Since nobody brings it up that much, I thought I would, but back in May on FireUp2100 website news, I see back on May 30, that it should take 15 month's to complete since it's in good shape. At that time, it would make Aug 2016. So with that being said, will 2100 run later next year? Also, if that is true, how come the Big Boy 4014 is 2019? I know 4014 is large and will take time. Just curious.
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Since nobody brings it up that much, I thought I would, but back in May on FireUp2100 website news, I see back on May 30, that it should take 15 month's to complete since it's in good shape. At that time, it would make Aug 2016. So with that being said, will 2100 run later next year? Also, if that is true, how come the Big Boy 4014 is 2019? I know 4014 is large and will take time. Just curious.
1) You might want to edit your subject title to reflect August 2016, since "August 2015" is long past.
2) The Reading 2100 still has service time on her boiler, per the FRA 1472 days/15 years of service, thus all the 2100 group needs to do is VERY CAREFULLY go through the running gear, and convert the firebox to oil firing properly (remember that the tender is already nicely converted to oil firing). On the other hand, if the 2100 group desires to return the locomotive & tender to coal burning, well that will be lots more work.
3) The UP 4014 isn't even being worked on, and there really aren't any employees currently at the Cheyenne, WY steam shop that are knowledgable on overhauling large articulated steam locomotives, let alone a 4000 class.
Thank Hot Water. Now I know the reason. Yes a coal burner would be more work. Oil burner is easier and easier to maintain. That's why 4449 and 844 I bet are easier to maintain.
Thank Hot Water. Now I know the reason. Yes a coal burner would be more work. Oil burner is easier and easier to maintain. That's why 4449 and 844 I bet are easier to maintain.
That is a real shame, UP should shop it out to folks that know how to rebuild a steamer. It seems like a growing business, there are two articulates in Roanoke and the big boy for candidates all it takes is a few million or so.
It is planned the engine WILL be returned to burn coal as God intended.
This is great news!
MH2198 posted:It is planned the engine WILL be returned to burn coal as God intended.
Well, in my opinion, that is too bad. It would definitely be a lot easier to PROPERLY concert the firebox to oil burning, since the tender is ALREADY converted to oil burning. Plus, daily maintenance is easier with an oil burner than with a coal burner.
Hot Water posted:Originally Posted by wrawroacx:3) The UP 4014 isn't even being worked on, and there really aren't any employees currently at the Cheyenne, WY steam shop that are knowledgable on overhauling large articulated steam locomotives, let alone a 4000 class.
Are they at least working on one of the other steam locomotives there since they are doing nothing with the 4014?
Hudson J1e posted:Hot Water posted:Originally Posted by wrawroacx:3) The UP 4014 isn't even being worked on, and there really aren't any employees currently at the Cheyenne, WY steam shop that are knowledgable on overhauling large articulated steam locomotives, let alone a 4000 class.
Are they at least working on one of the other steam locomotives there since they are doing nothing with the 4014?
They are still taking things apart on 844, so yes, 844 is being "worked on". No telling when the steel sheets, which they cut out, will be reinstalled inside the firebox.
Thanks for the update HW.
Hot Water posted:MH2198 posted:It is planned the engine WILL be returned to burn coal as God intended.
Well, in my opinion, that is too bad. It would definitely be a lot easier to PROPERLY concert the firebox to oil burning, since the tender is ALREADY converted to oil burning. Plus, daily maintenance is easier with an oil burner than with a coal burner.
I'll stick to my coal burners, thank you. After all, it's flat out sacrilegious for a engine that ran in hard coal territory to burn oil! Convert it back to coal, and do it right, and all will be right with the world. 
We can't all be like those who work on 4449 and 844 who barely have a speck of dirt on them... 
MH2198 posted:Hot Water posted:MH2198 posted:It is planned the engine WILL be returned to burn coal as God intended.
Well, in my opinion, that is too bad. It would definitely be a lot easier to PROPERLY concert the firebox to oil burning, since the tender is ALREADY converted to oil burning. Plus, daily maintenance is easier with an oil burner than with a coal burner.
I'll stick to my coal burners, thank you. After all, it's flat out sacrilegious for a engine that ran in hard coal territory to burn oil! Convert it back to coal, and do it right, and all will be right with the world.
I believe you'll find that the Reading T-1 class locomotives burned mostly soft coal, i.e. Bituminous.
We can't all be like those who work on 4449 and 844 who barely have a speck of dirt on them...Right, plus no environmentalists complaining about all the "toxic" ashes dumped on the ground nor all those cinders flying into all the poor kids eyes!
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
