Big Boy update, talks on going

Thanks HW...I completely overlooked the obvious...brakes, reduced speeds, tool car...

While I'd love to see a Big Boy in operation I also believe it's a very long shot.  However I'm learning alot from this thread and the previous one.  I also know that knowledge and the internet are not always connected.  So a few comments:

For years I've heard that 4004 was a basket case and the flood did cause many of it's problems.  Now I'm hearing otherwise.

One stall of the Cheyenne roundhouse has an extension.  About 4 feet as I remember.  I've again heard over the years that the extension was for a 4000 series.

At least twice I heard Lynn tell the story about 3985 and its last run as a coal burner.  He told of problems getting "good" coal while they were traveling.  The impression was suppliers were scarce and not supportive of an infrequent sales schedule.  On the last trip, the auger jamed and could not be moved in forward or reverse.  He said if you looked like you could bench press the pilot, you were offered a cab ride and they limped back to Cheyenne.  As soon as things cooled off they dropped the auger tubes and found a large chunk of concrete complete with re-bar.  I remember hearing that someone saved the concrete as a souvenir.

As for building one new.  I've heard that the steel available today is not as good as the steel available in the 40s.  Don't know if thats true but I can say I break more tools today then I ever did when I was in my 20s and had real arm strength.

How much would a Big Boy rebuild cost?  I know two narrow gauge locomotives here in Colorado are at 1.2 and 1.5 million estimate to complete.  So how much for a Big Boy (10 -15 Million)?  I do understand you don't know until your done, but what's a good guess.

Any more news on the "third party"?  Could it be the UP is just a contractor for this job?  If you had the money and the desire, who would you use for a rebuild?  What other groups beside the UP would be willing to take on the job.

Just sharing some things I've heard, some thoughts and looking for more knowledge.

I don't think money is an issue, as a shareholder 10 million would only be about .40 percent of last years earnings, plus the steam budget they already have. I would gladly take a 1% hit to see it run. I would not bet against the UP on this.

And why is UP not using the 6936 diesel?  That thing is HUGE

OK, building one from scratch is out of the question. Truly a lost art.

So that just leaves these 8. Denver, Dallas, Green Bay and St Louis seem far less likely candidates because of the organizations that own them. Scranton, maybe. After Pomona, the next best bets are Cheyenne and Omaha, with Cheyenne firmly in the lead. 

Personally, I think UP has done their homework very well on this.

With regard to club members talking about this, I seriously doubt there are any rules regarding secrecy. Most organizations of this kind will never find themselves faced with a decision of this magnitude. While the club is also a corporation, that is mainly for tax purposes. The members are all dues paying volunteers, sharing a common interest in trains.

Main reason is that Vice-President Wimmer, the Chief Engineer of the UP, retired. The 6936 was his favorite unit, and he specified the 6936 every time he went out on an inspection trip, which was quite often. 

It's not about "rules," it's about common sense. It's also about people who may be on the fringe of an organization wanting to stoke their ego by "getting the scoop" and blabbing about something that should have been confiential until all the details were worked out.

Exactly!  At this stage the "talks" are just that, talks.  There has not been any type of formal agreement reached, details ironed out and so on.  I understand that there are many "members" in the club however they have a board of directors and "they" are the ones who have to make the final decision and stand by that decision concerning the 4014.  Again just my 2 cents.

BINGO! You have hit the nail squarely on the head. When you have a deal this big knocking on your door you do not discuss it with the general membership until it is a done deal!

Organizations such as the California museum involved here have elected officers and a board of directors. Their task is to LEAD the organization into new opportunities. Blabbing about this to the general membership BEFORE it was a done deal was a huge abdication of leadership on their part. The board and the officers should have worked out the entire deal, and THEN announced it to the members.

Given the lack of professionalism and common sense on the part of the California museum, I have no confidence at all that this will ever happen.

Rich: 

I agree with you, to a point.  This and other groups should have something in the by-laws procedures that the BOD could lease equipment, and the conditions thereof.  By-law changes are usually voted by the members.  Also, all groups should vote on the their by-laws every so often.  Then the BOD has some sort of blueprint to proceed, knowing the will of the group.

BUT, having this in place, the BOD needs to keep mum.................... 

Question about UP over Cajon. In 2010 I was shooting pics there and I saw 2 sets of tracks which were all BNSF, but  to the side was a single track which UP seemed to be using (hauling windmill blades) Are all three BNSF, and how is it decided what tracks are used.  The parallel BNSF tracks looked in far better condition than the one UP was on

There are two separate main lines over Cajon pass. The Original Santa Fe double track main line to Summit, which is now three tracks. This main line dates back to the late 1800s. The Union Pacific obtained trackage rights of this line, but I can not remember when.

The second main line was constructed by the then Southern Pacific in 1967 which actually goes to Bakersfield.

Now, with the mergers of BN & AT&SF, the original Cajon Pass line is the busiest main line in the west. The SP line, now part of UP, parallels the BNSF main line, but does NOT connect with it, and continues on to Bakersfield and northbound up the San Joaquin Valley. 

You could broadcast this on the national news, and only a fraction of a percent of people would care. Mainly the rail fan community.

The behavior of the seller should be immaterial to the buyer. If the buyer really wants the item in question, they'll put up with a lot to get it, especially when the item is so rare.

This has never been about what Union Pacific thinks. This is about what the members think, because in the end they are the ones who will decide if the "sale" happens or doesn't. At some point the board is going to have to officially tell the members, and there will be some time and a lot of discussion before a vote is actually taken.

In the end, the only thing that matters is the vote. 

Unless the buyer is offering thing(s) that are not intended to be public knowledge.  I would think this is just as much about the UP as Pomona because it is UPs money, time reputation and railroad and for the group their future, attendance, financial security and offerings to draw in the people.....just MYHO. 

Perhaps UP is prepared to put up with a lot on this, perhaps they will just walk and pursue another 4000....I don't know we'll just have to see what UP offers them and how they feel about it.

You missed my point. The organization's LEADERS should be responsible to make the deal and THEN tell the members what is going to happen AFTER the deal is done. This is not the kind of deal that should be open to debate and a "vote" by the members at large. A deal like this should be put together by the LEADERSHIP of the organzation and THEN the members are told what is going to happen.

Opening something like this to discussion among the members before it is a done deal is a recipe for disaster, as evidenced by this entire fiasco. 

Cajon Pass . . . a photographer's delight  .  .  . Lots more railroad photos at my new website   www.scaramouchephoto.com

BTW, sometimes political candidates float "trial balloons" to see how folks feel about the idea of their running for office. Perhaps the UP wanted to gauge public reaction to the idea before they expended a lot of money.

 

Exactly. A museum elects a Board of Directors for a reason--to make decisions. If the entire membership needed to be consulted on every decision made, nothing would get accomplished.

Board meetings are open to the membership--that is when and where said membership can voice any concerns or thoughts. I suspect, however, that the number of members present at any given board meeting is very close to zero.

If the leaders have that authority over the members to say what an outcome is going to be without consultation, then it sounds like they would be more of a dictatorship rather than as a democracy.  If these sort of deals should be done in secret, then I can see this as a mechanism that will make the general membership  leave. I’m sure that a lot of those members have sweated hundreds of hours to make those exhibits look their best for continued preservation. To suddenly find that after all that work someone says that a particular item is suddenly going to go and not come back is a big kick in the teeth and shows very little respect for those people. If 4014 does go it will be interesting to see how the membership fares.

Just out of interest, is there a clause in the constitution ( if they have one) that says on major issues like this, that the future of a significant item within the collection has to be debated by all concerned and not just by a few. If this is the case then we can understand why the members are also involved and being vocal.  If as Rich says, it should be left to the 'chosen few'  then you could eventually see in a worst case scenario all the exhibits slowly move on to new pastures, which may not be for the better. Also, I feel you have to be careful with letting those few have such power because if they do make a wrong decision knowingly, or have a vested interest in moving something on, then is it getting close to being a legal confrontation?

Perhaps it is the care that the members have spent on 4014, that actually makes it a much better candidate than 4004. If each one of the BB’s had a major survey I'm sure they will not all come out the same, there will be a ranking value for each and a conclusion as to which is the best prospect to pursue.  Do we know if UP has actually spent time and money doing surveys on either of them?

As we all know, the UP seems to have set their cap to acquire 4014 for a restoration project (if it really does materialise) as opposed to 4004 which is on their doorstep, so there must be something UP knows that we don’t about the two. Hot Water mentioned that there is little between them all and that all the service records survive, which is a bonus to some point. But in reality 50+ years has passed since those records are of real value and the BB’s are dispersed far and wide and are subject to various conditions which is not improving the well being of them all. I have walked amongst those engines at Barry in the late 70's and seen what the elements can do to engines.

