Big Boy #4014 moves under power for the first time in over 50 years • The UP is bringing out the 4014, see schedule 🚂

Pingman posted:

R. Hales posted:

FORMER OGR CEO - RETIRED posted:

Kelly Anderson posted:

Then my suggestion is for those people to stay home, so there is more room for the rest of us who appreciate seeing an engineering landmark that we never dreamed would return, rolling past under her own power. 

No problem, Kelly. You can have my spot.  

If/when this thing ever runs, I’ll be somewhere else doing something interesting.

I won't be going either but not because this planned event is not interesting.  You imply the restoration and likely operation of one of the biggest, most powerful, and successful steam locomotives in U.S history is not interesting? Really?

I remember when I use to think you were a "train guy."

Exactly.

The Big boy was not the biggest nor was it the most powerful or the most successful. I think its cool they restore one. I dont like the fact that the restoration comes at the expense of other equipment in the historic UP steam shop. including 3985 witch IS actually the most successful (based on number built) Articulated design of the steam age.

jethat posted:

Pingman posted:

R. Hales posted:

FORMER OGR CEO - RETIRED posted:

Kelly Anderson posted:

Then my suggestion is for those people to stay home, so there is more room for the rest of us who appreciate seeing an engineering landmark that we never dreamed would return, rolling past under her own power. 

No problem, Kelly. You can have my spot.  

If/when this thing ever runs, I’ll be somewhere else doing something interesting.

I won't be going either but not because this planned event is not interesting.  You imply the restoration and likely operation of one of the biggest, most powerful, and successful steam locomotives in U.S history is not interesting? Really?

I remember when I use to think you were a "train guy."

Exactly.

The Big boy was not the biggest nor was it the most powerful or the most successful. I think its cool they restore one. I dont like the fact that the restoration comes at the expense of other equipment in the historic UP steam shop. including 3985 witch IS actually the most successful (based on number built) Articulated design of the steam age.

I thought the Big Boy was the largest ever built?

 

The Big boy was not the biggest nor was it the most powerful or the most successful. I think its cool they restore one. I dont like the fact that the restoration comes at the expense of other equipment in the historic UP steam shop. including 3985 witch IS actually the most successful (based on number built) Articulated design of the steam age.

I thought the Big Boy was the largest ever built?

No, it was not the largest ever built.  But it was one of  the largest, more powerful, and successful steam engine types with 25 built.  It was not the heaviest or longest of all engine types and did not possess the most tractive effort.  But it was up there!

R. Hales posted:

I remember when I use to think you were a "train guy."

And I remember when the Union Pacific steam program meant actually running steam locomotives, not shoving them around with diesels.

In my opinion, this contrived dog and pony show has very little to do with “trains.”

jethat posted:

The Big boy was not the biggest nor was it the most powerful or the most successful. I think its cool they restore one. I dont like the fact that the restoration comes at the expense of other equipment in the historic UP steam shop. including 3985 witch IS actually the most successful (based on number built) Articulated design of the steam age.

I wouldn't say the Challenger type is the most successful articulated design; the number made does not directly constitute whether the design is successful or not. I would say the best articulated steam locomotive designs come from the N&W. The A's were smaller than the Challengers, but had up to 126,000 lbs of tractive effort, which is almost as powerful as the Big Boys. And don't even get me started on the Y6's...

Now a Y6 would be someting to see.

Dominic Mazoch posted:

Now a Y6 would be someting to see.

Travel to Roanoke, Va and view the Y6a #2156.

The argument about "best" just doesn't have much meaning unless "best" is put in context.  Different engines are built for different jobs. 

A different example.  Lots of folks here adore the NYC Hudsons, and they were very good at what they were designed for:  high-speed passenger service on the Water-level Route.  But bring them out here and put them on the roller-coaster profile of the Frisco or the Mopac, and they would have limped home with their tails between their legs while a much less glamorous (and maybe even homebuilt) 4-8-2 did the job with aplomb.

