So upon seeing all the recent postings and talks about the UP 3985 and 5511 being restored, plus UP 844 and 4014 being operational, it feels like the one big steam giant from UP that's missing is the UP 9000. The sole surviving 4-12-2 would make quite the spectacle to see operational, but my question is... is it actually possible? I know obviously with enough money anything is, but practically is it possible? For example, what if RRHMA wanted to take a swing at its restoration, it is really feasible to restore to complete the set of five? They have a lot of potential, so if anyone could, I think it would be them.

Off topic from this, but if we're looking at one of the largest non-articulated steam locomotives, do you think it would be likely for them to get 4014 after it's 1,472 is up if UP doesn't want to keep it?

Ah yes, the UP 9000 debate that comes up every so often. To be fair, with all of the hype over 3985 and 5511, I'm surprised there hasn't been a post dedicated to it recently. I guess let's break down your post. Yes, as you've said, sure it's possible with the right money and know-how. But practical? Not so much, especially for the 9000. It unfortunately has a lot going against it. Being the only 9000 left gives it a uniqueness that wouldn't allow its owners to decide to give it up easily. It also hasn't ran in years, so you'd be looking at a restoration probably similar to UP 5511. Just like 5511, no one is 100% sure what the boiler and running gear condition is. But the biggest, most glaring flaw 9000 has that almost seals its fate as a static display is that rigid frame.

Let's say the owners/museum would be willing to give it up for a restoration and the money was available. But you need a place to run it. Nothing against the folks at VMT whatsoever, but you don't want a 611 situation where you get something restored and it can only run a few miles on track that doesn't let the locomotive stretch its legs. Plus, there are very few places where the 9000 could do that, regardless of how much track length was available. I was once told that even moving the 9000 was a challenge when it went through Cajon Pass and they had to essentially move at walking speed. It would almost have to run on UP rails to find a long enough section of track that was suitable and I don't see them going for that. You mentioned what if RRHMA got it? They would be in the same situation. I don't know what the overall terrain of the IAIS trackage is (which is where most of the RRHMA steamers will likely run) but I know there would be some challenges on the Silvis to Bureau Jct route. If RRHMA was given a choice hypothetically to restore UP 9000 or 838 to operating condition, I'd be willing to bet it would make more sense to go for 838 despite all of its missing parts and the massive amount of work and money that would be needed because at the end of the day, the 838 could run at a decent speed and not have to worry about having a place to run.

The moral of the 9000 story is that it would be cool, but it's a railfan's pipe dream. They'd be better off trying to get a Yellowstone or the Cab Forward. The Cab Forward would be hard to negotiate to get and I don't know about a Yellowstone, but they could both be better suited over 9000. For your 4014 question, I don't believe so. I'm sure UP has some sort of contract with the original owners of 4014 where if UP doesn't want to run it anymore it goes back to them. If not, RRHMA would probably be an option they would consider.

Well, 9000 wouldn't have another operating engine of the same wheel arrangement within 100 rail miles the way 611 now has.

A calendar a few years back showed 9000 on Santa Fe (they hosted UP over Cajon Pass) with men in fedora hats (1950's equivalent of white hard hats) watching the wheels in a turnout. UP 4-12-2's had a longer rigid wheelbase than PRR 6100 even with its divided drive and high wheels.

Phil Mulligan

I remember seeing that same photo in an old Trains Magazine. If I recall correctly that was a special move to get it to the museum in California, and going over winding mountain passes required some special attention and grease in the tightest spots.

Definitely not a good candidate for the long wheelbase alone- you'd be hard pressed to find a wye that would take it these days.

I just feel as if the 9000 could run if it got the right people behind it. I mention RRHMA because they are the first that come to mind, especially if they do good work on the 3985 and could negotiate with the owners of the 9000. We don't have any "Texas" type steam locomotives running due to a lot of negativity around restoring one.

Sure, like I said before it could run again. Let's go back and say RRHMA did get it. It could probably be restored and run up and down the tracks near the Silvis shops, but it's not going to go much further than that. Comparing a 2-10-4 to a 4-12-2 is a bit of a stretch as well. There are no operational 2-10-4s not because of negativity, but just like the 4-12-2, there's a lack of a place to run them. Granted a Texas type would be less of a headache to find places to run it. If you keep bringing up RRHMA getting the 9000, I think a more logical hope would be for them to get a 2-10-4.

If you look at the 2-10-2s, the last 3 that have run were all 3 of the QJs. 6988 and 7081 both ran on IAIS trackage where they had a dedicated place to run. The RJC 2008 ran on Corman's tracks. If those three weren't owned by major companies, they'd probably be sitting like the other preserved 2-10-2s. There are a few 4-8-4s that organizations can't even find a good place to run them at. SP 4449 if I recall correctly doesn't really have as much track as a 4-8-4 needs, 611 is in the same boat. When RDG 2100 gets restored, I don't believe there is a solid plan of where to run it just yet either. I'm not sure about the two ATSF ones, but I was told the NC&STL 576 out of Nashville was supposed to run on N&E tracks. Now that Corman took that over, I'm wondering if that one will still be able to run there, or if they'll be out of luck too. Point is, if you can't find good places to run 4-8-4s, how are you going to find a suitable place for a 4-12-2.

Sounds like everyone is getting out ahead of their headlights here. I'm waiting for the first person to say "Well, the 9000 got there under her own steam, she must be in good shape".

As for the RRHMA, they will need to "earn their bones" before everybody starts wanting to send everything there. Right now their plate is full and getting fuller.

Who will be first to say FIRE UP 9000?

Time to take this thread over to railfanning....

no way the 9000 would operate again because of that long rigid wheelbase. I wouldn't want to restore it because of that wheelbase.

Next, someone will suggest running the D-D trucked Centennial on a tourist line..... one with curves.............

But would it fit on the turntable ...... LOL!

This is going to Railfanning. Dreaming impossible dreams belongs to the railfanning forum.

Ahh yes, now I remember why I don't post here. Because someone has a question or wants information/discussion about something that's "impossible", they get dogged on.

Well, to be fair, the chances of UP 9000 getting restored are nearly 0. It's not impossible, but realistically no. I don't know what you expected whenever you picked quite literally the locomotive that has the absolute least chance and is the most impractical to restore.

No, they get dogged on for asking the wrong sort of question.

There was plenty more ragging, with a whole lot less "there" to be restored, when the T1 Trust started. Much of the serious ragging is no more... so why not try what they did:

1) Start with a DETAILED feasibility plan: what research and networking do you need to do, how will you raise and 'steward' money; who will you need or want to get on board... all the stuff that keeps you out of the sort of situation Dick Jensen found himself in.

2) Do your research early. Find the people; make good first impressions

[BTW: in my opinion, your organization's model should be much more(something the Trust did not do well at first!); find more people through the ones you now know; get sources, in fact line up multiple sources, for everything you're going to need.

3) Find a place, OF YOUR OWN, where the work can be done effectively. I'd also take steps to secure the location where the finished engine will be kept and maintained. (The T1 Trust did this early; they just don't talk about it.)

When you prove you can do it, and you can keep it, line up your financing, including bonding and insurance. This is a large sum. It does not need to be raised all at once, but don't take any steps if you don't have the moeny or insurance to put everything back safe and whole if 'problems' of any kind emerge.

Do these things correctly and fully, and you have a big leg up on demonstrating that you know, or can easily and effectively find how, to do what youre planning to do. This worked wonders with the 576 people, the move of a Berkshire to Kentucky (with a custom CSX logo painted on it!) and a certain 'rail-whacking' 2-8-8-2 of far more augment that a 3-cylinder engine with considerably higher drivers...

[BTW: I think your 'model' for organization should be a lot more like the group that restored 71000 Duke of Gloucester than the Tornado people...]