Hi guys;

Since there are a few Strasburg guys on here, I thought I go semi direct to the horses mouth with this question. With the lease of the LIRR 39 to the Strasburg Railroad, does this change their plans for ex CP 4-6-0 972 that was bought from the late George Hart? Will she keep her CPR appearance (I'm not going by what the rumours are saying)? Is there a master / long-term plan for the restoration of the 972, or is it being put on the back burner, now that a larger PRR designed G5 4-6-0 loco is now available?

Thanks - David Notarius, London UK

I think its safe to say that 972 has been on the back-burner for quite some time...or maybe it's better to say it has been very, very low on the "priority" list...

Thanks for asking as I am also wondering the same thing. I tried asking a similar question for the railroad to answer but that got kicked over to the “foaming” board. Also, why keep the engine if they have no long-term plans for it in the next 10 years or more? Its already been sitting there for 25 years or so. They can do as they wish of course but some of us find it curious that’s all.

I wish Strasburg and the LIRM all the best of luck.

Pennsy Power

At one time I thought D-10's to be the ultimate tourist branchline power, but considering that only one of the seven survivors is operable today, I guess I was wrong.

I thought there was an effort to steam #999 a few years back, but perhaps that is just my fuzzy memory?

Rob


For giggles here is the webpage for a silver coin commemorating the D-10 and Canada, complete with a picture of #972 at that bastion of Canadian steam, the Reading Shops.


http://www.talismancoins.com/servlet/Detail?no=1577

I am going to attempt to address the question concerning #972 vs. #39.

We bought #972 from George Hart in the mid-90s with the plan to have it in service by 2000. As work continued, we discovered several problems you don’t usually run into on a “normal” rebuild. As we attempted to weld repair the mud ring, it would crack parallel to each bead. We had it tested and the carbon content was so low it was not possible to weld repair it without cracking. That meant a new mudring would have to be fabricated. When we removed the wrapper sheet, we discovered the rear boiler course was not even close to round. Much work is required to make it round again. These issues along with the normal items you would encounter makes for a very expensive project for an engine that size.
Contrary to popular belief, we were not planning on making the engine into a PRR G-5. We decided to convert it to a belpare firebox with good reason. Since we had to replace the box anyway, we wanted go with the better design. (The belpare is a better design as compared to a radial because of more heating surface, more steam space, and everything is stayed at right angles) Unfortunately, business got to the point that the need for the locomotive faded and we last worked on her in early 1998.

Fast forward to 2013. While I will not go into the details, the partnership with the Long Island Railroad Museum makes business and operational sense for us and exposure sense for them. If the rebuild takes place, we will have a locomotive that will pull anything we’d give it. We will also have a PRR designed locomotive in service in PRR territory just like we used to. That is a big deal around these parts.

Rick

At what point does it become more sensible to build a new boiler from the ground up, both financially and from an upkeep standpoint?

I'm guessing that the chances of 972 being rebuilt at Strasburg any time in the next 50 years are slim, and the necessary work makes her an expensive prospect for anyone who would consider buying her. It's a shame, really, but that's the nature of the game. At least I'm fairly confident she's not going to be cut up in place while on Strasburg property.

Anyway, I'm still hoping for that eventual rebuild of #1187/4 which serves no realistic business value for Strasburg, other than attracting we weird Reading fans who want to see a camelback run. ;)

Depending on your mission statement, building new vs. repair is not just about cost. Each outfit would have to decide what was best for them. From a purely economic standpoint it would likely be best to go with new in this case, but………………
Never say never with #972, as you never know what will come down the pike. The same could have been said about #39.
Economically, #4 doesn’t make a lot of sense, but sometimes other factors enter into the equation. We shall see, maybe the Amish Mafia will threaten us if we don’t overhaul her.

Rick

Will they make thee an offer thou cans't not refuse?

dave

Rick, once the #39 is part of the operating roster, you guys will then have three heavy engines to take care of the long trains. In this case the need or economical use of the 31 and 89 becomes less. Has there been any discussions on how those two engines will be used in the future? I am sure there are no plans for retirement but will they be regulated to offseason duties only? Also, (from an operating and maintenance standpoint) is it better to have three heavy engines vs. what you have now?

Thanks,
Pennsy Power

Hey were talking about boilers here don’t get the board all steamed up. But since it was brought up Rick, can you ask Linn if the Amish guy who greased the tracks at Carpenter’s back in the day before they had crossing gates there was part of the Amish Mafia? Maybe you guys sold some Amish stuff made in China and they were giving payback.

Pennsy Power

Three “heavy” engines would be ideal because both #31 and #89 are restricted on the tonnage. Yes they will both pull the heavier trains, but they must be worked that much harder with the resultant higher repair bills. We try to restrict their use to the shoulder seasons and the “half hour” train. We have discussed several scenarios for both engines and only time will tell what happens. Just remember that nothing will happen with #39 until the money is raised.

Rick

By the numbers, 39 would give them a six coupled "heavy" engine that has slightly more power than 475. Who is to say that when either 475 or 90's 1472 comes up in a distance future, one of them might be put into storage? 39 could prove to be cheaper to operate than the 8 or 10 coupled engines. Experience would tell.

Then as Rick says, it makes operational sense. In recent years, they have had to push-pull heavy trains with the smaller engines for periods while the shop works readies a "heavy" engine.

I suppose this is foaming and perhaps belongs on the other side...

Bob

Mr. Musser, not that it really matters now at this stage of 39's restoration but I had heard in the past (or read it) that because of the G5's ower to drag the bejesus out of any train its assigned to, the 4-6-0's had a tendency to sway back and forth even on the most level of track making them very rough riding engines. My guess would have been a counterweight issue, but I'm probably wrong. Any truth to this claim about them being an unsmooth ride?

Back in the 80s we had an ex-Pennsy fellow working for us. I remember him telling me that at speeds between 45 and 55 mph the G5s would ride so rough they would sometimes shake the oil cans off the shelf on the backhead. He didn’t say specifically why and I have only read things such as the big gap between the #2 and #3 drivers being the cause. Whether the driver spacing is the culprit or not conjecture it this point. Maybe we will find out for ourselves someday.

Rick

On Long Island, they were typically matched to 12 car commuter trains during rush hours, and there were the heavyweight trains to Montauk. The G5's are remembered as having terrific acceleration and pull, but were known to ride very roughly. Occasionally, they were paired with a K4s, too!

Opinion time: 972 is better served as a CPR ten-wheeler, 1183 is better served as reassembled and an operable museum piece. 7132 is better served as functional switcher. As the main-stay equipment comes around for service, having the ability to "relax" a bit allows Strasburg to undertake rebuilding projects for others, while 39 hauls in thousands who just want to see a PRR design G5s underway.
Yes, there is a surplus of power, but really, who is complaining?