Dave, I was only on the engine a couple of times, but I believe the one "burner" you see entering through the bottom of the fire door was it. It couldn't possibly have filled that firebox adequately with flame, particularly from that location. And the firing " valve" was very tough to regulate. But that was only one of the problems. The fire and water level management was horrendous, with the injector being VERY difficult to get started and the water pump apparently not even operable at all, from what I saw. Luckily the worst-case scenario didn't happen.

Scott

Actually I do, although not a good one. Taken with my cheap cell phone a couple of months ago....

Very cool, thanks!

I looked with interest at the interior firebox pictures, but I'm not seeing anything unusual there. I know several people have said that the firebox is now scrap, but unless it is out of the picture, I'm not seeing the catastrophic damage people were referring to...what am I missing?

Thanks Scott......the idea of filling a Wootten firebox with a door mounted burner seems intuitively not obvious to me. Short circuiting the heating surface with a rear mounted burner and no brick arch, coming in well above the mud ring, and between syphons seems like a great way to reduce steaming capacity by limiting the producing capacity to just the top central part of the firebox and tube bundle, while cooling the boiler through cold air pulled through the sides. Very odd idea.

I'd avoid the reactive opinion that a small amount of use converted the firebox to scrap without knowing a whole lot more than we are privy to, and without knowing the source of the information. If anybody truly knowledgeable has been through it and done a legitimate survey, it seems nobody here is aware of it.

Somewhere I have pictures of an uncle by marriage, Joe Rhein, running her on the Reading back in the 1950s. Have to dig them out one of these days.

dave

I believe previous photos show the siphon tubes as being severely warped. I could easily be wrong, but that's my recollection. The best plan for the locomotive would include returning it to a) the anthracite region, b) coal firing, Having a reputable locomotive shop do the restoration. I find that having the lead locomotive of a historic class left in this condition after having been made operable in the era of preservation, is the saddest part of the whole thing.

If one considers: 2100 is badly damaged by misuse, 2101 burned and partially restored for standing display, 2102 stored in fair condition, 2124 stuffed and mounted in need of heavy rebuilding. You wonder what the British would do with a cluster of for from the same class!

Hello,

Interesting discussion.

It prompts me to ask, even on oil burner locomotives in regular service, what happens in a flame out? Maybe this was rare, in a tunnel, oil flow interrupted? Was there enough brick work hot enough to immediately reignite the oil? The firebox and syphon tubes would be cooled by the boiler water. I have visions of volatized oil cloud filling the firebox ready to instantly ignite.

Certainly there was no spark source like as in at natural gas burner.

Thanks you.

Regards,

Randy

Happened and still happens occasionally. Yes, the brickwork will be hot enough to reignite the flame when fuel flow is restored.

The danger here is that too many efforts to relight the fire will result in a pool of fuel on the floor of the firepan, and when that finally ignites you do not want to be standing anywhere near the firedoor, as it produces what can best be described as a low-level detonation, wherein flame will come out all around the door as the fire searches for air.
In extreme cases, the door or the peephole can be blown off. The thing to do is stop trying to relight it, stop, use the blower to evaporate all the fuel lying there, and start over with your normal fire-up procedure.

Back in the 1990's, a certain steam operation learned this lesson well. They prided themselves on the use of fuel that consisted of basically anything that could be poured into the tender tank. As a result, they were trying to burn a slurry of waste oil, paint thinner, solvents, brake fluid, diesel fuel, gasoline, transmission fluid, etc. You get the picture.

At the midpoint of their trip, they were offered a load of good fuel gratis, which offer they considered insulting and loudly and indignantly refused. On the way home, the fire became a series of low-level explosions. By the time they got home, all the paint had been burned off the backhead and the cab ceiling, the wooden cab floor had been on fire several times, and often as not there was as much black smoke coming out of the cab windows and the bottom of the fire pan as was coming out of the stack, with the blower shrieking all the way.

Don't try this at home. These are professionals. Just ask them.

Warped syphons or distortion from the lens? Must have been a pretty wide angle to shoot inside a firebox.

Anyhow, syphons are just steel. They were frequently repaired in revenue service as were arch tubes, and for similar reasons. It's nothing to be afraid of.

dave

The group that Lincoln Penn speaks of seemed to pride themselves of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Perhaps that's why said engine hasn't run for years.
So many experts, so little time.
I'm genuinely surprised the 2100 didn't end up being a catastrophic disaster. And I'm very thankful it didn't.

Dave, perhaps a blistered syphon can be repaired, but at what risk to the operating crew when that blister gets hot enough to melt through? I for one do not wish to operate any locomotive with scale buildup to the point there is no thermal transfer of heat to the water. May not be a large hole when the steel becomes molten, but it is a risk to the crew. Pity the poor fireman who decides to check out the unusual noise in the firebox, by opening the door or peephole when the metal yields to the pressure. Poor maintenance and design practices are a hazard to everyone in the vicinity of the locomotive.
My 2 cents,
Mike Tillger

And neither would I, Mike. It wouldn't prevent me from replacing any damaged syphons though, and from maintaining good washout procedures to prevent scale problems from becoming a problem in the first place. I have no idea of that's what happened here.

But who has presented any evidence of blistering? Richard mentioned they looked warped in a photo but had no personal knowledge and neither do I, so I'm asking some questions to try to understand just what they installed here.

You seem to know more if you know firsthand that there was real damage and scale problems - please fill us in about more of the specifics of the installation and how it worked.

dave

I think I see what Richard is talking about... The siphons do look warped. If that's the case, imagine what sort of damage has been done to the firebox? Just for the hell of it, tear off the firebox, slap on a new one and be done with it. No reason to get someone killed...

I just touched base with a 'certain steam operations' fireman, wanted to set the record straight-used motor oil was used, at first, straight from the tanks of local auto shops. That didn't work so well, not because of the used oil, but because of the contaminates in it. In that time, it would of been pretty common to dump -every- waste automotive fluid into the same tank. From what I can see, plenty of groups can and do use used motor oil, but it goes without saying you can't suck the sludge off the bottom of every local shops tank and run.

They used transformer oil, certified and tested to be PCB free, that fired quite well. (the utilitys spend plenty of time keeping the PCB free oil out of the PCB bearing oil, because if you pour non-PCB oil into the PCB tank, that simply adds gallons to the hazmat disposal fees). Busybodies shut that down and it turned out to not be worth the fight to prove the oil was OK for use.

Machine oil from local paper plants was used, and it fired just fine too. But I don't think they were producing the oil in the quantity needed for longer trips.

Diesel was used on the longest trip, over some of the crew's objections. They were not the first crew to find out that you can't get enough heat out of it, nor were they the last. Some flashbacks occurred and eyebrows did get lost, but that was due as much to the engineer running as anything. The stories of the charred cab are a bit exaggerated. And the refusal of the good fuel-just remember the loudest, most obnoxious, and poorly behaved of your group will be presumed to represent your whole group, either hide them from the public or get rid of them. You may have to pay for it long, long after they are gone....lesson learned, I hope.

If we're talking about the photos linked in this thread...well, it may be my old CRT monitor, but they don't seem warped to me - I see the angle of the front of the syphons looking like they slant side to side, but where they in reality probably don't and the curving at the rear / top of the image where they rounded ends curve up to clear the top of the firedoor........all of which is formed that way. The sides don't appear to be bulbous or wavy or the rounded bottoms bent or otherwise disfigured by more than soot and mortar from the firebrick.

No, I'm not going to write this off based on what I can see in the posted images without more information.

dave