Museum boards first and formost have an obligation to the artifacts under their care.  That is their primary concern.

I seriously doubt institutions like Chicago's Museum of Science and Industry , the Field Museum or the Art Intitute of Chicago put it up to a membership vote if they intend on sending an artifact on tour or long term loan to another institution.

That's what a board of director's is for.  To decide what is best for the artifacts under their watch and the organization as a whole.

Rusty

Hardly a dictatorship, but a board that is in charge....someone has to make the decisions.  If everything went for a vote to all the members then nothing and I mean nothing would ever get done.  And what Rusty stated is right on. 

If 4014 was the only one that was left I would agree with you whole heartidly, but there are other choices to be had

Pomona can either be known as the group that helped to bring one back to life, or the group that stood in the way.  If the latter is true I'm sure UP will go elsewhere if need be with out loosing too much sleep over it.  4014 as a first choice makes sense, a great climate.  I understand the groups concerns over the loss of a great attraction, but I would think having it under steam again would do it more justice than just sitting there....and it depends on what UP offers them in return.

did not the 3751 use the pass in the 2012 trip to the grand canyon?

http://www.sbrhs.org/news.html

find (02.17.2012): UPDATE - 3751 Excursion toArizona

It most certainly did. But,,,,the 3751 trip was a joint BNSF/Amtrak approved excursion and ascended the Cajon Pass grade at track speed! NOT a "dead in tow" operation!

Just some completely unsupported speculation on my part:

If they're serious about restoring a big boy.... parts would be hard to come by and fabrication expensive.  The 844 has another FEF that is cannabilized for parts.  Perhaps if 4004 is the "easier" big boy to get then it would make sense to go after a more "difficult" one to aquire first.  Once both engines are in hand, then the determination could be made which platform would be better to restore and use the other one for necessary parts.

Even  more un-founded speculation on my part:

Didn't standardization of parts from the Big Boys make it to the redesigned 4-6-6-4 Challengers?  Perhaps if any parts do match, maybe use it for spare parts on the 3985 since it only has one surviving sister and there are more big boys left.

Whatever.  Interesting fun dreaming about it.  I'm certain that everyone on this forum, regardless of what they believe on this story, would absolutly love to watch an operational big boy go steaming through their neck of the woods. 

Chris, I think you're right when it comes to the more routine decisions of a group like Pomona, but the magnitude and importance of this decision far exceeds what the board may be willing to take responsibility for. I know that if I was on that board, I wouldn't want it on my head that I gave away the group's greatest asset. An unpopular decision by the board could rip the group apart. It's a very fine line.

As for Rusty's comment, I'm afraid the museums that were mentioned are an apple and orange comparison. I've been to each of those museums, they are all wonderful. The city of Chicago is very lucky to have such world class venues.

Those are much larger organizations with paid boards. They have multi-million dollar budgets and hundreds of paid employees. They have huge buildings and massive collections. People become members of those museums knowing full well that they will have no say in the management decisions.

I'm willing to bet the R&LHS is much smaller. This is in no way intended to minimize their importance and accomplishments.  To them, this deal is like the Germans asking MSI for their U-boat back.

If that is indeed the case, those board members should resign and make room for people who can LEAD. That is what they are there for! You CANNOT present something like this to a general membership for discussion and negotiation. If that is done, nothing will ever happen and the result is the mess that the California museum has on its hands now.

Well Rich, you and I clearly have a difference of opinion on this.

If I was on that board, this is what I would do: I would hear the railroad's proposal and try to negotiate the best possible deal, including replacement equipment and excursion privileges and the possible return, if the project proved unsuccessful as well as cash. I would send a letter containing the proposal and the board's recommendation with a mail in ballot, to all the members and let them vote. They don't need to be part of the negotiations, but they do deserve to have a voice in the final decision.

I know that if I was a member who had poured years of his life into this club, I would want to be asked, and would feel betrayed if I wasn't. I would feel much better even if the vote didn't agree with my opinion, than if the board had done it on their own.

Even by my own description, the news of the project's existence has come out prematurely. However, be it a lack of professionalism or leadership on anybody's part, the one thing we haven't seen, is a lessening of interest or resolve on the part of UP. My guess is they will continue to pursue 4014 until all hope is exhausted, at which time other candidates are available.

In the meantime, idiots like me will pontificate, theorize, speculate and otherwise yammer away on this, on the off chance that someone who actually has some say in the matter reads  and maybe even finds some valuable insight in what was said.

