It is currently Sun Feb 28, 2021 2:29 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:42 pm 

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 1:40 am
Posts: 481
PC, Thanks for the information. I've always been interested in re-power projects and engines in general.

Too bad the simple answer wasn't, Get to end of track and attach a switcher and pull the FY backwards.

Seems something akin to what the steam guys did in the 80's could be setup in the obs car. A small diesel control box using standard toggle switches and a rotary switch for speed control. NKP765 had such a box built by EMD. Other outfits made their own control boxes based on the EMD design and the 27 pin cabling between steam engine and diesels. I bet a small control box could be put together in no time with EMD drawings at hand. The FY control system might need modifications to make it work though.

Robert


Last edited by BigBoy 4023 on Tue Jun 11, 2019 12:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 10:11 am 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 9:54 am
Posts: 936
Location: NJ
Bigboy 4023- Exactly what I suggested earlier. I have in my files a very compact design for such a box, that I developed for when or if my museum group decides to put one of their steam locomotives in service. The largest item would be the automatic brake valve, which I can't miniaturize and still keep the FRA happy.

As others have suggested, the tail car is a blank slate, and a small desk, with the controls under the lid, could be worked into the restoration. Whether the throttle is electric, air, hydraulic or mechanical will have to be determined, though. Other than a mechanical linkage, all are fairly straightforward to do, though.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:58 am 

Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm
Posts: 1372
Here is the story of what happened with the Flying Yankee project from one of the original participants, posted on the Flying Yankee closed facebook group yesterday (02/22/2021), re-posted to RyPN with explicit permission from the author, Scott Whitney. It is very thorough and answers a lot of questions. The original was nine (Word) pages long, any errors in formatting are likely due to my pasting it here. https://www.facebook.com/groups/195388914553494

"The Wreck of the Flying Yankee Project
(and hopefully how to repair the damage)

Introduction:

When the Edaville Railroad closed its doors in southeastern Massachusetts, it inadvertently placed into motion a series of events that would have a large impact on the promotion of railroad history in New England. Edaville was home to a huge collection of two-foot gauge equipment, most of which hailed from different railroads in the State of Maine. However, the collection also held a couple of standard gauge pieces. One of these was former Boston & Maine locomotive 1455 but more notably former B&M #6000, commonly referred to as “The Flying Yankee” and is the focus of this article.

The Flying Yankee (hereafter called just 6000) is a three-car, articulated, self contained trainset built by the Budd Company in 1935. It’s significant purpose was to afford a lightweight and economical transportation piece with solid construction of stainless steel and appointed in modestly high-end interior design for the comfort of passengers. The Budd Company (hereafter called Budd) was a relative newcomer to railroad car construction and was pioneering the use of stainless steel. Budd partnered with both Electro Motive Corporation (now a part of General Motors) for the propulsion engine and with General Electric Company for all the electrical and generation needs. Air brake equipment was provided by either Westinghouse or New York Air Brake, however, the two are completely interchangeable so whichever is irrelevant. Heating for the train was supplied by an on-board flash boiler producing steam that was distributed to baseboard elements. Air conditioning was of the mechanical compressed Freon type, itself rather new to the railroad industry.

The 6000 had a long career on the B&M, racking up over one million miles. However, due to its diminutive size, after its initial few years as a premier train, it was relegated to services that were not in need of high capacity. When the B&M retired the 6000 in the latter 1950’s it was donated to Edaville for display but there was no place to operate the standard gauge train at Edaville due to its two-foot gauge track.

Upon the closure of Edaville, much of the equipment there was disbursed. Two foot gauge equipment was moved to Portland, Maine in a rather gala procession using the antique hauling equipment provided by veteran equipment mover James Robinson of Dublin. NH. The 6000, however, was given to the State of New Hampshire, though I highly doubt that the State was very enthused about accepting responsibility for the trainset. It too was transported by Mr. Robinson to a location in Glenn, NH to await plans for its future.

Formation of the Flying Yankee Restoration Group and the first move:

A while after the train’s arrival at Glenn, the Flying Yankee Restoration Group (FYRG) was formed to attempt to have the 6000 restored for posterity. Of the individuals involved, at least one was a prominent local businessman (in the Glenn area) and another was a retired railroad engineer. Other members of the group I do not have histories on, however, nobody in the group had any practical experience in the rehabilitation or restoration of railroad equipment. Ultimately this would be of serious detriment to the project.

