But a cold roll test won't show issues that don't appear until 1) there is steam pressure above the valve, and 2) the valve chest and valve heat up.

Holy cow. What is it about railroad stuff that makes people want to eat their own? Jeez. Cut the folks some slack. Damn.

On a locomotive I was involved with we did the rolling test. As Kelly alluded to it was more or less to find if anything was binding and to see the parts were cooperating with each other. In this case it was a 2-8-2 logging engine with new axle, new crown brasses, reprofiled wheels, may have been a couple of new rod brasses. It was only the running gear and frame. We just wanted to see it roll without any obvious problems. Running it through some tight switches allowed this thing to wiggle and track like it was supposed to. Without the boiler and all the extra weight it proved nothing but it rolled freely without binding at that point. That was our objective. We wanted to see this. Happy ending. The Polson #2 after a few break in runs ran for 31 or 32 days straight with no major problems. A long list of changes/minor repairs resulted in the break in period, but none overly serious. A much easier restoration in comparison to Skookum.

The real proof in the pudding comes with the break in period and there's nothing like a fully assembled locomotive under its own steam power. This is where you find the final glitches. Sometimes little glitches, sometimes big ones. I think the Skookum was not your normal steam rebuild in the sense it was way more complicated for many reasons. That is my guess. Takes a pretty skilled bunch of mechanics to put together a parts kit that they did not take apart along with missing parts. I commend the efforts of all involved. I can only imagine the frustration and anxiety in the process of finishing this up. It would be driving me insane. On a good note they are so much closer and it will get done in its time. This restoration is on my bucket list to witness in person.

Regards, John.

I wonder as well, though what gets me is that it is steam specifically that elicits that response.

Simple Answer: Pride and egos. Everybody wants to be portrayed as a expert and some feel that in order to do so, means putting down those who fail. Don't believe me? There is a group on social media dedicated to the failure of a certain tourist railroad in Maryland, but I digress...

OCSR will right this in due time and I wish them well. Compound locomotives are a unique marvel of engineering and any living example does wonders to educate those not privy to their operation or existence.

Jeff

This type of BS is exactly the reason I rarely come here any more.

As one who is enthusiastic about steam locomotives and believes in the importance of operational steam in both bringing the story of early 20th century industrialism to the public and in preserving the knowledge of how to operate and maintain these wonderful machines, I view this type of mechanical failure as something that presents a great learning opportunity.

When the Tornado had an operational failure, a brief report was immediately issued and updates were (and are still being) provided on the Trust's website. People can learn from answers to questions such as (1) What conditions led to this mechanical failure?, (2) How can these conditions be remediated such that the failure does not occur again?, and (3) How are the parts that failed restored to operational condition - can they be repaired or do new parts have to be fabricated and how is this done?

The Trust has a duty to their stakeholders to provide timely information as well as a larger educational mission to maximize the learning opportunity presented by such a failure. The Skookum, from my understanding, is privately owned. The private owner and OCSR are entitled to keep this whole endeavor under wraps if they so wish. By getting the locomotive to this point they have shown great mechanical skill and perseverance. It is understandable, with the obligation of getting the loco operational again by next June, if they wish to focus their resources on diagnosing the issues and repairing the damage. Once repairs are well under way, I would appreciate it if, for the learning benefit of the community, they would post a post mortem on the OCSR website, Facebook page, or on this board.

What, if any, are the obligations of a private owner of an artifact that has historical significance to society at large? What, if any, are the obligations of a private owner of a piece of equipment that is part of an industry to share failure data as a way of encouraging best practices?

In my mind, the owner owes nobody an explanation. Period. If he has investors in the project, then they should get an explanation. Frankly, the railfan public is owed nothing.
If it is a group similar to the 2926 project where it is a charitable organization, then the contributors should be informed.
When we(1522/SLSTA) had one of our problems, we made sure the information got out.
I have seen the photo of the damage, and like most other folks I'm curious as to what caused that much damage. Not to gloat, throw shade, talk smack or spread it around. Just satisfy my curiosity.
When and if people are informed is up to the owner.

Perhaps the desire to keep incidents under wraps is to avoid the very comments that were made on this thread and another that has since been deleted. It seems that there are many people who just sit in the shadows and wait for an opportunity to pounce on others. At the slightest provocation they come out with scant evidence and go on tirades questioning the abilities and motivations of everyone associated with something that went wrong. Maybe wait to find out what actually happened before casting aspersions about people who probably spent thousands of hours converting a pile of rusty parts into a living, breathing machine. Nobody is more upset about this incident than those people are right now.

Thank you for this perspective, Rick. I can only begin to imagine how the people involved must feel after years of work and who knows how much money spent on this pretty engine. . .and now so much must be redone.

Well, at least it is a steam engine--all it will take will be more time, more money, some skill and some steel. It's stuff a competent machine shop can make, even if it might be a bit expensive. It's not a Winton diesel with known mechanical issues apparently inherent in its early design, and no parts available for it. Nor is it like some other aging 3rd or 4th generation diesels that have no circuit cards or even computers available, parts that would be extremely difficult for shopmen in our business to make, if they could be made (and programmed) at all.

I think we should be required to give our real names. I know the argument has been that some anonymous members are executives protecting their careers, but we seem to lose a lot more content than we gain from the anonymity. Most of the damaging and slanderous content seems to me to originate from the anonymous members. I think if members are held responsible for their comments, and also given the opportunity to apologize when events later, perhaps, prove them wrong, it would create an environment where more are willing to share information.

There are numerous events and accomplishments that are not presented here because the sources do not feel they will be treated fairly, and I think (but have not made an accounting) that most of that unfair treatment comes from anonymous members.

Valve gear parts are made of a tough steel that can be straightened and repaired through ordinary blacksmithing methods. It may take some time, but they can get them back to their shape again, or at worst replace them with new pieces made using modern water jet or similar techniques - far easier than standard practice back a hundred years ago. We don't know what the valve and valve chest look like, or if the crankpin was damaged which could complicate things exponentially.

I'm fascinated by what the cause might have been - Kelly's theory seems as likely as any - slide valves don't have as many probabilities for jamming in place than piston valves do.

She's in good hands (with broken hearts) after this incident, and I'm sure we'll see her in steam again, hopefully pretty soon.

This type of BS is going on in all of society, just look at politics! We all know that there are some in any group that are "different" so to say. That said we need to reject these type of posts, and as softwerks has stated, (uses real name in signature) real names would go a long way to help.

I do also agree with those that stress that this can be a learning opportunity, and should NOT be used as a chance to cast shade on this fine group and the wonderful accomplishment that has been achieved. It can also be an opportunity for someone who perhaps has a solution or insight into this can offer valuable input. We should always keep in mind that the focus of this forum is to advance preservation.

Steven A. Carlson

I am just a lowly moderator, and while I do not speak for RYPN itself, I would support a move to require the use of real names for all new members. It works for Facebook, which is a much much larger platform, so why wouldn't it work here?

I used to be known as Stationary Steam, then Hot Metal, but decided that I did not need to hide behind an assumed name and am confident enough in what I say to put my real name behind it.

How true. I've never seen any "damaging" or "slanderous" content on Facebook.

Dave - Thank you for your technical assessment. So, for a replacement, we are looking at a forged piece, or one that is cut from a cross-rolled plate that is machined, like the rods in FEC 148? Also, which of Mr. Kelly Anderson's theories are you giving a high probability to? I read his post as stating four possibilities - a foreign object in the steam chest, a balance strip jamming, a joint seizing, or a part breaking.