The Skookum is alive!

j6677 · **Joined:** Mon Sep 03, 2018 9:02 am **Posts:** 26

Didn't see anything posted here, so I figured I'd bite:

http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/20 ... -in-oregon

Attachment:

SkookiumtestfireHansen.jpg [ 82.55 KiB | Viewed 12078 times ]

Photo by Martin E. Hansen, accessed via link posted above.

Kelly Anderson · **Joined:** Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:52 am **Posts:** 2477

Crescent-Zephyr · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:15 pm **Posts:** 1730

Fantastic sight to see!!! Hope to see her in real life one day.

I know the locomotive is currently at Oregon coast, but who is the owner?

John T · **Joined:** Sun Sep 14, 2014 5:05 pm **Posts:** 1270

Deep River #7 is owned by Chris Baldo of Willits, CA. The fire up must be very recent as Chris didn't mention it when I saw him on the 8th.

John Risley · **Joined:** Tue Aug 24, 2004 10:34 pm **Posts:** 954

Congrats to all involved. Quite the journey for this old gal. Don't know if any books have been written about her? But a story from her beginning to present would be interesting read. Can't fathom trying to put this back together after being torn apart so long and many moves. The potential for lost parts would be a never ending battle I would think? Again Congrats to all involved. Regards, John.

Crescent-Zephyr · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:15 pm **Posts:** 1730

Oh interesting! Sorry if this is common knowledge, but is he an owner / involved with the skunk train? Is the plan for her to operate down there?

WVNorthern · **Posted:** Thu Sep 20, 2018 7:01 pm

John Risley wrote:

The potential for lost parts would be a never ending battle I would think?

In the recent TRAINS magazine article on this engine, it mentioned that either the leading or trailing truck (don't remember which) came up missing due to all the moves over the years.

Bobharbison · **Joined:** Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:42 pm **Posts:** 2956

John T wrote:

Deep River #7 is owned by Chris Baldo of Willits, CA. The fire up must be very recent as Chris didn't mention it when I saw him on the 8th.

Very recent as in happening right now. (Or just finished, I'm not on site)

jayrod · **Posted:** Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:13 pm

Glad to see a fire in her. I'm a fan of the smaller, work horse steamers.

EWrice · **Joined:** Wed Jan 15, 2014 9:14 am **Posts:** 367

This is great news. There was a guy a few years ago that wrote a series of articles in Live Steam magazine about this engines history. There was some interesting pictures showing it on its side in the creek, and some of how it was disassembled and moved. Glad to see it back together. She's been disassembled since the 1950's or 60's if I recall.

John T · **Joined:** Sun Sep 14, 2014 5:05 pm **Posts:** 1270

Short history

33463 06-09 2-4-4-2 15&23X22 48” 162,650 24,800 200
Little River RR (Little River Lbr. Co.) #126 Townsend, TN
returned to Baldwin
Columbia River Belt Line RR (The Whitney Co.) “SKOOKUM” Blind Slough, OR 1910
Larkin-Green Log. Co. “SKOOKUM”. Blind Slough, OR
Carlisle-Pennell Lbr. Co. #7 Onalaska, WA 1920
Carlisle Lbr. Co. #7 Onalaska, WA 1924
Mud Bay Log. Co. Olympia, WA
returned to Carlisle Lbr. Co. Onalaska, WA
Deep River Log. Co. #7(2nd) (reported traded for 2 donkeys) here by 9-33
(wrecked and abandoned 1955)
unknown insurance company
Charley Marrow Seattle, WA 1956
(dismantled and moved to Snoqualmie, WA 1960)
Rogan Coombs Fortuna, CA 1980 (stored dismantled at Mt. Rainier Scenic RR Mineral, WA)
Chris Baldo Willits, CA 2004 (under restoration at Tillamook, OR)

tom moungovan · **Posted:** Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:28 am

I had asked an acquaintance about the 200 lb. boiler pressure and if it would be restored to that figure. I was told yes. That's a bit of a rarity for something built clear back then.

The 48' drivers are nice too as the larger diameter opposed to the usual logging engine 44" will cut back a little on some of the wear to crossheads, guides, rings and tires, etc.

hamster · **Posted:** Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:39 pm

tom moungovan wrote:

I had asked an acquaintance about the 200 lb. boiler pressure and if it would be restored to that figure. I was told yes. That's a bit of a rarity for something built clear back then.

The 48' drivers are nice too as the larger diameter opposed to the usual logging engine 44" will cut back a little on some of the wear to crossheads, guides, rings and tires, etc.

Restoration of an old locomotive to its designed boiler pressure is not uncommon now because of the Part 230 regulations. The 1472 day inspection is designed to identify every weak part of a boiler. The initial engineering calculations then determine the MAWP that the boiler would be allowed to operate at. If this pressure is acceptable, no further repairs are needed. However, if higher pressures are neccessary, the boiler can be repaired and brought back to its original MAWP.

tom moungovan · **Posted:** Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:33 pm

hamster wrote:

tom moungovan wrote:

I had asked an acquaintance about the 200 lb. boiler pressure and if it would be restored to that figure. I was told yes. That's a bit of a rarity for something built clear back then.

The 48' drivers are nice too as the larger diameter opposed to the usual logging engine 44" will cut back a little on some of the wear to crossheads, guides, rings and tires, etc.

Restoration of an old locomotive to its designed boiler pressure is not uncommon now because of the Part 230 regulations. The 1472 day inspection is designed to identify every weak part of a boiler. The initial engineering calculations then determine the MAWP that the boiler would be allowed to operate at. If this pressure is acceptable, no further repairs are needed. However, if higher pressures are neccessary, the boiler can be repaired and brought back to its original MAWP.

Thanks , your point is well taken, although I had meant that it was a bit unusual for a boiler built well before 1920 to have a 200 lb rating, not that restoring it to that pressure
was unusual.
Tom

RCD · **Posted:** Fri Sep 21, 2018 9:10 pm

WTH is that thing?

The Skookum is alive!

Who is online