The initial hurdle was to put out invitations to any parties interested in undertaking the 6000’s overhaul and refit. I am not sure if it ever did extend beyond two, but those that I know of for certain were the Claremont Concord Railroad (CCRR) and also the Green Mountain Railroad (GMRC). Note that prior to retirement at the end of August, 2018 I had spent 37 years working at the Green Mountain with more than half that time devoted to overseeing the upkeep and refurbishment of the GMRC passenger fleet. That fleet consisted of 18 pieces of equipment with build dates ranging from 1891 to 1937. Therefore, my experience with old railcars speaks for itself.

The FYRG ultimately chose the CCRR to perform the refurbishment of the 6000. This came as quite a relief to me as I already had a full plate with the GMRC equipment. Another advantage was that one former work colleague (hereafter known as Mr. A) as well as another good friend (hereafter known as Mr. E) also were employed at CCRR thus allowing me to offer strategy input as to how some of the project should proceed (free of charge).

The initial hurdle was a bit of a problem to the CCRR. How could they get the 6000 from Glenn to the CCRR’s shop at Claremont Junction? James Robinson, during the ensuing time the train sat at Glenn, had retired from moving equipment and was no longer available. Funding for the 6000 project was just in its infancy so there was no cash available to hire riggers to move the train. Much head scratching thus went on as to how they could get the funds to afford the move. Being a very practical person, I already had the answer before I was even asked for ideas. I simply asked Mr. A: “The 6000 is owned by the State, right?” “Yes, but they won’t pay to move it,” he said. I simply turned to him and said, “Since the State owns it, just have them get one of the National Guard units to move it as an exercise.” At that his eyes got wide and the rest of the move was history in the making. No money spent and the Guard got some good training at rigging!

Inspection, evaluation and trouble on the horizon:

With the 6000 trainset now at Claremont Jct., work began in earnest on evaluation of the equipment and how to proceed with the restoration. Mr. A would primarily be involved with all things mechanical while Mr. E would concentrate on the interior and other body appointments as well as coordinating and controlling materials and contract work procurement. Both these men would perform exemplary work in their fields.

Work then began on taking the 6000 apart piece by piece to begin restoration. Funding was now coming in as the word of the project spread. Things were looking pretty good to most eyes. However, the FYRG leaders had decided to take a different direction than a true restoration. They wanted to be able to bring the 6000 on tour around the whole Northeast and possibly beyond. Their grand idea would involve running the train over Amtrak owned routes. Unknown to the outside world, this was a game changer that the group could ill afford. Let me digress with some council on general equipment restoration:

There are three basic types of equipment restoration---

1. Actual restoration to as-built condition;
2. Restoration to operate in a tourist or historical/educational capacity;
3. Ground up rebuild to modern specifications.

Restoration to as-built condition would not necessarily be as expensive. It is predicated on the fact that one does not expect the trainset to be moving on its own and may indeed just be placed in a housed static display location. The body and interior work would receive enough of an overhaul to appear like when the train was new and be available for mostly viewing purposes only. Only a light amount of electrical work would be required to allow for lighting the interior. If moving of the trainset is desired to occur beyond placing it to its display point, then wheel and brake work would have to be done. The rest of the mechanical equipment would receive a cosmetic overhaul in the form of cleaning and repair of external surfaces along with paint but would remain non-functional.

Restoration to operate in a tourist or historical form would require significantly more work and expense. All items from the above as cosmetic would have to be accomplished. All mechanical/electrical equipment would require a major overhaul and refurbishment. At this time one would need to decide on some amount of upgrades to the equipment that will indeed deviate from as-built but would be for the betterment of the operation of the equipment and simply cannot be avoided.

Rebuild or reconstruction of equipment delves into the field beyond tourist or historical operation. This occurs when significant portions of the equipment undergo a reconstruction so intense and so altering to the original that it must now conform to much more stringent Federal regulation with regard to physical construction of the equipment and those measures that must be imposed as to what structural improvements need to be made to conform to current Federal specifications on structural integrity and crash worthiness. It becomes a highly expensive proposition from any perspective. That said, making it Amtrak acceptable goes beyond this level into a category all its own.

Words cannot express how shocked I was that the FYRG has turned in the direction of running the 6000 on Amtrak rails. While impressive, it would soon turn into financial disaster for the group. Despite my warnings, they proceeded.

Comparison time:

This is the point at which I would like to compare notes on how the FYRG leaders and I differed on opinion as to what the group would be required to do for Amtrak acceptance versus what I believed would be a far more realistic goal of achieving operational capability. This includes everything from mechanical function through the need for support facilities for the 6000.

Interior:
Cosmetically, the 6000 would require no changes to speak of. External repairs to dents and dings as possible would still need to be done, as well as the interior appointments. The staff at CCRR was doing exemplary work in this direction and required no input from outside. Mechanical and electrical components, on the other hand, would require far different approaches as to what would be affordable and what was beyond reason.

Electrical system:
Starting with the basic electrical system, there is a basic disagreement that I came to realize early on. The plan was to make the 6000 have a 480V three-phase system thus making it similar to Amtrak standards. I say “similar” because, being a dedicated trainset, it would never operate with any Amtrak equipment per se. The only occasion to do so would be if the 6000 suffered a breakdown on Amtrak rails. If such were to happen, it is likely that it would be the one and only time as the 6000 would then be banned from Amtrak as unreliable. I was totally against the use of 480V three-phase because the support facilities for this are extraordinarily expensive. The FYRG was imagining bringing the 6000 to many locations around the NE area and hoping to just ‘plug in’ wherever they went. I can say right now that 480V facilities are few and far between and then mostly only exist in locations where the public would not be allowed to go. A single location can cost tens of thousands of dollars to install and the group envisioned several that would only be used on rare occasions.

The basic electrical system of the 6000 was originally either 32VDC or 72VDC. I don’t recall which today but it is of small importance as that system would still be required to operate control systems on-board the power car. This DC system also provided power to the lighting, the kitchen grill and to the air conditioning. However, for the purposes of equipment simplification and reduced overall expense, setting aside the original configuration of DC power in favor of commonly available would be much preferred in today’s world. For the ease of providing standby power at outlying locations, it is far simpler and less expensive to provide a simple single-phase 120/220VAC service point or a 208VAC three-phase (which also would provide 120/220VAC) than that of 480VAC three-phase. In actuality, only the air conditioning motors would utilize the 480VAC and it is just as easy to equip the AC system with 220VAC or 208VAC three-phase, though they are slightly less efficient to operate. My personal choice is somewhat in the air between 120/220VAC and 208VAC three-phase. The key issue is that 120/220VAC is very common and easy to obtain whereas three-phase power is not. The 480V three-phase is out of the question because you have to add the additional expense and engineering of a transformer bank to reduce the power to usable voltage. I had to perform just such a task prior to retirement on a new car we received at GMRC. Lastly, to power the trainset on the go, a modest sized Stadco or equivalent generator would have easily fit inside the power car or beneath it for supplying the very modest power demands of the train. Said demands are almost laughably small, making the use of 480V even more ridiculous.

Heating:
As mentioned before, the train heating was originally supplied by a flash boiler making steam to heat the cars. In today’s world this is far too inefficient as to be practical. Therefore, this is another item that would not remain original to the trainset. Sadly, in the early staged of the first coach overhaul, I learned that the FYRG had decided to install electric baseboard heating in the 6000. While electric heating is simpler to manage, it does have some disadvantages that one must weigh carefully against a suggested alternative. That alternative would be a forced hot water closed loop with a compact household style boiler replacing the large flash boiler. The advantages such a system would have over a high voltage baseboard heat are:

1) Faster heating of the cars;

2) Less costly to operate (inductive electric heat is more expensive per BTU) and would use the power car’s fuel tank as its supply;

3) Has the ability to use heat from the power car’s cooling system when it is operating (via a heat exchanger) so that the boiler can be shut down;

4) Has the ability to provide standby heat to the engine of the power car (again via the heat exchanger) when shut down in cold weather.

5) Most importantly… A boiler system can be plugged into any standard 15-20A power outlet to operate. As an example, GMRC coaches can plug in to operate up to THREE boilers with one cord.

The boiler system would be a closed loop and filled with RV quality anti-freeze solution, thus keeping it separate from the power car engine cooling system by virtue of the mentioned heat exchanger. Connections between cars would be via disconnectable, dripless fitting, flexible lines (as has been used on GMRC with good success). An expansion tank in the power car would complete the system.

Sadly, at least the car with the completed interior already has electric baseboard. Replacement of that with forced hot water piping is rather problematic but not impossible. Also, the electrical panels purchased for the cars themselves are designed for three-phase operation. However, they can be simply adapted if single phase is reverted to.

Underframe:
In actuality, the underside of the 6000 was not in need of much work. The equipment in place such as air conditioning and air brake was already something that needed overhaul. Yes, there would be some restoration work required on any materials made of common steel, especially where steel meets stainless steel and the resulting corrosion thereon. Things like truck bolsters, buffers and end plates between cars would need attention but none more extreme than I was used to working with. These items I consider common repairs.

At this time I would like to inject one of the most annoying, time consuming and labor intensive jobs that the Amtrak inspector deemed necessary for the 6000 to operate on Amtrak lines. This was the complete removal of the original Budd applied insulating coating that covered the entire bottom of the stainless steel sub flooring of the equipment. I considered this to be something that was absolutely not needed for the operation of the train set. The subfloor is corrugated stainless and had weathered the years remarkably well. However, Amtrak insisted and the CCRR crew spend countless hours in labor time trying to remove all of the coating. It resisted any sort of power wash and they had to resort to manually chipping it away in its entirety. Not only did it not reveal anything, now the train is devoid of this insulation that was sound deadening. The time lost on doing so rapidly depleted the available funds for man hours that were better devoted to meaningful work.

Trucks and wheels:
Fortunately, the trucks used under the 6000 are of a double drop equalizer design common to early Budd applications. One was dedicated to having traction motors for propulsion while the remaining trio was simply load bearing. No two tucks used were of the exact same design due to the variations in load bearing. Aside from some minor rust areas the frames themselves were in relatively good condition as is with just normal repair of wear liner surfaces and bolster bowls for continued use on a local level. Here again, Amtrak required more and the trucks had to be shipped out for a complete overhaul that included complete paint removal, magnafluxing and inspection for tram (i.e. making sure the wheels and axles would sit flat and parallel). Here again, the cost of doing so was extraordinarily more than a general overhaul would have cost.

The wheels of the 6000 are a null subject. They had sat for so long that there was considerable surface rust, the roller bearings and their journal boxes had also sat unused for too long and though they may have run with just general maintenance, it was prudent to have the wheels and bearings replaced and the boxes fully serviced. This was accomplished by the very established firm of ORX that has a long history with passenger equipment.

The power truck motors are of a GE design and obsolete. However, GE is fully capable of overhauling such and the finished product is actually better than the original due to advances in materials. I believe the motors were thusly completed and are the same as I would have done.

Brake rigging under the 6000 was thoroughly rusted and in some cases immovable. While labor intensive, it would require freeing up of all stuck pins in their bushings and replacement of those too badly worn. Amtrak differed from my thoughts as they required replacement of ALL pins and bushings.

Air Brakes:
Let me lead off with that these comments are based on a time period before the advent of the new PTC system requirements. The original air brake system of the 6000 was a very simple one. Different from a regular locomotive, the 6000 has but one air brake valve that controlled the entire consist. As an older style it did not have what is referred to as a pressure maintaining feature.

Here is another point at which I would depart from tradition and install a 26C control valve with an SA independent valve and applicable modern valves on each car. This adds pressure maintaining and also the independent portion can act as a parking brake by just applying brakes only on the power truck.

Unfortunately, in the quest for Amtrak compatibility, the FYRG specified that the 6000 would have to be equipped with all forms of modern air brake equipment including cab signals (which it did have an old primitive variation of originally but B&M had long since ceased to use), penalty application hardware and systems monitoring and recording hardware and electronics that were in no way required for the operation of a historical trainset. This is in much the same manner as historical steam locomotives continue to operate today. In short, an extraordinary amount of the restoration funding was spent on this rather than overhauling cars.

Control Equipment:
Thankfully, the control equipment of the 6000 was overhauled in kind with the exception of integration of safety and monitoring items.

Engine and Auxiliaries:
Auxiliary equipment included both the main and auxiliary generators, both of which are General Electric equipment like the traction motors. As before, GE was completely able to overhaul both in a timely manner to like new condition.

The Flying Yankee is powered by a Winton model 201A two-cycle diesel engine. This is an early model employed by Electro Motive Corporation but has long passed being in production even for replacement parts. However, it is an integral part of the 6000’s history and cannot be ignored. A few examples still exist in the country but nobody is willing to part with same. As a result the Winton engine began a complete rebuild from the ground up to bring it back to operation. By the end of the time the 6000 was on CCRR property the Winton engine was nearly completed and the block was ready to install in the power car for reassembly.

Cooling:
The cooling system of the 6000 was very basic for the time period and was to be retained for use with the Winton engine. However, here again I believed that historical integrity needed to take a back seat to provide added engine longevity. On the plus side is that the change would be barely visible to anyone in the public. My suggestion was to employ a Mesabi brand radiator system. Personal experience has shown me that it is far superior and though initially expensive, they turn out to be far less expensive in the long run.


End of the line for CCRR:

Then the money ran out... Suddenly people were catching on as to how much was being spent on making the 6000 road worthy in the eyes of Amtrak. Donations dwindled and rent to the CCRR was not being paid. On the outside you would hear rumors of how the CCRR has mishandled things and absolutely NOTHING could be farther from true. They performed every task they were ORDERED to perform, regardless of how nonsensical it was.

After languishing for a while longer with no progress (CCRR wasn’t going to work on it for free!) the story started to circulate that the FYRG was going to pull the train set from Claremont under the guise of it having completed “Phase 1” of the restoration and now would be going to “Phase 2” in Lincoln, NH. Of course that was a pure fabrication in an attempt to cover financial woes, the only truth in it that is was indeed going to move to Lincoln. So far as I know, the CCRR was never compensated for storage fees for the trainset languishing on their property without being worked on.

Lincoln:
Once finally in Lincoln, there was a small amount of hoopla made over the 6000’s arrival but still no money was available for work. The fans had quite enough of what was going on. At this point that I have to explain that there was a change in direction of the FYRG’s concept for the fate of the 6000. Group leaders decided that the Winton engine (as well as the auxiliary and main generators) should be replaced by a modern power plant.

To say the least, the historical enthusiasts were incensed at the notion of replacing the Winton, myself included! The Winton was the historic backbone of the 6000 and to remove it and replace it with something modern was tantamount to raping the 6000. Also, the Winton engine was an integral part of the construction of the 6000 and to replace it would require structural re-engineering of the entire engine mounting bed. Thusly, the historical integrity would be further compromised. This is not to mention the extraordinary effort and money that would be wasted in the overhaul as far as the Winton had progressed along with the refurbishment of both the main and auxiliary generators. It was totally unacceptable!!

Last but not least, the FYRG’s initial members have largely passed on or otherwise left the group. New faces have begun to emerge from the dust in hopes of drawing attention to the train. Certainly the State of NH (who owns it) is not interested in contributing a dime toward any work on the train set. All we can do is wait and hope.

SJW"


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:18 am 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 11:26 am
Posts: 4297
Location: Maine
If the state of New Hampshire owns it and does not wish to contribute to further restoration work, perhaps a well organized group with the knowledge, talent, and will to undertake the job could purchase it. If you look at the historical promos for the trainset, it was a huge forward leap in Maine Central/B&M concept modernization. A complete change of management and dedication would be required along with an acceptable plan to bring the "Flying Yankee" back to operable status. People at trackside don't care if it's powered by a Winton engine or something else. The silver art-deco train is what they wish to see and ride.

Just another opinion.

_________________
"It's only impossible until it's done." -Nelson Mandela


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:31 am 

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 7:16 am
Posts: 1623
Scott provided an excellent summary of this project. I was asked to look at the train while it was at Edaville, and was shown it a couple times afterwards. I lived very far away at those times and I noticed that information from previous discussions was not being passed along through changes in the project management.

The equipment had been parked at Edaville with no stack protection, the 8-201A engine was in rough condition. They were given a lead to an 8-201A Winton engine that had been a warehouse spare for a retired locomotive and I don't know that they ever followed up on it.

The two GE traction motors were sent to an electrical repair shop in Dover New Hampshire, were rebuilt, and the paperwork was then lost. The repair shop put the motors up for sale on an internet auction. I saw the auction listing and called New Hampshire DOT to let the supervisor who handled the project know about it. The state recovered the motors, but one of the axle support bearing caps disappeared in the process, so one motor would have needed a new cap to be usable.

There are several sizes of wheels used on this train. I was told a sad story about replacement wheels having been ordered, but I cannot confirm the details so we will leave it alone. Maybe somebody else knows and can comment. I do know that the original wheels were re-profiled, and they were down to the point where no further cuts could be made.

The original brake system was quite unique, brake effort was proportioned for the different size wheels through cylinder size and lever geometry. Weight on each axle was very critical. NY Air Brake donated a much more modern set of equipment, where proportioning was adjustable, it was not used.

Scott probably would not have known this, but there were sketches done prior to FYRG involvement, for a 12V-71 Detroit Diesel engine and generator replacement propulsion skid that would have exactly fit the Winton engine footprint and would have allowed reinstallation of the original Winton engine and GE main generator at a later time if the train was put on stationary display. They were done for a discussion of restoration back in the 1980s that did not develop further.

Seemed like there was a lack of financial discipline on this project. Things were being done out of sequence, items were obtained before they were needed, and dated or potentially time-obsolete items were being given a calendar priority that would have resulted in their being out of date by the time they were applied. And I can confirm first hand that some items donated to support the historical education mission were instead auctioned at the wine and dine galas.

PC

_________________
Advice from the multitude costs nothing and is often worth just that. (EMD-1945)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2021 2:06 pm 

Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:51 pm
Posts: 154
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Very interesting to read what happened to this trainset, and the choices that were made.

I'm been following the Mark Twain Zephyr restoration being done by the Wisconsin Great Northern Railroad, and it's interesting to see how their choice was to go for the modified, operational excursion variant:
http://www.marktwainzephyr.com/

They post a weekly update on youtube, and it's fascinating to see the progress that they are making. They are destroying a lot of the historical fabric of the car (you'll cringe watching the kitchens be removed from the two cars) but they have a goal of restoring it to service and it sure looks like they are going to get it done.

They have switched to electric baseboard heating, and are re-powering with the internals from an SW-600 (which has a 6 cylinder 567C engine) since the Winton, generator and traction motors are long gone.

I hope that the Flying Yankee project somehow gets going again someday.

_________________
----------
Jim Evans


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:45 pm 

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 7:16 am
Posts: 1623
Here is good video where they discuss the different features of the individual trucks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qL4Pin3vWk

I am very interested in seeing how the planned 6-567C works out for the MTZ because the weights are very comparable with the Winton 201A. That works out well for propulsion but doesn't leave much capacity for a separate HEP plant unless it is kept very small and light.

PC

_________________
Advice from the multitude costs nothing and is often worth just that. (EMD-1945)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:55 pm 

Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm
Posts: 1372
PCook wrote:
I was asked to look at the train while it was at Edaville, and was shown it a couple times afterwards.

Scott probably would not have known this, but there were sketches done prior to FYRG involvement, for a 12V-71 Detroit Diesel engine and generator replacement propulsion skid that would have exactly fit the Winton engine footprint and would have allowed reinstallation of the original Winton engine and GE main generator at a later time if the train was put on stationary display. They were done for a discussion of restoration back in the 1980s that did not develop further.

PC

Your technical contributions, the issue of weight distribution for a replacement prime mover, etc. are being discussed on the FY closed group currently, referring back to your earlier posts in this thread (thus sort of a closed circle). If you do facebook I would suggest that you ask to join the group, your name and reputation is known there already and your opinion would be welcomed. https://www.facebook.com/groups/195388914553494


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:05 pm 

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 7:16 am
Posts: 1623
Thank you for the invitation but unfortunately I gave up on Facebook long ago due to them handing out your information and showering you with unwanted e-mails. The folks at State of New Hampshire DOT know me and are in touch with me occasionally. I can be contacted on this site via the PM function. Some of the folks associated with the train have my e-mail address.