T.E., HP, driver diameter, grate area, etc., etc. are a set of variables that allow for excellent specialization.  Those big articulateds excelled in the roles they were designed for, but, as just the pair of Big boys and Challengers demonstrate, they were not interchangeable.

kgdjpubs posted:

Dominic Mazoch posted:

And the big question:  Where can you run a BB locomotive?  Length?  Weight? 14 wheel tender?  North Platte to Ogden, OK?   Hopefully they have checked the railroad for more places to run.  Withoit any fore seen isdues.

By and large, it should be able to go the majority of places you can take 844 or 3985.  I'm sure there are a few spots here and there where you might have an issue turning it on a wye or getting it into a display site..."mundane", but important, concerns.  I'd be surprised if most of the mainlines themselves present many issues.  It's the side tracks and switches once you get off the mainline to tie up for the night where you might find some issues.

That engine shoudl be able to run on most UP main lines.  The axle loading of the main engine (34 tons) is less than that of a 110 ton grain car (37.5 tons.).  So the main constraint is the location of wyes with heavy rail.

John Mills posted:

I thought there was talk of them doubleheading 844 and 4014.  Has that been ruled out?  if they did doublehead would a diesel still be necessary; if nothing else for braking?

Why would you even think about a need for another engine for braking.  A Big Boy has the pump and air resevoir capacity for braking long freight trains down Sherman Hill.

I think some of you are under the impression that the locomotive’s brakes are used to slow and stop a train. In the case of a diesel with dynamic brakes, this is true. However, on a steam locomotive, the locomotive’s brakes are NEVER used when braking a train. When a steam locomotive is powering the train, the brakes on the cars are used to slow and stop a train.

The locomotive brake (the Independent Brake) on a steam locomotive is not used when moving because of the heat generated between the brake shoes and the tires. If the tires are heated too much, they could expand enough to get loose and come off. That’s obviously a bad situation!

Adding a second steam locomotive to a train adds nothing in terms of available braking power.

Here's an dumb question. That's a "water bottle" between UP 3985's tender and the diesel? Does the water flow from it, into the 3985's tender? Gravity? Pump?

I believe the photo is from Frontier Days, July 2004, in Carr Colorado. Hot Water …. who may be in the cab?

Thanks

EBT Jim posted:

Here's an dumb question. That's a "water bottle" between UP 3985's tender and the diesel?

Yes. Normally referred to as an auxiliary water tender/tank.

Does the water flow from it, into the 3985's tender? Gravity?

Yes, by gravity. There are 2 1/2" fire hose fittings at the lower corners for refilling from a fire hydrant.

Pump?

No need for a pump.

I believe the photo is from Frontier Days, July 2004, in Carr Colorado. Hot Water …. who may be in the cab?

Engineer, Fireman and Pilot Engineer or Pilot Conductor. Possibly a "guest".

Thanks

I just do not understand why it is that the folks who do not care to see the Big Boy run grump about the rest of us, or the UP, who are excited to see this locomotive operate, whether helped by a diesel or not. If you would rather be somewhere else, be there and enjoy that. Let us enjoy what would thrill us in peace but I'm sure not in quiet.

Ray

I just don't see how the feelings and opinions of those who disagree affects the others.  Will Rich's comments, opinions, and or feelings about the BB somehow stop you from seeing it, getting excited about, etc?  Also, you can proceed past reading his or other's posts which you find objectionable.  There are people on this board I do just that with.  It's not complicated, I see their screen name, I keep scrolling.  Life goes on and the world fails to explode.

For what it's worth, I don't and have not always agreed with Rich, HW, and others, but it surely doesn't make me have a negative opinion of them.  I even find I disagree with myself sometimes.....

Rayin"S" posted:

I just do not understand why it is that the folks who do not care to see the Big Boy run grump about the rest of us, or the UP, who are excited to see this locomotive operate, whether helped by a diesel or not. If you would rather be somewhere else, be there and enjoy that. Let us enjoy what would thrill us in peace but I'm sure not in quiet.

