Hi,

I stopped by Taylorville a few days ago with a friend and saw that the 1352 was outside, detached from its tender and looking a little worse than it did when they first moved it out of the engine house. Are there any updates on the locomotive's move to Ohio?

Thomas

Currently 1352 is in a holding pattern while 2100 is receiving firebox work in Cleveland. We'd planned to give 1352 a protective coat of paint last summer, but unfortunately we ran out of time before it could be organized. That's planned to happen this summer to help protect the engine until 2100 is done and 1352 Can be moved for restoration.

Thanks
Russ Swinnerton
American Steam Railroad Preservation Association Secratary

Russ -

Thanks for the info on this good looking 2-8-2.


Les

Where can I find a status report on the 2100?
Thanks,

-154

Their facebook page seems to be the only thing that has relatively current info on it.

https://www.facebook.com/americansteam/

I think 1352 will need more than a "coat of paint" to protect it from further rust and decay. Hope they get to do it this summer.

Thank you for this update. The 2100 Facebook page shows that you are making some progress which is great to see. I am unfamiliar with the operating possibilities in OH where 2100 is currently located. Have you secured any agreements to provide access to track for operation of 2100 when it is done? Where will 2100 be housed and maintained once it is operational? As far as moving 1352, where will it be moved for restoration? Do you have a contract/lease for more space in the roundhouse in Cleveland where 2100 is being worked on? Is the planned restoration of 1352 cosmetic or operational? My apologies for all the questions but I could not find this information on your website and the information there appeared a bit dated. With the recent changes in Amtrak policy I did not know if any of your plans for operation of 2100 and/or movement of 1352 had changed. Thank you.

Les and anyone else who is interested:

Here's the photo I took of 1352 at Taylorville a few days ago. https://www.flickr.com/photos/148791086 ... datetaken/

Thomas

Thomas -

Thanks for the photo of the Mike sitting there in the weeds.


Les

I wish someone would take over that project who actually intends to get it back in service. Poor gal has lived a troubled life from Kansas City to today. She deserves better.
Not being independently wealthy and being older than dirt it won't be me.

No worries with the questions. I'll condense them down to a couple answers.
As far as future operations, the new Amtrak rules will make things more difficult for sure, but there are still places to run and ways to get there. We've talked to several places and received positive responses, but now is too early to sign any contracts or name specifics. Don't want a repeat of the 1309 debacle. I'd expect more to happen on that front this winter after a hydro test and test fire on 2100. (Currently these are on schedule, but we move at the speed of money, so that's subject to change)

Currently, we are leasing 1 stall in Cleveland to work on 2100, and that probably won't change this year. As for the future, time will tell.

As for 1352, the ultimate goal is to get 2100 running and turn our attention to 1352 for a full operational rebuild.

Currently with 2100, there is Firebox work being done including new side sheets going in and stay bolts being made. Once that's done, we'll be ready to put water in it and see what leaks, then get her tightened up in prep for a hydro test.

Stay tuned.
Russ

RSwinnerton - Thanks for the update on your two very worthwhile projects. Glad to hear you have some positive responses to your inquiries about hosting 2100. I agree that it is likely too early in the repairs on 2100 to start contracting operating dates. Please consider inquiring if operating entities that have responded positively would be willing to provide you with letters of interest that you could post on your website. Being able to show people possible operating futures is way of reassuring donors and maintaining excitement for your project through the long time period and many ups and downs of a restoration.

Frisco 1352's stack is capped and it has no lagging or jacketing so, considering that the intention is to restore it to operation, the fact that it is sitting outside will probably not make much of a difference in the ultimate amount of work to be done if it has to wait its turn behind 2100 for another year or so. With the history of 1352 and the mud floods, most of the weathering of 1352 is likely behind it even if it sits on the siding in Taylorville for a bit longer.

There appears to be some of interest on this thread so, if you do schedule a date to do further stabilization of 1352 in IL, you may want to consider posting it here with some advance notice to give folks the opportunity to help out.

Be aware that 1352 was turned out in the '40s by the Frisco Springfield Shops as a 2-8-2, but the boiler is from the teens as a 2-8-0. As a Frisco enthusiast, this whole project has left me sad.
It is what it is and it is probably all it will ever be.
I'm old and tired and have had enough of looking at piles of parts laying in the weeds for decades.

While it may be minor in the scheme of things if it sits outside a bit longer, I'd argue it is not an ok option as was previously stated (especially the uncovered stack). If I recall correctly, this engine sat in a small engine shed before the efforts began to move and restore it. Im a bit surprised to see that efforts stopped so abruptly and left the engine out in the open to take more abuse than when it was sheltered from weather, graffiti, and theft previously. Hopefully she gets some kind of protection soon so that further damage/rot will be minimal.

10stewi - My apologies if my previous post was not clear. The pics the group posted a while ago appear to show the stack capped - I will edit my post to clarify. I agree that, even with the stack capped and the lagging off, having the locomotive outside is not optimal. That said, the weather over the next year or two is not likely to have any more adverse impact on operability than has already occurred. From people I know in the area, the location is pretty remote so hopefully, the other two sources of further degradation that you cited will not occur.