The difference in weight between a 6-567C and D25 generator vs. a Detroit Diesel 12V-71 and D79 generator was around 14,000 lbs. That gives you a lot of latitude for other things you might need to do. But Scott was absolutely right, a hot water heating system with RV antifreeze could do the heating job with much less total weight than a separate HEP set and electric baseboard heating. Use of LED lighting could further reduce the electric power requirements. With equipment now available, you might be able to do the heating and lighting tasks without needing a dedicated HEP set.

With the train fitted with efficient insulation, air conditioning might be handled by split units and a small generator in each of the cars. Marine A/C units mounted under the floor are also a possibility. Nowadays there are lots of options.

PC

_________________
Advice from the multitude costs nothing and is often worth just that. (EMD-1945)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 11:59 am 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 11:26 am
Posts: 4297
Location: Maine
Preston, thanks for posting a refreshingly optimistic report about possibilities for "Flying Yankee". I am convinced the styling and artistic design of the trainset carry far more interest with the general public than does LED's versus incandescent bulbs.

_________________
"It's only impossible until it's done." -Nelson Mandela


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2021 8:20 am 

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 7:16 am
Posts: 1623
A few additional questions came in by e-mail from people watching this discussion, and since the years are slipping by rapidly now and the lesson of this train would otherwise be lost in the future, I am going to discuss a couple of them here. The answers are my own opinion:

Q: Where did the insistence on full Amtrak compatibility come from?

A: I don't know where this originated. It was never an issue when the train was being discussed at Edaville. By the time FYRG started asking me about the train when it was in New Hampshire, they had made the "decision". The cost of full Amtrak compatibility would have been enormous. An ACSES installation alone might have gone over $150,000 considering it would have been a one-time adaptation and there would have been yearly costs to keep it certified.

Q: Would a national tour have been possible?

A: Where are there wyes nowadays to allow turning this train? And keep in mind that the Flying Yankee presently has no rear coupler. Also, who has a drop table facility capable of taking an articulated train if a truck in the middle needs work? The train would not fit on the drop table at the MBTA Boston Engine Terminal. (used just as an example). I don't think a tour was ever a realistic possibility, which further questions the need for Amtrak compatibility.

Q: Was rebuilding and operating the Winton 201A viable?

A: This depends on what kind of operation is planned. For unlimited operation on the Amtrak routes, no. For excursions on a shortline railroad in New Hampshire, where the train could be rescued and towed in if needed, and future runs cancelled easily, they might have been able to do it. But my understanding is that there was only one extra spare cylinder liner being prepared, due to cost considerations, not enough to overhaul the engine a 2nd time. If you were planning long term operation of the Winton wouldn't you order at least one full engine set of spares? And if you weren't planning for use of the Winton, would there be any point in doing anything other than cleanup for stationary display? Eugene Kettering wrote a very comprehensive technical paper about all the problems with the 201A engine. Kettering told it exactly as it was.

As an additional thought, keep in mind that if the place you are operating has a low track speed limit and no major grades, the power requirement for this train might be quite low. That opens the door to other possible powering options. Maybe in the future......(leaving this for somebody else to consider)......

PC

_________________
Advice from the multitude costs nothing and is often worth just that. (EMD-1945)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Flying Yankee Restoration Group
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2021 8:56 pm 

Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm
Posts: 1372
PCook wrote:

Eugene Kettering wrote a very comprehensive technical paper about all the problems with the 201A engine. Kettering told it exactly as it was.
PC

Here's a nice article about Winton diesels, it quotes the Kettering article:

"The boys worked all night and hoped the engines would run all the next day. It was no fun, but we learned fast and a new design study was soon underway at Winton. To mention the parts with which we had trouble in Chicago would take far too much time. Let it suffice to say that I do not remember any trouble with the dip stick.”

https://vintagedieseldesign.wordpress.c ... -progress/

Diesels of that era were quite primitive, the Baldwin DeLaVergne engine was similarly cranky, the difference is that EMD completely reworked the Winton 201A with their 567 and improved its reliability considerably to an extent that Baldwin never really did.


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 86 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: