I have heard this story from another source. I would like to see this engine be restored, at least cosmetically if not operationally, but the kind of restoration that they are talking about is going to turn it into the steam locomotive from Back to the Future III.

A few points.....

First, it says light weight running great- perhaps timken light weight roller bearing rods? Nothing won't with that.

Second, a gas producer fire box is a proven coal burning design associated with the works of porta and wardale.

Third, a "modern" boiler may well be a water tube firebox for all we know. It's another proven design which would be an improvement.

Forth, claiming the speed record would be awesome!

If the money is there it has promise in claiming the speed record if nothing else!

Cheers, Jason

Or Germany. That's where the boys who built 60163 Tornado got their boiler from.

They did not build the boiler for Tornado quite right, as it had to be sent back for repairs. I think she could hit 130 MPH without an exotic rebuild, but who would want to take that chance of wrecking the thing?

Well it sounds like something has come along to take everone's mind off the 844.
This kind of thing is what drug the PRR down the tubes with the T1 failure.

Yawn.

Wake me when you have a) a business plan, including clearance for tests from the owner of a high-speed rail route, and b) a half-million-dollar cash deposit.

If we can't get Amtrak to allow a GG1 to be towed over its Corridor for preservation, or WM 734 to move ten miles over CSX, what makes you think Pueblo or Amtrak will let a steamer run at 130?

IDIC. May you be rewarded in proportion to your contribution, hope the government doesn't get in your way too much.
That's my reaction.

[quote="Mark Z. Yerkes) Or Germany. That's where the boys who built 60163 Tornado got their boiler from.[/quote]

What Tex said and a bit more. If you look back, you'll see a lot of information and some other postings about the German VS Yank boiler design, and problems with Meiningen built new replica boilers in the UK and down under. Whether a new design entirely would make a difference....? Sulzer (SLM) probably has built more proven quality new era boilers than anybody for high-output rack line locomotives so I'd be very interested in their ideas.

I think this is an idea whose time came and went back during the 1980s, barring the use of nontraditional designs which would preclude the traditional Stephensonian steam locomotive as a basis. Perhaps something with multiple larger scale Cyclone engines powering electric drive?

dave

The direct cause of the boiler issues that plagued Tornado have not been divulged. It has been reported here and on countless other boards that the German New Boiler was faulty. I have, as has been mentioned before reserved judgment and to this day, I will proudly argue that the DIRECT issue in this case had NOTHING to do with the boiler, nor the cyclical manner in which it was being operated.

Dave, the latest boilers on the Rack Locomotives in Europe, though commissioned by SLM were actually sub contracted to other shops. None, including the boilers in the boats (SLM/DLM projects) in Switzerland have ever suffered from any lack of quality nor have they had integrity issues.

What causes me most pause in this discussion is the open willingness to badger NEW boilers. I am interested, of all of the posters here, how many have NEW boilers and of those, how many have had issues with said new boilers?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, there was nothing magical or perfect about boilers built 50 years ago in contrast to those built today. If you think that what has happened to the Tornado is a first time event; think again. In fact, an in depth study of the machine to which that boiler is attached will show a few inherent issues between locomotive and said boiler (irrespective of who built it or how).

To blame a new boiler for the lack of insight toward a specific issue is shameful. I like what Mr. Porta taught us, which Matt J. and others with whom I associated remind me of often.

"You can not know, what you do not know, until you know it."

Until this discussion can knowingly define the issues, I think we are simply swiping in the dark at anything that changes the direction from the fact that we "simply do not know what we do not know and we have yet to learn what it is we need to know" in respect to new boilers and the potential issues there-of.

Kindly submitted,

Aw c'mon, swiping in the dark is what this board does best.

Sometimes I'm very inclned to agree with Charlie.

Very astute observation. I concur, using as the primary example the thread on the UP 844 driver damage. Fourteen, count 'em, fourteen pages of "discussion" in less than a month! Talk about beating a dead horse.

I will now retreat to the safety of my storm cellar.

Thanks!

Agreed.

We should not roll the issues (what ever they may be) with Tonrado and the epic code brown that was the 2100 debacle into what could be a new locomotive idea and concept design.

I can not speak for the Tornado (as I have never seen it but REALLY REALLY want to next time I'm across the pond) but can speak for the 2100. FUBAR does not even begin to describe what I saw, but that is for another time and place. There is no reason that some of these things can't be accomplished, and if it's meant to happen, it will.....irregardless of what the armchair steam mechanics have to say.

I would say that maybe we should defur to the guys like Jason, Kelly, and John who evidently really know what they are talking about, and not try to nickel and dime the what ifs of this. If it is to happen, then more power to someone for being able to accomplish it inspite of the "nay sayers" who always seem to proliferate these procedings with all the reasons something can't or shouldn't be done. No matter what any of us do in the museum/preservation/restoration world it is always going to be an uphill battle against all odds of funding and support, yet somehow we manage to get things done and equipment preserved. Have at it guys (and gals), I look forward to seeing the video of the engine pounding the iron in Pueblo!

I think the lack of divulgement IS the primary problem with the Meiningen boiler situation. Any technical design or construction issue follows, presuming we ever find out if there are any. I know simply that if I were charged with getting a new boiler built, my inability to know the specifics of the situation would make me want to disqualify them as bidders. If they have nothing to hide, let them come out with the facts.

I agree with the high standard evident in all things SLM / Sulzer in the modern steam age. I'd go so far as to call them the industry leader at this time.

Puffing Billy has had much better success with their welded generation of boilers than with their riveted predecessors. I'm pretty sure there has never been a better time to build a new steam locomotive, boiler included, but I'm also sure that the custom and unusual nature of the job requires a lot of care, planning and QC beyond the experiential ability of all but a few individuals in the industry at this time. There's maybe 5-6 guys in the US I'd trust to act for me in that capacity.

dave

The Transportation Test Center, Inc. at Pueblo, Colo. solicits and performs the tests that it is paid to do, including for new designs of high speed locomotives. Amtrak did move GG1 4935 from and to the Strasburg RR for exhibit at Union Station in Washington, D.C. I don't know if there was any attempt to pay CSX their special train charges for moving WM 734, or if it was proposed to be a free move. There was an attempt by a British charity to get representatives on the CSX Board of Directors and increase the immediate return to stockholders, was the incumbent management's position on what they would haul to be one of the possible changes?