Will N&W 1218 be restored?

Well, I think Rich has said it very clearly. It all sits on the bottom line. IIRC Hot Water had commented just about the same response when the discussion was about the UP and some other steam engines in the US. It runs for no real value to the railroad because it is a loss in revenue compared to diesels, that has almost always been the case.

We always seem to talk about each railroad like they are the same thing, which can apply only to certain aspects of them, but not all. Parts have been taken from other engines, no one makes parts, certain shops/companies can make replacements but they are expensive, etc., etc. Whatever the problems are, there are not many solutions. I know the folks at Strasburg have said that they do do work for some folks, but it is not like they manufacture parts for Big Boys, Class A's, Hudson's or any other old steam locomotive(someone might tell me I'm wrong on some of that).

What can we do but sit and wait. See what comes and what our great locomotive experts like Hot Water, Rich and others who know what is what.

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

We always seem to talk about each railroad like they are the same thing, which can apply only to certain aspects of them, but not all. Parts have been taken from other engines, no one makes parts, certain shops/companies can make replacements but they are expensive, etc., etc. Whatever the problems are, there are not many solutions. I know the folks at Strasburg have said that they do do work for some folks, but it is not like they manufacture parts for Big Boys, Class A's, Hudson's or any other old steam locomotive(someone might tell me I'm wrong on some of that).

By and large, the outside is just window dressing.  When you take them apart, it's all basically the same thing.  There really aren't many "special" parts for a specific locomotive any more for the later engines compared to the earlier engines.  It's still small quantity custom orders for renewable parts.  The tolerances will change from engine to engine regardless of when it was built or its size.  In the big picture, firebox work is firebox work.  Boiler work is boiler work.  Running gear work is running gear work.  Appliances are basically the same--air pumps and injectors are basically air pumps and injectors.

There is a little bit of a difference in construction techniques and a few modern things when you are going from basically World War 1 era designs to 1940s era designs--welded boilers vs riveted boilers, superheaters, differing types of valve gear, dealing with higher boiler pressure.

There's just more work on a bigger locomotive, but if you can do machine work, you can restore a bigger engine just the same as a smaller one.  Just be prepared to write a bigger check.

@kgdjpubs posted:

By and large, the outside is just window dressing.  When you take them apart, it's all basically the same thing.  There really aren't many "special" parts for a specific locomotive any more for the later engines compared to the earlier engines.  It's still small quantity custom orders for renewable parts.  The tolerances will change from engine to engine regardless of when it was built or its size.  In the big picture, firebox work is firebox work.  Boiler work is boiler work.  Running gear work is running gear work.  Appliances are basically the same--air pumps and injectors are basically air pumps and injectors.

There is a little bit of a difference in construction techniques and a few modern things when you are going from basically World War 1 era designs to 1940s era designs--welded boilers vs riveted boilers, superheaters, differing types of valve gear, dealing with higher boiler pressure.

There's just more work on a bigger locomotive, but if you can do machine work, you can restore a bigger engine just the same as a smaller one.  Just be prepared to write a bigger check.

I understand the machining bits, but I would say the hard part is finding someone to do what is needed. Not many places where they would be willing or able to make certain parts. I know price will always be one of the big obstacles.

Also another problem is having someone who "knows" what they are doing. Experienced people are dwindling, and just because a blueprint can be read doesn't mean that the person doing the work with it will know something that the experienced folks do. I remember watching the restoration of Sierra;#3, and there was some ups and downs and guessing on some of the things. Granted I wouldn't be able to tell you what or if things could have been better or worse. I'll leave that to the experts.

I think folks just have to accept the fact that sometimes locomotives put out to pasture will not return to service.  Every year restoration and operation gets more expensive.

Rusty

@Rusty Traque posted:

I think folks just have to accept the fact that sometimes locomotives put out to pasture will not return to service.  Every year restoration and operation gets more expensive.

Rusty

Yup, the folks at Strasburg had an engine that they were under contract for by the owner. They had said that they work until the money runs out, notify the owner, he pays, they work, rinse and repeat. I don't remember how long they said it has been there, but it is a relatively smaller engine almost like a small switcher size. The owner has his own little private railroad, so that means he has some kind of money, but not enough to throw at his engine without regard.

Send it to the UK! They seem to be able to fix any steam loco, even build a new one from scratch!!!

@Big Jim posted:

Send it to the UK! They seem to be able to fix any steam loco, even build a new one from scratch!!!

You gonna pay the freight?

Rusty

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

Rusty

One reason for the success of steam excursions in the UK is the government owns the ROW. Everyone that runs a train, commuter, intercity and etc pays a fee. Steam can run provided it meets the needed safety requirements.

