Second Heavy-Service Mechanical Locomotive

[Ken Fleming]

The 2012 Long Range Plan mentions a second Heavy-Service Mechanical Locomotive (Page 19) to go along with #52.  About what size will we be looking for?  Would we consider a 36" or 30" that could be re-gauged?  Are we doing some serious looking for one?  Maybe the members could do some looking and/or put out some feelers?  What price range?  Of course a donation would be best.  I am sure other members may know of locomotives scattered through out the boondocks.

This one is 12 miles from me:  http://www.readingrailroad.org/roster/roster_loco_319.html

[James Patten]

Ken, the one that's 12 miles from you looks identical to #52.  That size, or a little bit larger, is what we are looking for.  We've put out some feelers for one.

Price?  Free is best.  I think #52 was around $5K.  That would be a good price too.  Probably anything we want will need to wait until next year's fund drive.

[John McNamara]

Ken,

That's a fascinating link! On page 3 of the May/June 1997 WW&F Newsletter there's a picture of our #52 arriving at Sheepscot on April 10, 1997. It bears the numbers 317 and M02801. From the picture in the link and the specifications, it appears that the RCT&HS/Carpenter Steel 319 and the WW&F/Carpenter Steel 317 are twin brothers!

A second Heavy-Service Mechanical Locomotive would be desirable because we depend so much upon #52 that having it out of service for maintenance or repair would be very problematic. That said, having a second Heavy-Service Mechanical Locomotive is definitely in the "nice to have" category rather than an urgent requirement. The Long Range Plan therefore recommends such acquisition if "a suitable locomotive become(s) available for a very attractive price." I have a vague recollection that #52 cost $8500. I don't know if that included the shipping. No discussion occurred concerning what price "attractive" was, but I assume $8500 would be the upper limit.

I have some concern that the link information was last updated almost ten years ago, so I would be curious whether the locomotive was indeed still there. Having a locomotive identical to the one we have would be excellent from a training and servicing standpoint, but trucking it from Louisiana would be expensive, limiting the amount of an acceptable price.

I don't know whether Board action would be required to authorize an inquiry. Maybe Board members on the Forum could comment.

-John

[Wayne Laepple]

John --

Unless I'm badly mistaken, the locomotive that Ken sent the photo of is in Pennsylvania. It's an orphan among a huge collection of standard gauge equipment. There is/was a similar locomotive at that closed down attraction at Scarborough, but I don't know what the latest is on that one.

Cheers -- Wayne

[Ed Lecuyer]

It appears that the locomotive is in PA, not LA. However, it is owned by a museum and (on the forum) we have a "thou shalt not covet" rule. Thus, negotiations (if any) should be handled behind closed doors.

Also, since the object in question served at a Reading, PA steel mill, and their museum site is in a former steel mill - I'm guessing that it fits the mission statement of the RCT&HS. However, it may not - so a BOD-level inquiry may be appropriate.

[John McNamara]

I don't know how I confused PA with LA, but yes, PA.

[Ira Schreiber]

There is also the 24" unit at Biddeford along U.S. 1. I saw it several  several months ago.

[Mike Fox]

That one in Biddeford is a 15 ton, operationally similar to our #52. There are others out there just sitting around. A good deal could be had for one if we are willing to put the effort into fixing it.

[Robert Hale]

I wonder if these would be able to be re-gauged to 24".

http://www.multipowerinternational.com/narrowsale.html

Yes, I know they are Chinese built but a steam loco this size would be interesting to see running on the WW&F.

[James Patten]

There's a group of people in Wales who I think took one of these and have regauged it and rebuilt it to run on the Ffestiniog.  So yes, it can be done.

[Dylan Lambert]

There's a group of people in Wales who I think took one of these and have regauged it and rebuilt it to run on the Ffestiniog.  So yes, it can be done.

Last I checked the C2 project is still a work in progress. To aid the reguaging, the whole frame had to be cut and parts removed to make it gauge compatable for when the wheels are completed. The boiler was also removed, but I don't know if it has been worked on as of yet. Link to the website below;
http://c2project.org/index.php?page=album&album=feb_2012

[John McNamara]

Before we go too far afield in this discussion, let's note the word "mechanical," i.e. not steam.

[Wayne Laepple]

It seems to me that we should aggressively seek a second heavy-service mechanical locomotive. No. 52 will inevitably require an overhaul of some sort at some point down the line. Not only does it serve as prime mover when steam power isn't available, but more importantly, it is the protection locomotive if the steam locomotive should fail for some reason.

In addition, when construction begins on the main line north of Top of the Mountain, Brookville No. 51 may not be adequate to safely handle construction trains on the steep grade. A second larger diesel would cover all of those contingencies.

I suspect if such a locomotive became available, people would be willing to subsidize the purchase so as not to impact the budget.

[John Kokas]

It would seem to make sense to find a unit either identical to or as close to #52 as possible to have commonality of parts.  Ideally, one would want to find (2) "junkers" and use one as a parts source.  I know; heresy to some in the preservation world, but practical long term for the other units.

[Robert Hale]

The engine is no real issue since it is a Detroit 4-71, the drive train on the other hand might be an issue to get parts for so a spare parts supply would be a good thing to have.