Trains Magazine's online Newswire is reporting that the holding company that runs the San Luis & Rio Grande out of Antonito, Co. has acquired ex-Lake Superior & Ishpeming 2-8-0's 18 and 20. Both locos are currently stored in Mount Hood, Oregon; 18 is operable, while 20 will need an estimated year's overhaul, hopefully to be operated in 2009.

In addition, the company has acquired five 1954-built ex-AT&SF full-length Big Domes, last used by Holland America/Westours on the Alaska Railroad.

Full details available to Trains Magazine subscribers at www.trains.com, click on Newswire..........

Alexander D. Mitchell IV said, "Trains Magazine's online Newswire is reporting that the holding company that runs the San Luis & Rio Grande out of Antonito, Co. has acquired ex-Lake Superior & Ishpeming 2-8-0's 18 and 20."


Trains' report has a small error, the SL&RG is run out of Alamosa, CO.

my error in transcription, then.

Too bad they could not entertain the idea of restoring this engine:
http://www.steamlocomotive.info/vlocomo ... isplay=269

Should prove to be quite exciting to see two similar (if not identical) engines with in the same livery pulling a double header!

/Mitch

Leaving aside the fact that the Colorado RR Museum'd probably part with their locomotive when very warm places freeze over, the 583, at a bit under 28,000 lbs TE, is a bit light for the task at hand. According to Earl Knoob, their current loco - ex SP Mogul 1744 - has about 33,000 lbs of tractive effort, and they've been looking for something which would haul a few more cars up the steep east side of La Veta Pass. See his comments at: http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,100934,101347#msg-101347

Still, I understand your point. It'd be great to see the only remaining example of standard gauge Rio Grande steam running on ex-Rio Grande mountain trackage.

Scott

I am curious with this and the Grand Canyon operations both looking for new steam recently, why niehte rshowed any interest in the Chinese engines that recently came into this country?

Just a dumb guess, but having seen the Grand Canyon, I would guess that a Chinese 2-10-2 would NOT be out of the question for them, but I don't know if the SL&RG's track is "right" for same. Maybe if the Multipower "catalog" happened to still have 2-8-2 SY's? Could I still get a rebuilt Chinese 2-8-2 without poaching one from the Valley or Susquehanna? Hell, Knox & Kane's ain't doing much these days...... and they probably already paid the duty......... Maybe the Grand Canyon has enough business acumen to wait just a bit in hopes the prices drop on the two QJ's already here?

Actually, I just had another dumb idea...... Given the flack that 1) Wal-Mart and everyone else is getting for importing "cheap" Chinese goods, 2) the recent furor over lead and other toxins on Chinese toys to the point where folks are saying in all seriousness "can I trust any toy from China?", and 3) the sorta-controversy over Canadian locos at Steamtown........... is it possible that Xanterra/the NPS would be attempting to avoid possible negative press that would result from acquiring a Chinese 2-10-2?

GCR is very capable of measuring its needs and assets. GCR profile is 3% grades and need to move things at speed. 3751 is only a nine car locomotive and 4960 and 29 are 8 cars each. A Chinese 2-10-2 (which have 60% of the power of Milwaukee 261) or most of the locomotives out there are not going to get to the canyon unassisted with a 12 to 14 car train due to the fact that their tractive effort is not enough to do the job. If Grand Canyon Railway is still pursuing the express rail to the Canyon idea proposed several years ago then the maximum track speed will probably rise.

I would hope that the San Luis & Rio Grande mainline can still hold most of the locomotives out there considering the 2-8-8-2 the Rio Grande ran over the hill for years.

We have a problem in our industry which is too many people do not understand the technology but they preach a certain position or wild idea not based on fact but emotion. This loose lips and fast words have caused me several times to have to undo prolific rumors and incorrect assumptions. While this is a natural human trait that we all have it often times destroys good efforts because it creates tension and distrust. This speculation and dreaming is a way we fill a void of a lack of news and facts. Yet in the long run, it helps create that void which we hate so much. Speculation may do more to destroy the industry than anything else.

With all due respect, if that were true the industry would never have survived the 1960s and 1970s. <:-)

I've never for the life of me understood--and neither have my Arizona in-laws who are rapidly learning a lot about railroads--how and why the GCRR puts its hottest and "weakest" motive power, its steamers, on during the hot high season summer months when any train (steam, diesel, nuclear, sail) is a good alternative to the crowded roads, and then uses the diesels during the slower months when the steamers probably could handle a shorter train and be more of a draw. But I agree I'm not privy to their actual operating statistics and strategies. The important thing to consider is that, absent any "greenies" shutting out steam, they have to be working with a very long-range plan, and eventually they may well have to either rebuild a vintage loco for the umpteenth time or build all-new from scratch if they want steam. Strasburg, New Hope, Valley, etc. can "baby" steamers on an easy run; GCRR can't. Eventually they'll have the same problem as the Mount Washington Cog Ry., and the solution will likely be the same. I was thinking of the QJs as one possible interim solution.

Heck, there were some rumors floating about recently about a certain Santa Fe 2-10-4, which in light of Brother Peartree's points above now sounds like the only feasible steam alternative for the GCRR. That or perhaps a certain speedy 4-6-6-4.............

As for SL&RG, I haven't the foggiest what their real plans are, but maybe there's some hope for a Chinese 2-10-2 there? Come on, five Big Domes behind a 2-8-0? What's the grade on that line? At least no one's proposing a certain Reading 4-8-4 and C&NW bilevels yet............. I hope.........

The Chinese 2-10-2's will not take our 16 degree mainline curves. As of yet no one out there is taking any of these Chinese things and making them work hard for a living. There is enough difference between good old USA overbuilt steam lack-of-technology and what the Chinese do with thier engines to cast some doubt in thier durability.

The 18 is ready to go, it is a known quanity. Chinese stuff isn't.

Besides, we'd have to buy a pile of metric tools to work on it.

The plan is to have 3 domes sent to Alamosa. One would replace the parlor car on the current trainset. We are toying with the idea of a diesel powered train to run peak season from La Veta to Alamosa and return. It would use the other dome, leaving one as a spare. The other two would go elsewhere or into Amtrak charter service.

As to the 583/683. Having her around would be seriously cool but impractible. She is quite a bit smaller, a slide valve soak, a real antique, and knowing where she last ran, I imagine she is in pretty rough shape. CRRM is a good home for her.

Makes sense. And I think what would be a "natural" is during the Major League Baseball spring training season when many snow birds use it as an excuse to head south. What I do not understand, is why the Grand Canyon wouldn't at least TRY running steam for a one or two week "experiment" during this period to at least see if ridership behind steam would increase over diesel powered train service.

Les

Potential problems in getting reliable results. Is it Heissenberg's Uncertainty Principle that the act of being observed changes the beahvior of the subject by creating a different set of conditions that that of the subject in its "natural" state? Been a very long time ago I learned about this stuff..........

First, just substituting power for a couple weeks and not telling anybody about it demonstrates nothing about the capacity of steam to draw people in from outside - and interested locals have probably already ridden. A short program of steam well publicized becomes a special event - which is a different market than a regular frequent service.

I think the only way to tell would be to bite the bullet and just do it and see how things shake down - which doesn't allow for variables beyond control such as the effect of weather patterns or gasoline costs on visitation under any set of circumstances regarding the product offered.

Which isn't to suggest it might not be worth a try.

dave

GCRY ran steam-only year-round at its incept. Then it switched to steam-in-summer, diesel-in-winter. Then it started running diesels in the summer, too.

In other words, they have tried that "experiment," and over 18 years of experience operating the railroad, the operation has evolved to produce the maximum revenue for the minimum cost. For several years at least, the railroad was a break-even operation at best, and all profits (and some subsidies) came from the Fray Marcos. That's why the Biegerts repeatedly offered the railroad operation for sale, and found no takers.

That's not to say that steam wouldn't increase ridership, but what's the justification for increasing ridership if it increases costs more than revenues?

JAC

Well, the danger of that approach is its inherent implication that conditions in the marketplace and cost structure haven't changed during the 18 year duration of the "experiment" - but I really don't think it was an experiment in the first place. What doubtlessly is true is that the operators of the RR know more about it than any of the rest of us do - and given their relatived success, we could do far worse than to give them the benefit of the doubt.

dave

With all due respect you both missed and proved the point of my post completely. When discussing property or project X you need to know something about it before a real discussion can happen. The San Luis & Rio Grande has a round trip ruling grade is 3% with 16 degree curves. The ruling grade on Grand Canyon Railway is 3% with 10 degree curves. 18 was a six Harriman car locomotive on Grand Canyon Railway. It should do well for San Luis & Rio Grande. Grand Canyon Railway was a 200 a day operation when originally conceived. They changed the number of days of train operation from 200 to 363 days when the Frey Marcus opened. They cut the number of steam says down to the time period between Memorial Day and the last day of September which was further reduced to an end at Labor Day a couple of years ago.

Since 2004 they have worked to improve the efficiencies of both the steam locomotives and diesels. They recognize that the steam locomotives have a role but that most people really do not care what locomotive pulls the train. They do give those people who want to ride on a steam train an opportunity to do so. Their marketing and promotional work has served the railroad well and they continue to improve their rider ship numbers each year. Grand Canyon Railway is challenging enough that even thou the Santa Fe was closing the branch they still filmed it for simulator use and did use the tape for mainline engineers out of Amarillo, Texas for one.

When some one says they need T&P 610 or Santa 2-10-4 or most locomotives out there and all of their diesel assists will be over ignores the fact that on a 3% grade it is tractive effort that determines what the locomotive is going to pull and most of the super power locomotives do not have a great improvement in tractive effort for the additional maintenance and issues they have.

When we make statements about incidents such as what may have happened with SP745 or make some assumptions to make a case for our favorite locomotive to be operating at a property we do little to promote our industry. As you want to change this or that so it will be “better” we defeat the purpose of preservation. People are saying and doing things without regard to the long term results of their actions. If this continues to happen we will be our worst enemy for our beloved tourist railroad industry and the railroad preservation industry. One must remember that history did not start the day before I saw something but rather a long time before that. So when I hear comments that something has to be this or you need to improve this without a real study of the issues at hand or worse yet an understanding of the organizational goals it reminds me of an SP employee who said that, “The SP could run a pretty good railroad if they did not have all of these customers.” Ignoring the reality of your mission, goals, and environment will do you more harm than good. People making statements of opinion regardless of the facts and issues at hand create far more damage than good.

Now please excuse me I have to once again tell yet another person that the driver spring on SP 3420 is fine it is designed to be upside down under the firebox. I am still getting over an ignorant comment over a decade ago.

Robby Peartree