I would love to see this happen. I'm not holding my breath, but I am crossing my fingers.

Perhaps the reason why 4004 is not first choice is because it has already been used as a spares source to keep the UP Challenger operational. So, being incomplete the UP would have to find replacements for it which would have to come from another BB I assume.

Another off the wall option could be that UP acquire 4014 and do a deal that 4004 is part of the exchange. Both locations would still have a BB, albeit not the same ones they started out with many years ago. The cost of moving both would be horrendous I guess.

As another post suggests, perhaps UP will end up with both and 4004 will end up as a spares loco for 4014 and whatever else is compatible to 3985.

I hear ya Elliot, I truely do...The only thing is that U-boat will be harder to get as they built the building around it.

I don't think UP is worried about parts, what they can't get off another locomotive they will fabricate....like a few years back when the entire firebox was replaced on the 844...lots of work but they got it done.

Once you have given something away then you have lost title to it and whatever the recepient does with it is down to them. If UP still had some interest in it and all the other engines they gave away, then there are possible legal implications if someone had an accident while crawling all over it and fell off! Then the blame culture kicks in and someone would say that if it wasn't there then it wouldn't have happened etc, etc

Yes I understand the legal ramifications of that which completely make sense w/o question....I just find it funny that they get it for free, make $ from it and now would possibly expect a chunk of $ for it to go back to the folks who paid for it to begin with it.....what a circle of life there. 

Chris,

i guess some people/organisations just get lucky! Now if another serious contender had approached them with a view to restoring it would you consider that they have it for nil cost just so that it would be restored, and as in this case possibly be the only one in steam?

I guess you can liken it to when people donate their train collections to say the TCA and then some years later the TCA has to sell bits of it for whatever reason, would you expect to receive back some/all of the profits they made from the sales or even have the items back even if they did not want them?

I'm not sure why UP and others gave engines away in those days as they must have had some scrap value and been a source of income at that time. Was it for publicity to keep people aware of the UP as a possible option of travel, actually cost effective to drop them off at various locations as it may have been cheaper than moving them to a scrap location or....?

Neil

Everyone,

Again let me clear up some of the detail in the statement published on the first page of this thread.  The general membership is not voting on this proposal only the BOD as the authority of make a final decision on this matter.  What the membership is getting is basically an info packet containing all the details about what UP is looking to do and some pros and cons for returing 4014 to them.  We are doing this only to get a sense of the memberships opinion on the matter, again the membership is not voting yes or no on this proposal.  Before the membership was made aware we as a BOD decided to agree to negoiate with Union Pacific.  It was not our intention to say "spill the beans" about this story but details were leaked out without the boards approval.  

At this time no deal has yet been reached but talks are still ongoing.   We strive to be a first class railroad museum and I am deeply sorry if these events has soured us in your eyes. 

As a side note Union Pacific Steam Program Manager Ed Dickens will be the featured speaker for our annual meeting on Feb. 23 check out our website Railgiants.org for more details.  Non members are welcome.

Chris,

Again, I agree with you, they shouldn't give it away for nothing and this is where I assume they are at now with the discussions. 

There also has to be some thought as to the future, assuming it all happens, that as and when it probably gets retired again, either medium term or completely, that the owners, again assuming that the current owners lend/lease it to UP arrange that it is returned in at least the condition that it left.

What hasn't been discussed much is the third party that I think was mentioned at one point that may also be involved. Is this a sleeping partner that may be fronting the funds for the restoration, is it a joint venture between UP and third party or....?

Neil

I don't think the UP will spend any $ on the engine if they do not own it outright, UP will definetly want the control in that regard.  I am sure as you stated that the group wants to be gauranteed that if the restoration gets cancelled or it gets re-retired that they get it back, which they should.  I don't see UP going ahead with this just to turn around and retire it again but anything is possible.

     As for the third party I am interested to hear who this is as well.   

Back in the day, it was a combination of civic pride and good publicity for the railroads.  It depended entirely on the railroad.  The New York Central, for example, sent just about everything off to the scrap yards.

As far as cost effectiveness vs. scrapping, with the quantity of steam locomotives going to scrap during the late 40's and 50's, by giving one away to a community or museum, the loss of scrap value $$$ for a few locomotives would be a drop in a bucket. 

The railroads simply wanted steam off the books one way or the other.  

And, there even 50 years ago, there were better ways to store power, for potential future use than placing them in parks. 

The more rational question would be, why did the UP never retire the 844?

Rusty