 300 miles under its belt before it's allowed to be inspected by the FRA? That seems a little ridiculous and somehow completely wrong, but hey I'm just a fan who knows nothing about the workings behind the scenes of rail preservation and restoration.
I'm no expert on 49 CFR 230, but I've never heard of a steam locomotive being allowed to operate on a railroad under FRA jurisdiction without first passing its inspection.
Sounds like one or more crown brasses need to be made and installed before the engine can be lowered back onto her wheel sets ("re-wheeled?")
A steam locomotive cannot turn a wheel ANYWHERE until the FRA inspection is complete. Either the reporter got it wrong or Garner said it awkwardly.
It will take about 300 miles to work out the kinks and break in the brasses. That’s what he was talking about.
Rich:
Should that be: Turn a wheel under its own power?
UP hauled 4014 out of LA under diesel tow. I did not hear anything that the FRA inspected the engine itself before the tow.
Dominic Mazoch posted:Rich:
Should that be: Turn a wheel under its own power?
UP hauled 4014 out of LA under diesel tow. I did not hear anything that the FRA inspected the engine itself before the tow.
Why would the FRA bother? When removed from the park, and readied for towing to Cheyenne, 4014 was NOT "presented for service", thus the FRA would only care about the brakes being functional, or a big air hose in order to by-pass the locomotive dead-in-tow.
Rich Melvin posted:A steam locomotive cannot turn a wheel ANYWHERE until the FRA inspection is complete.
Well, there are insular steam-powered railroads that the FRA does not have jurisdiction over.
smd4 posted:Rich Melvin posted:A steam locomotive cannot turn a wheel ANYWHERE until the FRA inspection is complete.
Well, there are insular steam-powered railroads that the FRA does not have jurisdiction over.
That's interesting, where would those be?
Hot Water posted:smd4 posted:Rich Melvin posted:A steam locomotive cannot turn a wheel ANYWHERE until the FRA inspection is complete.
Well, there are insular steam-powered railroads that the FRA does not have jurisdiction over.
That's interesting, where would those be?
I'm fairly certain PRR #643 at Williams Grove, PA falls only under PA state jurisdiction so they do not have to necessarily comply with FRA regulations. I could be wrong though.
1309 may very well become fodder for doctoral theses in business schools.
PennsyPride94 posted:Hot Water posted:smd4 posted:Rich Melvin posted:A steam locomotive cannot turn a wheel ANYWHERE until the FRA inspection is complete.
Well, there are insular steam-powered railroads that the FRA does not have jurisdiction over.
That's interesting, where would those be?
I'm fairly certain PRR #643 at Williams Grove, PA falls only under PA state jurisdiction so they do not have to necessarily comply with FRA regulations. I could be wrong though.
Do they haul passengers, and cross roads?
Insular railroads are few and far between. And even in those cases, there are still tough regs to comply with. In some cases, the state regs are more strict than the Federal regs.
Hot Water posted:smd4 posted:Rich Melvin posted:A steam locomotive cannot turn a wheel ANYWHERE until the FRA inspection is complete.
Well, there are insular steam-powered railroads that the FRA does not have jurisdiction over.
That's interesting, where would those be?
Pretty much any steam-powered amusement park railroad. In this country alone, Disney operates 9 steam locomotives, 7 of them restored Baldwins.
Hot Water posted:PennsyPride94 posted:Hot Water posted:smd4 posted:Rich Melvin posted:A steam locomotive cannot turn a wheel ANYWHERE until the FRA inspection is complete.
Well, there are insular steam-powered railroads that the FRA does not have jurisdiction over.
That's interesting, where would those be?
I'm fairly certain PRR #643 at Williams Grove, PA falls only under PA state jurisdiction so they do not have to necessarily comply with FRA regulations. I could be wrong though.
Do they haul passengers, and cross roads?
They haul passengers I'd say about 10 times a year if even that. They do have a couple public crossings as well.
Three that come to my mind in my region are: 1. WMSTR in Rollag MN. 2. Prairie Village Railroad in Madison SD 3. RR in Henry Doorly Zoo Omaha NE. None cross public roads and stay on their own property.
Kent in SD
OK, who regulates steam tractors and live steam model railroads? State and loval governments?
Dominic Mazoch posted:OK, who regulates steam tractors and live steam model railroads? State and loval governments?
Yes.
"Audit of scenic railroad reveals plenty of problems"
www.wcbcradio.com
Here's a direct link to the article.
As I mentioned above, they would have been ahead to just rework the 734 and put savings towards fixing the track and other issues. I think from the public's POV a steam engine is a steam engine.
Kent in SD
Two23 posted:As I mentioned above, they would have been ahead to just rework the 734 and put savings towards fixing the track and other issues. I think from the public's POV a steam engine is a steam engine.
Kent in SD
I don't think anyone will disagree with that, hindsight being 20/20. The "point of no return" point happened under previous management. Once the current management took over, that decision had been already been made for them and there was no choice but to press forward and hope for good results. It's not like 734 was in great shape at that point either.
I wonder how many children ride behind a steam engine, andvare upset because it is not painted blue?
BTW, the B&O Museum as a Fireball WM F Unit!
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
