| Railway Preservation News https://www.rypn.org/forums/ |
|
| D&R 9 https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21749 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | bobyar2001 [ Sat Nov 25, 2006 11:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | D&R 9 |
Current condition of Dardanelle & Russellville 2-6-0 9, at North Freedom: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=163970 |
|
| Author: | Les Beckman [ Sun Nov 26, 2006 2:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: D&R 9 |
Thanks for posting the recent photo of D&R #9. I've always kind of liked that little Mogul. Just wondered where in the list of engines to be repaired by Mid-Continent, does she stand? I know that the first priority is C&NW #1385, but how far down the list is old #9? Les |
|
| Author: | John Risley [ Sun Nov 26, 2006 3:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: D&R 9 |
I am certainly not the authority of what is going on at MC as far as what engines are in line to be repaired, but I have a pretty good idea. The first priority of MC is finish putting the Montreal {Western Coal and Coke #1} back together. The museum isn't really involved in the restortation of the Polsen #2, but both of these engines could concievably be running about the same time depending on whole bunches of things going good or bad. Money and the right people volunteering is the key in my humble opinion. Then comes the C&NW #1385, she will cost the most to fix, is almost to big for a daily engine, so she should be last of these 3 mentioned. I hope there is reluctance to take any more engines apart till we get these 3 back together first. None of us are proud of having so many engines torn apart like they are. Hind sight is 20/20 and it is easy to criticize folks who make mistakes, but the parties involved thought they were doing the right thing. Just don't want to go there tonight. As for the D&R #9, she would be the next logical choice and I believe some folks think that way. She has the power and is light enough not to tax the infrastructure. Not to mention she is kind of cute too. The problem we may have with her is the corrosion of the boiler shell. The loco had fiberglass insulation and the jactet was left on to long. The pitting is very bad. Most of the rivits will need replacing and who knows with out the ultra sound how much of the shell itself will have to come apart, but it looks scary to me by just looking at it. Just speculation at this time, but she might be another candidate for a new boiler. Also she needs a completely new or rebuilt tender. Her original was wood framed, and is pattern material at best. We had a steel frame under the old tank, but that can't be used and it not the anwser. Not worth worring about right now, we have too much work on the other 3 road engines to even think about it. Plus we have a 0-4-0 tank engine that should go back together too before we rip another one apart. I don't want to talk about the Lousiana Cyprus Lumber Company #2. {Lima 2-6-0}. This is just my speculations and thoughts on the subject, which are subect to all sorts of corrections depending on who you talk too. So anyway it might be a while till the #9 steams again. We put a lot of miles on that old girl over the years, she was a good engine, tough too. Cheers, John. |
|
| Author: | Les Beckman [ Sun Nov 26, 2006 10:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: D&R 9 |
John - Thanks for the most excellent report. While reading through the Mid-Continent website, I noticed that the comments for LS&I 2-8-0 #22 indicated that its private owners had completed boiler work and were set to install a new set of flues. This kind of gave the impression that the Consolidation was pretty far along on the road to being operable. Can you comment? I don't think the 22 has ever run at North Freedom has it? Les |
|
| Author: | John Risley [ Mon Nov 27, 2006 2:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: D&R 9 |
Well I can not go on to much about the LS&I#22 as I don't know much about what was done to her and when. I was under the impression that a lot of work was done and the tubes were put in. Please don't quote me on this stuff, but I think the owners got caught in the rule changes that came about back in 2000 or when ever the then new rules came into play. I think she will have to have a complete boiler survey done to make her compliant with current FRA rules. I think all the boiler work was done by contractors and records kept, but as I understood it the tubes will have to come out. I probably shouldn't even speculate like I am. I have talked and emailed back and forth with the owners son {he might be part owner too for all I know} about other things, but never the #22. Maybe someone will comment? As far as it running at MC I don't know where it would run. Our main line was originally layed with 60 lb rail, maybe lighter yet in places, plus we have at least one curve that is hard on big wheels. The #22 was a ore hauling loco with some pretty impressive axle wieghts. I was told what they were but don't recall. I was surprised how heavy a loco she is. Maybe Jason would know as her sisters are running out at Grand Canyon. Personally I think our decopod would be much easier on our light rail then the #22. Some more good news about the #22 is she hopefully will be under cover soon. The owners are trying to get a building up to store it in. Last I heard there were some zoning concerns that were holding those plans up. When ever I look at the engine I am impressed, it really looks like you could fire it up safely right now. Always liked those lighter LS&I engines too. Hopefully some one who knows better will pipe in. John. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|