Ray

TexasSP posted:

I just don't see how the feelings and opinions of those who disagree affects the others.  Will Rich's comments, opinions, and or feelings about the BB somehow stop you from seeing it, getting excited about, etc?  Also, you can proceed past reading his or other's posts which you find objectionable.  There are people on this board I do just that with.  It's not complicated, I see their screen name, I keep scrolling.  Life goes on and the world fails to explode.

For what it's worth, I don't and have not always agreed with Rich, HW, and others, but it surely doesn't make me have a negative opinion of them.  I even find I disagree with myself sometimes.....

Remember how geared-up people used to get here while UP 844 was being worked on? Holy cow! 

Someone would post a progress report on 844, Rich would usually start things off with his very clever "Kool-Aid" insult, and from there it turned into a food fight. lol. Got kinda nasty at times. Even a couple of folks from other websites, that don't normally post here, would join in on the Union Pacific steam program bashing.

I'm glad that's pretty much over. Steam locomotives are cool. American history. I wish more of them would/could run. Thanks to UP for doing this.

TexasSP posted:

….  I even find I disagree with myself sometimes.....

..... Sometimes I give myself the creeps ...

One thing that I see Rich's viewpoint on, is when 844 was doing it's first runs, it had a diesel coupled to it, which really seemed to be anticlimactic and a little misleading.  IMO, I would rather have seen her moving completely on her own, without a diesel helper (especially since she had no consist to pull at that point!)

Hopefully with 4014, we'll see her run for a bit without assistance.

Eddie Marra posted:

One thing that I see Rich's viewpoint on, is when 844 was doing it's first runs, it had a diesel coupled to it, which really seemed to be anticlimactic and a little misleading.  IMO, I would rather have seen her moving completely on her own, without a diesel helper (especially since she had no consist to pull at that point!)

Hopefully with 4014, we'll see her run for a bit without assistance.

Isn't this often done with the diesel in dynamic braking mode in order to simulate a load for the steam loco?

---PCJ

RailRide posted:

Eddie Marra posted:

One thing that I see Rich's viewpoint on, is when 844 was doing it's first runs, it had a diesel coupled to it, which really seemed to be anticlimactic and a little misleading.  IMO, I would rather have seen her moving completely on her own, without a diesel helper (especially since she had no consist to pull at that point!)

Hopefully with 4014, we'll see her run for a bit without assistance.

Isn't this often done with the diesel in dynamic braking mode in order to simulate a load for the steam loco?

---PCJ

Generally only within the Cheyenne Terminal (Yard Limits), and thus not occupying a main line.

Eddie Marra posted:

jethat posted:

Pingman posted:

R. Hales posted:

FORMER OGR CEO - RETIRED posted:

Kelly Anderson posted:

Then my suggestion is for those people to stay home, so there is more room for the rest of us who appreciate seeing an engineering landmark that we never dreamed would return, rolling past under her own power. 

No problem, Kelly. You can have my spot.  

If/when this thing ever runs, I’ll be somewhere else doing something interesting.

I won't be going either but not because this planned event is not interesting.  You imply the restoration and likely operation of one of the biggest, most powerful, and successful steam locomotives in U.S history is not interesting? Really?

I remember when I use to think you were a "train guy."

Exactly.

The Big boy was not the biggest nor was it the most powerful or the most successful. I think its cool they restore one. I dont like the fact that the restoration comes at the expense of other equipment in the historic UP steam shop. including 3985 witch IS actually the most successful (based on number built) Articulated design of the steam age.

I thought the Big Boy was the largest ever built?

There doesn't seem to be any disagreement that the Big Boy was the heaviest reciprocating locomotive ever built, based on total weight of engine and tender. 

There have been claims made in books that a certain C&O locomotive was heavier (locomotive-only weight), but those claims are based on the 1941 weighing of one incomplete locomotive, combined with weight estimates for the missing parts.  Four years later, when that same locomotive and one other were weighed (complete and in full working order), neither one was heavier than the 1944 order of UP 4-8-8-4's. 

Suffice it to be said that the official specification table published by the C&O railroad lists the locomotive weight of this type at 771,300 lbs.  The equivalent official specification published by the UP lists the locomotive weight for the 1944 series 4884-2 at 772,250 lbs.

