It is currently Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:00 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 8:58 pm 

Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:41 am
Posts: 3032
Location: Inwood, W.Va.
To carry the effect off with the 4501, it would be best to add a high Pennsy headlight. . .


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 12:25 am 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 1:51 pm
Posts: 8354
Location: Baltimore, MD
robertmacdowell wrote:
Alexander D. Mitchell IV wrote:
Put another way: I love MGs and Triumphs, but if you're going to offer me one that I have to keep running reliably, I'll take that Mazda Miata instead. There are limits to my masochism.

See, there's the difference twixt your thinking and mine. I'll take the Triumph, and swap a Miata powertrain into it.


Actually, the fad for a while was to take the Miata and drop a Mustang 5.0 V8 into it. . . And at one point, I came close to buying an MGB with a Chevy engine retrofitted, but it was an abominable retrofit.

The problem with this mentality, however, is that you're creating a "hot rod," and not a "classic" or "antique car." Museums do not, or at least shouldn't, do this. PRR 1361 is owned by a railroad museum. The Grand Canyon RR can convert CB&Q 4960 into a French-fry-oil-burner, and it'll be used, but they aren't running a CB&Q or Santa Fe museum.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:19 pm 

Okay, the most commonly asked question still yet to be answered. Is there a 1361 update? Tried emailing the museum twice and got no reply...


  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Mon Apr 29, 2013 8:45 pm 

Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:47 pm
Posts: 475
SPsteambuff wrote:
Okay, the most commonly asked question still yet to be answered. Is there a 1361 update? Tried emailing the museum twice and got no reply...


The reason it's yet to be answered, you discovered for yourself. All most of us outsiders know is that the tender is complete, almost all the parts are in storage at Altoona, and the boiler/frame are stored at EBT. That's been the update for the last several years.

_________________
Mark Z. Yerkes
Amateur Rail Historian


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:26 pm 

Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 2:42 pm
Posts: 34
Slight correction: All parts EXCEPT boiler are in Altoona; boiler is (at last sighting) at EBT. Tender was "rebuilt" 2 years ago, "ready for paint and decals". Problems arose trying to move it, now sits forlornly gathering a new coat of rust in the yard, and unprotected from vandals. Typical of most of their "collection". So far, the taxpayers of PA have "invested" over $3m in the "restoration", with nothing worthwhile to show for it. Do the taxpayers even care? Apparently not.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Wed Jun 19, 2013 8:33 pm 

Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 3:55 am
Posts: 70
1361prr wrote:
Slight correction: All parts EXCEPT boiler are in Altoona; boiler is (at last sighting) at EBT. Tender was "rebuilt" 2 years ago, "ready for paint and decals". Problems arose trying to move it, now sits forlornly gathering a new coat of rust in the yard, and unprotected from vandals. Typical of most of their "collection". So far, the taxpayers of PA have "invested" over $3m in the "restoration", with nothing worthwhile to show for it. Do the taxpayers even care? Apparently not.



The masochist I am when it comes to steam locomotives, I read this whole thread and remember having a bad experience with the young museum staff in 2012.

"If I were the boss of this, I would have them fired," I thought then, and: "Not a good sign for the management of the museum".

This is by far not the first restoration project which turns out to become much costlier than thought in the beginning. I may be wrong, but all this thread reads between the lines as if the major flaw seems not to lie in the design of the firebox but in the actual museum management. Your remark about the tender losing part of the invested taxpayers money just by - obviously unneccesary - neglect goes the same way.


So this newbie naively asks: Could a change in management possibly make a change in the outcome for 1361?

Michael,

who just had a perfect day in Strasburg with all friendly staff.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 10:49 pm 

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:16 pm
Posts: 15
Any updates/news?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 1:53 am 

Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:30 pm
Posts: 602
Location: Bucks County, PA
leward wrote:
Any updates/news?


No.

_________________
Big Jim Video Productions
Morrisville, PA

http://www.bigjimvideo.com/home.html
http://www.youtube.com/user/bigjim4life


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 3:46 pm 

Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:54 pm
Posts: 271
bigjim4life wrote:
leward wrote:
Any updates/news?


No.

How much money has been wasted on that project?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 4:55 pm 

Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:18 pm
Posts: 2076
We are going to sit and wait for updates, there maybe work quietly going on, we would have to poke some of the people involved to find out, but any work at this point you would not expect operational for several years for sure, so lets just hang tight.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 4:10 pm 

Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2013 4:11 pm
Posts: 270
Wow, Just read through this and other 1361 items, and 2 car funeral comes to mind. Agree with the reality that until you get one taken apart its extremely difficult to know what the scope will be. Pretty safe to assume that a locomotive built before 1920 will have some significant needs. By all that I’ve digested on 1361, racing down the main line ala 1950 will require a new firebox and “wrapper” course. The Belpaire design can be re-engineered to meet code. And from what I’ve read the PRR in later years created the compromised Bepaire when they removed the nut from the “roof” stays thus creating the weakness that won’t pass today’s standards. This as well at the steel thickness been discussed ad nauseam here and elsewhere. One thing that has become exceedingly clear as a result of this locomotive’s story is the need for a suitable strategy that encompasses a home base, capital plan, and thorough cost loaded refurbishment plan when considering returning any steam locomotive to operating status. I Do have one question – Was the Boiler removed from the frame and only the boiler got sent to EBT? The excursion to Rockhill Furnace just seems odd to me. Seems that the loco boiler could have been stored onsite during the roundhouse construction.

Having read through all this I can see why the VMT is being very specific about needing a mass of funds up front to tackle 611. My understanding is that the majority of funds sought by “fire-up” are for infrastructure and the capitol plan.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 10:31 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 7:16 am
Posts: 1379
Due to the interaction between original metals and modern product, any partial repair of the boiler is likely to have a much shorter operating life than could be obtained from a new construction boiler. Considering the historical importance of this locomotive, it deserves a new boiler, and the donors deserve some assurance that their money is being spent wisely rather than on a repair that will require further repairs not far into the future.

PC

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


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: P.R.R. 1361
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:56 pm 

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 9:40 pm
Posts: 710
Just so everyone understands,the locomotive did meet the Form 4 requirements when it was built, though just barely. There was little to no allowance designed in for such things as wastage or corrosion. Back then, the Form 4 was the boiler's "birth certificate", and there were no requirements to ever remeasure or recalculate anything, ever.

Today, there are still some boilers out there that were built to absolute minimal standards to begin with. 80 years later, after many miles, repairs and modifications, they don't anymore. Some just barely miss it; others miss it by a wide margin. In either case, it is possible to make necessary repairs/modifications to get the boiler above the Form 4 requirements.

There are those who choose to make the repairs/modifications that have been revealed as necessary after everything has been measured and recalculated to indicate the situation of a boiler as it is TODAY, not as it was when it left the builder who-knows-how-many years, miles and cycles ago. The present rules are designed to prevent someone from digging up an old paper, copying one, or making one up, then going out and running something that isn't anywhere close to what it should be.

Steam locomotives are expensive. So are accidents. Over the years, there have been locomotives out there whose operators were blissfully ignorant of the actual condition of the machines they were riding around on. And a few who knew but didn't care or couldn't afford to make things right. Not to mention a few who were afraid to know.

Ignorance and arrogance on the hoof are never a good thing. Do it right or don't do it at all, IMO.


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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: