In the Facebook group Friends of NP 328 it is being shared with group members that MTM plans to restore the S10 Class ten wheeler Northern Pacific #328 to steam. With friction bearings, it also requires extensive firebox work, boiler work, and running gear work.

It is stated on MTM's website that the 328 is owned by the City of Stillwater who has leased the engine to the museum on a permanent custodial loan.

How common is it for a non-profit to accept donations to restore (cosmetically or to operation) on a piece of equipment they might not even own but have on display? A donation from the City of Stillwater, MN should be priority 1 if it indeed is still owned by the city.

The friction bearings are not easy (if possible at all) to convert to roller bearings to be able to operate the steamer off the MTM property.

328, if restored, would be used on caboose hop rides and for educational purposes only. There would not be an option to run it off MTMs property. 3/4 of a mile ride at best.

While we all want to see steam engines brought back to life, at what point is a plan set up for failure?

And yes, this is the same museum that was part of some very interesting discussion in January and February on this site.

In a case like this, SOLID bearings are not the kiss of death like a lot of folks want to believe.
New crown brass, if needed, redesigned oil lubrication to replace grease cakes and she will be just fine. Look at ex-SR 4501 and 630 at TVRM. They run cool on oil lube.
She would be the perfect engine for your MTM operation.

MTM has their own running rights and tourist ride called the Osceola and St. Croix, and I believe they have solid bearing rolling stock there. 328 is not a high speed mainline engine anyway. It never ran really long excursions, just trips around the metro area.

When 328 was taken out of service back in the late 1980s, it was described in the museum newsletter as "a basket case that probably never should have been restored in the first place". It looked cosmetically beautiful, but it never had the kind of jack-up-the-whistle restoration that we see most commonly today.

I guess the question is whether 328 or 2156 better suite the branch line excursions they are running.

Steven,
As a minor point she ran until at least September of 1998 where she joined the Soo 1003 & 2719 in a triple-header...........mld

If they can run solid bearing stock on their tourist operation, the 328 is small enough it could be trucked there and back as needed.

There are VERY few roller bearing steam locomotives around, especially with regard to main drivers. There have been some lead, trailing and tender trucks converted to rollers, but the frame around driving axles has to be designed for, or greatly modified, for rollers.

On the other hand, there are a lot of diesel electric locomotives in mainline service on Class 1 railroads, and elsewhere, that have solid bearings. I can't vouch for units with AC traction motors, but many (most?) units with DC motors have solid traction motor support bearings. The difference between them, and freight cars with solid bearings, is that the locomotives get those bearings inspected, and oil added if needed every 92 days, or more frequently.

Of course, those locomotives have rollers as their main axle bearings.

I rode in her cab for a bit on that "Steam in the Valley" weekend. She seems the perfect size for their operation, which I believe is every weekend during the summer. She's easy on coal, and her cab is set up for backing; the engineer's seat is mounted to slide on a bar mounted to the cab wall, and can be slid ahead of the reverse lever so the engineer can sit facing the direction of travel and lean out the window as needed. Not exactly dual control, but about as close as you can come with steam.

I am fairly certain that the Minnesota Transportation Museum doesn't even own this locomotive. Canadian National will not allow them to run steam out in Osceola without a massive insurance policy.

With no real remaining steam experience within the organization, a world class group just up the rails at Harrison Street with the Friends of the 261, there is really no profitable and reasonable path to achieve the return of 328 to the high iron.

They want to operate the 328 at Jackson Street Roundhouse only - and I'm guessing the FRA will require not only the 15 year rebuild and re-cert, but I'd be surprised if BNSF would allow the steamer on the siding MTM leases for their Roundhouse caboose ride.

Too many questions, not enough feasible options.

Then there is the issue of them not even owning the locomotive.

I question the issue of ownership you put out. That does exist for several locomotives: correct me if I’m wrong, but NC&StL 576 being restored in Nashville is not owned by the organizations involved in the restoration, but it’s a leased locomotive.

Heck, 261 was for a long time a leased locomotive. While there obviously are problems with this, aka what happened to 261 after it’s first stint in operation, I wouldn’t sweat that as the primary issue.

Now where have I heard that term "permanent loan" before?

Raising funds for a piece of equipment you do not own is common enough that there WAS such an arrangement that was summarily terminated about a year ago.

http://www.project3713.com/2022/02/03/p ... uary-2022/

There is a risk in accepting donations intended for such a project, since the owner can terminate the project or reject the funds and now YOU look like the bad guy, even if you did nothing to cause the situation.