Scott Griggs

Louisville, KY

Eddie Marra posted:

One thing that I see Rich's viewpoint on, is when 844 was doing it's first runs, it had a diesel coupled to it, which really seemed to be anticlimactic and a little misleading.  IMO, I would rather have seen her moving completely on her own, without a diesel helper (especially since she had no consist to pull at that point!)

Hopefully with 4014, we'll see her run for a bit without assistance.

Diesels behind 844(4) is nothing new:

Rusty

FORMER OGR CEO - RETIRED posted:

I think some of you are under the impression that the locomotive’s brakes are used to slow and stop a train. In the case of a diesel with dynamic brakes, this is true. However, on a steam locomotive, the locomotive’s brakes are NEVER used when braking a train. When a steam locomotive is powering the train, the brakes on the cars are used to slow and stop a train.

The locomotive brake (the Independent Brake) on a steam locomotive is not used when moving because of the heat generated between the brake shoes and the tires. If the tires are heated too much, they could expand enough to get loose and come off. That’s obviously a bad situation!

Adding a second steam locomotive to a train adds nothing in terms of available braking power.

I think there was a situation with the UP 844 near San Marcos TX in 2012 where improper braking with the locomotive did cause wheel and tire damage.

The diesels aren't necessarily for assistance. Out here, they're very handy for dynamic braking going through the Cajon pass. Also, when 3751 makes a run, the diesels are handy for HEP for the passenger cars. UP handles that aspect with a generator car.

Hot Water posted:

Dominic Mazoch posted:

Now a Y6 would be someting to see.

Travel to Roanoke, Va and view the Y6a #2156.

Operating, not just preserved.

AGHRMatt posted:

The diesels aren't necessarily for assistance. Out here, they're very handy for dynamic braking going through the Cajon pass. Also, when 3751 makes a run, the diesels are handy for HEP for the passenger cars.

Which diesels? Non of the BNSF diesel are equipped for HEP. Amtrak diesel do also supply HEP.

UP handles that aspect with a generator car.

Correct, but since 2011 the steam crew have been using more and more diesel "help", and NOT just for dynamic brake.

Dominic Mazoch posted:

FORMER OGR CEO - RETIRED posted:

I think some of you are under the impression that the locomotive’s brakes are used to slow and stop a train. In the case of a diesel with dynamic brakes, this is true. However, on a steam locomotive, the locomotive’s brakes are NEVER used when braking a train. When a steam locomotive is powering the train, the brakes on the cars are used to slow and stop a train.

The locomotive brake (the Independent Brake) on a steam locomotive is not used when moving because of the heat generated between the brake shoes and the tires. If the tires are heated too much, they could expand enough to get loose and come off. That’s obviously a bad situation!

Adding a second steam locomotive to a train adds nothing in terms of available braking power.

I think there was a situation with the UP 844 near San Marcos TX in 2012 where improper braking with the locomotive did cause wheel and tire damage.

The alternate Engineer on the steam crew was operating 844, and simply forgot that he had the diesel "helper" loading in about throttle 7, when he tried to slow down and stop for the scheduled service stop. After finally applying the air brakes in emergency, the current manager, who was on the left side of the cab training a Fireman, ran over and moved the power reverse lever into reverse and then cracked the throttle open, thus locking up the drivers on 844, while the diesel "helper" continued to push then forward. When the Diesel MU Control box was subsequently throttled down to idle, the consist "slid to a stop". There were a number of witness, both onboard and on the ground.

AmeenTrainGuy posted:

Hot Water posted:

AGHRMatt posted:

The diesels aren't necessarily for assistance. Out here, they're very handy for dynamic braking going through the Cajon pass. Also, when 3751 makes a run, the diesels are handy for HEP for the passenger cars.

Which diesels? Non of the BNSF diesel are equipped for HEP. Amtrak diesel do also supply HEP.

UP handles that aspect with a generator car.

Correct, but since 2011 the steam crew have been using more and more diesel "help", and NOT just for dynamic brake.

 

Could you elaborate more on "... and NOT just for dynamic brake."? What I don't get is how did the bigboy's stop long trains without dynamic braking but cannot stop 5 - 10 passenger cars? 

You are losing sight of the fact that more than 70 than 70 years ago, all they had were train air brakes. Thus, all trains, both freight and passenger used nothing but the brake shoes, which were cast iron at the time, to slow and stop trains. In the modern era with steam specials/excursions the use of a diesel helper in dynamic braking on long down grades, is highly beneficial, plus saves the disc brake pads on the passenger cars.  With that diesel "helper" MU'ed with the steam locomotive, it also can be used in power to stretch water & fuel usage on the steam locomotive. Maybe the steam locomotive is very capable of "pulling the train up the grade all by herself", but at reduced speed, to what point? Why beat the crap out of the poor steam locomotive for absolutely NO REASON, when just a bit of "help" from the diesel will maintain a higher speed and conserve fuel & water on the steam locomotive.

AmeenTrainGuy posted:

Hot Water posted:

AmeenTrainGuy posted:

Could you elaborate more on "... and NOT just for dynamic brake."? What I don't get is how did the bigboy's stop long trains without dynamic braking but cannot stop 5 - 10 passenger cars? 

You are losing sight of the fact that more than 70 than 70 years ago, all they had were train air brakes. Thus, all trains, both freight and passenger used nothing but the brake shoes, which were cast iron at the time, to slow and stop trains. In the modern era with steam specials/excursions the use of a diesel helper in dynamic braking on long down grades, is highly beneficial, plus saves the disc brake pads on the passenger cars.  With that diesel "helper" MU'ed with the steam locomotive, it also can be used in power to stretch water & fuel usage on the steam locomotive. Maybe the steam locomotive is very capable of "pulling the train up the grade all by herself", but at reduced speed, to what point? Why beat the crap out of the poor steam locomotive for absolutely NO REASON, when just a bit of "help" from the diesel will maintain a higher speed and conserve fuel & water on the steam locomotive.

Thank you for the explanation.

So to summarize it seems like the actual steam engine is capable of doing all the work, but UP would rather preserve the life of the engine, get dynamic breaking, and reduce fuel usage by using a modern diesel locomotive to do some of the work.

Depending on the territory that will be operated over, essentially, YES. If there are no seriously long "mountain grades", the the steam locomotive should be able to handle most of the passenger train assignments unassisted. Such was done previous to 2010 with either 844 or 3985, when traveling east or south to such locations as, Chicago, Kansas City, St Louis, Houston, etc..

Hot Water posted:

Dominic Mazoch posted:

FORMER OGR CEO - RETIRED posted:

I think some of you are under the impression that the locomotive’s brakes are used to slow and stop a train. In the case of a diesel with dynamic brakes, this is true. However, on a steam locomotive, the locomotive’s brakes are NEVER used when braking a train. When a steam locomotive is powering the train, the brakes on the cars are used to slow and stop a train.

The locomotive brake (the Independent Brake) on a steam locomotive is not used when moving because of the heat generated between the brake shoes and the tires. If the tires are heated too much, they could expand enough to get loose and come off. That’s obviously a bad situation!

Adding a second steam locomotive to a train adds nothing in terms of available braking power.

I think there was a situation with the UP 844 near San Marcos TX in 2012 where improper braking with the locomotive did cause wheel and tire damage.

The alternate Engineer on the steam crew was operating 844, and simply forgot that he had the diesel "helper" loading in about throttle 7, when he tried to slow down and stop for the scheduled service stop. After finally applying the air brakes in emergency, the current manager, who was on the left side of the cab training a Fireman, ran over and moved the power reverse lever into reverse and then cracked the throttle open, thus locking up the drivers on 844, while the diesel "helper" continued to push then forward. When the Diesel MU Control box was subsequently throttled down to idle, the consist "slid to a stop". There were a number of witness, both onboard and on the ground.

Lack of Situational Awareness?

A letter from Ed Dickens • Feb. 4th, 2019

Hello Friends,

Thank you for the patience and understanding as we work through the many very important details involving the release of the schedule. As we plan the operations for this monumental year, we continue to evaluate all network impacts, such as track, bridge, yard and other crucial maintenance projects, to ensure we do not have any conflicts we can’t easily manage with a 605-ton Big Boy.

With this massive network, there is always work occurring somewhere on the system. In many cases there are large system gangs roving about, doing work like replacing ties, rail, undercutting, crossing panels, bridge approach work, ballast... maintaining a rail network for this size is a monumental task. You name a type of maintenance, it is happening at any given time on the Union Pacific.

Source: Union Pacific Steam Club

Gary: Rail-fan

Hot Water posted:

AGHRMatt posted:

The diesels aren't necessarily for assistance. Out here, they're very handy for dynamic braking going through the Cajon pass. Also, when 3751 makes a run, the diesels are handy for HEP for the passenger cars.

Which diesels? Non of the BNSF diesel are equipped for HEP. Amtrak diesel do also supply HEP.

UP handles that aspect with a generator car.

Correct, but since 2011 the steam crew have been using more and more diesel "help", and NOT just for dynamic brake.

 

They use Amtrak or Metrolink (So. Cal. Local runs). 3751 "sleeps" at the old Santa Fe roundhouse site and is off-line right now (boiler inspection, I believe). The tender is detached right now.

This just in - the 4014 has passed her hydro test today! Next steps will be continued reassembly and STEAM TESTING! It won't be long now...

AmeenTrainGuy posted:

Are there any major modifications made to #4014?

Besides the oil conversion, I don't think so.

TrainMan1225 posted:

This just in - the 4014 has passed her hydro test today! Next steps will be continued reassembly and STEAM TESTING! It won't be long now...

Are you sure that 4014 actually passed its FRA hydro test? This may just be the preliminary test, prior to inviting the FRA inspector/inspectors in to witness, and APPROVE, the final hydro test, i.e. the one that counts.

Hot Water posted:

Are you sure that 4014 actually passed its FRA hydro test? This may just be the preliminary test, prior to inviting the FRA inspector/inspectors in to witness, and APPROVE, the final hydro test, i.e. the one that counts.

The Steam Club email just said that it had passed the hydro test, and that the next steps were to reassemble and steam test the engine...so maybe it's the final hydro. But I'm not a part of their team, I'm just a foamer from Ohio.

TrainMan1225 posted:

Hot Water posted:

Are you sure that 4014 actually passed its FRA hydro test? This may just be the preliminary test, prior to inviting the FRA inspector/inspectors in to witness, and APPROVE, the final hydro test, i.e. the one that counts.

The Steam Club email just said that it had passed the hydro test, and that the next steps were to reassemble and steam test the engine...so maybe it's the final hydro. But I'm not a part of their team, I'm just a foamer from Ohio.

OK, right, more confusing "information" from the "Steam Club". Most experienced steam operations conduct a "pre-hydro test" so as not to embarrass themselves in front of the FRA Inspector/Inspectors. Then, after all the little "issues" are corrected, the FRA invitation goes out, and when the FRA responds with a mutually acceptable date, the final hydro is conducted and subsequently approved by the FRA folks.  

Hot Water posted:

Casey Jones2 posted:

What I've been wondering lately is why we never see any of the Heritage Diesels go out on the road??

If you are referring to the various Heritage painted diesels, the UP has, they are always "out on the road" all over the system.

If you are referring to the three executive E Units (A-B-A) and the DDA40X, those units are not conducive to hauling freight on a daily basis, plus there aren't that many folks remaining on the UP, in the shops, that know how to troubleshoot & work on them, let alone replacement specialized parts/components.

Gee, that sounds a lot like the excuse some railroads used for eliminating steam way back when!

The cab is on and moved into the yard. Short photo essay. 🚂

Source: Union Pacific Steam Club • Cheyenne, Wyoming

Gary: Rail-fan 

Wow...she’s not even completely finished yet and she already looks stunning. I can only imagine how beautiful she’ll be running.