Yeah, the UK is an entirely different animal when it comes to rail. It is like comparing Ty Cobb to Derek Jeter. Whatever the future holds for steam in the US, it is still probably going to be what it has become, a small entity in a much larger world. I don't know what the longest runs of steam are, but given all the regulations, company's willingness, and whatever else factors in, steam is getting smaller and smaller. Don't know what else there is to be said.

Things may change in the UK as their Department For Environment, Food and Rural Affairs want to move away from using any coal use in country.  That means UK steam locomotives also.

Rusty

@Rusty Traque posted:

Things may change in the UK as their Department For Environment, Food and Rural Affairs want to move away from using any coal use in country.  That means UK steam locomotives also.

Rusty

I understand that all the coal mines in the UK have been closed, and the "historic rail operators", i.e. those with steam locomotives, now have to import their coal fuel.

@Hot Water posted:

I understand that all the coal mines in the UK have been closed, and the "historic rail operators", i.e. those with steam locomotives, now have to import their coal fuel.

Or convert to oil...

We seem to have strayed just a bit, so I think we should get back on 1218.

So, when was the last time 1218 ran under its own power?

Does all the time it has been sitting affect the inside of the boiler, pipes, tubes or anything else relating to the boiler?

Some said parts have been pilfered, sold off and what not, and we've touched on machining new parts/manufacturing new parts, cost  and other such things.

We've also debated on where would 1218 be set to run the rails should it be restored(at least I think someone said something). Question for that part, is there anywhere besides mainlines(not saying it would run there) where it would be too restrictive because of something like rails wouldn't be able to handle it?

I don't think I can ask anything else that I can think of at this time. Any of you have anything else to add?

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

We seem to have strayed just a bit, so I think we should get back on 1218.

So, when was the last time 1218 ran under its own power?

You would probably have to Google search that.

Does all the time it has been sitting affect the inside of the boiler, pipes, tubes or anything else relating to the boiler?

Not really, as there is nothing inside her boiler now, i.e. no flues, tubes, nor superheater units. In fact, There may not even be a front flue sheet or a rear flue sheet inlace.

Some said parts have been pilfered, sold off and what not, and we've touched on machining new parts/manufacturing new parts, cost  and other such things.

She just needs expensive boiler work.

We've also debated on where would 1218 be set to run the rails should it be restored(at least I think someone said something). Question for that part, is there anywhere besides mainlines(not saying it would run there) where it would be too restrictive because of something like rails wouldn't be able to handle it?

No. But remember that there is always J Class #611 available, if the NS ever decided to "allow" steam trips again. Thus, why waste money on 1218?

I don't think I can ask anything else that I can think of at this time. Any of you have anything else to add?

I can tell you last june, at Strasburg, we were riding behind the N&W 611. (Beautiful locomotive, by the way) and I ask the engineer about getting the 1218 going, All he said was, are you gonna write the check??  I think that it hasn't ran since the late 1980's. maybe 1992 at the latest,

I am a little concerned about the Pere Marquette 1223 in Gran Haven Mi. I live about 150 miles from it. The future for it doesn't sound to good, from what I have been reading.

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

We seem to have strayed just a bit, so I think we should get back on 1218.

So, when was the last time 1218 ran under its own power?

We've also debated on where would 1218 be set to run the rails should it be restored(at least I think someone said something). Question for that part, is there anywhere besides mainlines(not saying it would run there) where it would be too restrictive because of something like rails wouldn't be able to handle it?

Last operated November 1991.  Two weekends of excursions after the big 25th Anniversary event in Chattanooga.

There are some places where it could not run, even on mainline trackage.  For example, it wasn't allowed on the NS line between Asheville, NC and Bulls Gap/Morristown, TN even though the 765 and even the T&P 610 operated on that line.  611 couldn't run on that line either.  Like any engine, you'd have to do a clearance check before saying definitively whether it could run somewhere.  The clearance points on steam engines aren't necessarily where you think they would be.

@Hot Water posted:

Thanks again Hot Water. I've been a passenger on 611 twice and even got a cab tour the last time out. That was very informative, I recorded the whole rundown on what the person said about day to day operations and such. Yeah, with 611 running about, 1218 is a big cost that they can just say no way to. Why fix when something that they deem better as probably better crowd draw. Ah, but what the heck do I know?

@kgdjpubs posted:

Last operated November 1991.  Two weekends of excursions after the big 25th Anniversary event in Chattanooga.

There are some places where it could not run, even on mainline trackage.  For example, it wasn't allowed on the NS line between Asheville, NC and Bulls Gap/Morristown, TN even though the 765 and even the T&P 610 operated on that line.  611 couldn't run on that line either.  Like any engine, you'd have to do a clearance check before saying definitively whether it could run somewhere.  The clearance points on steam engines aren't necessarily where you think they would be.

Thanks for when it last ran. Are those spots you say where it didn't run the mainline for NS? If it is, both Rich and Hot Water have answered those questions time and time again as 611 doesn't have the necessary safety features that 765 has(or paired with the diesel, forget exactly what Rich said).

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

Thanks for when it last ran. Are those spots you say where it didn't run the mainline for NS? If it is, both Rich and Hot Water have answered those questions time and time again as 611 doesn't have the necessary safety features that 765 has(or paired with the diesel, forget exactly what Rich said).

I'm saying that certain NS mainlines were restricted for certain engines both during the time of the original program and today.  There were places that you could run 1218 but not 611.  There were places where neither 611 nor 1218 could run, but 765 could.  There were places that 4501 could run, but 765 could not.  There were places where 630 or 722 could run, but 4501 could not.  You had to check everything, and it was dependent on the engine itself.

It had nothing to do with safety features, or diesels, or anything else.  It had everything to do with clearances, axle loadings, curvature and such.  Some routes, like Manassas to Front Royal, originally couldn't accommodate either engine.  Later, the track was upgraded and both engines ran there.  Originally, the 1218 could run Salisbury to Asheville, but the 611 could not.  After 1989, that line received some upgrades and 611 could run to Asheville.  Neither 611 nor 1218 were allowed to run on the N&W Punkin Vine from Winston-Salem to Roanoke, even though there is at least one documented instance of a J running on that line in regular service.

The short version is that you can't presume any engine can run on a particular route until you do a check of all clearances on all tracks that you will be using.  I remember an article years ago that Rich wrote where there was ornamental lighting installed on a platform in Pittsburgh that 765's cab roof would not clear, so they had to go past the platform on an adjacent track and then back in.  The clearance choke points aren't necessarily where you think they would be....so you have to check everything.

Note: on some portions of the PRR, cab signals were required to lead on that particular line.  Thus being part of the reason 611 was towed to/from Strasburg.  765 got cab signals installed, so it was able to run the PRR leading during the recent steam program.  611 did not.  Both engines could be operated on the line though.

@kgdjpubs posted:

I'm saying that certain NS mainlines were restricted for certain engines both during the time of the original program and today.  There were places that you could run 1218 but not 611.  There were places where neither 611 nor 1218 could run, but 765 could.  There were places that 4501 could run, but 765 could not.  There were places where 630 or 722 could run, but 4501 could not.  You had to check everything, and it was dependent on the engine itself.

It had nothing to do with safety features, or diesels, or anything else.  It had everything to do with clearances, axle loadings, curvature and such.  Some routes, like Manassas to Front Royal, originally couldn't accommodate either engine.  Later, the track was upgraded and both engines ran there.  Originally, the 1218 could run Salisbury to Asheville, but the 611 could not.  After 1989, that line received some upgrades and 611 could run to Asheville.  Neither 611 nor 1218 were allowed to run on the N&W Punkin Vine from Winston-Salem to Roanoke, even though there is at least one documented instance of a J running on that line in regular service.

The short version is that you can't presume any engine can run on a particular route until you do a check of all clearances on all tracks that you will be using.  I remember an article years ago that Rich wrote where there was ornamental lighting installed on a platform in Pittsburgh that 765's cab roof would not clear, so they had to go past the platform on an adjacent track and then back in.  The clearance choke points aren't necessarily where you think they would be....so you have to check everything.

Note: on some portions of the PRR, cab signals were required to lead on that particular line.  Thus being part of the reason 611 was towed to/from Strasburg.  765 got cab signals installed, so it was able to run the PRR leading during the recent steam program.  611 did not.  Both engines could be operated on the line though.

Thank you for the clarification. I know clearance has been an issue for 611 in certain spots, Hot Water I think explained that when 611 came to Strasburg the first time. I also know Rich has indicated track grades for a few areas that are tolerable but only for certain speeds, but I don't believe that was mainlines. I do know though that Rich had said that certain engines without the safety features were not allowed to run under their own power on the NS mainline(611 being the particular engine in question).

Oh, other reason, insurance.

People are too sue happy today and the big railroads have lawyers whose job is to minimize risk and liability for the corporation. I’m surprised Wick was able to pull off 21st Century Steam. Now, it’s a liability again to NS. But Wick didn’t consider it a liability but goodwill. I think some bad apples ruined the program because they risked their lives for a picture. But steam excursions are no fun without open windows anyway. The places where 765 and 611 run now allow open windows.