For those of you who have not seen or heard. A new beast is roaming the rails at the W&W. More info can be found here:
http://forums.railfan.net/forums.cgi?bo ... 1221369552

Interesting question that arises:

The B&O and Chessie System employee timetables I have for this area ALL say that the Landenberg Branch was restricted specifically to SW1's and Alco S2's. I assume that this had to do with weight restrictions on the trestles, or one or two sharp curves.

Has the W&W done any analysis to determine whether an SW900 (which the B&O had) is now compatible with the "rebuilt" railroad?

Also, what of 114 and 8408? Are they hale and healthy, or is there a more, er, sinister reason that the SW900 was leased?

I thought weight restrictions are typically due first to bridges, then due to track and roadbed condition. Were not quite a few bridges washed out and rebuilt on the W&W?
O. Anderson

I've heard that both SW-1's are facing problems to be expected from anything nearly 70 years old and having no major rebuilds. The 114 has been notorious for electrical problems over the years, despite electrical rewiring being done. I have also heard, there are already some 'issues' with this leased SW900...so, who knows where that will lead. The 8408 will never leave though, as it is on the National Historic Register along with Boontons, 98 ,92 and the branch itself. The bridges were on that register, until their compete destruction which removes them and is why only the two completely destroyed were replaced and the others repaired after Floyd. ...the 114 is a different story, it was a trade and not registered.

As for the ROW...here are just some observations....NOT SET IN STONE.

Considering that the branch was limited to 100 tons with the trestles it had for over 100 years, yes, that is the primary reason, as well as the smaller bridges and culverts found along the ROW. I question whether it was structural design that set this limit or if it was just pure age, as I can't see those B&O 10 wheelers weighing in at under 100 tons fully loaded with water in the boiler and coal/wanter in the tender. I guess it would have to do more with the distribution of that weight though. 8408 was assigned to the branch from the day it left the builder in 1940, although many other SW-1's were seen on the branch over the years. The ALCO S-2 (3/D-3) that the W&W had on the line until it was traded for the 114, was, from my understanding, re-ballasted to bring it into that 100 ton compliance...though it still had a history of spreading rails along the line and derailing, including a rather 'nasty' derailment near duPont's drive just prior to its' departure. Some of the wooden trestles on the line were completely rebuilt over the years with new materials, others were just "upgraded"...basically, preventative maintenance.

All bridges on the main line are now currently are built of steel (I'm sure rated well over 100 tons now...anyone know for sure the new limit?), which was not the case prior to TS Henry as only 2 were rebuilt with steel after Floyd. The smaller bridges were gradually replaced over the years with steel, long before any major flooding. Culverts are a different story....some have been replaced with new materials, others are still in the works (unless they were part of flood destruction rebuild efforts)?

My question of concern would be the Iron Bridge at Ashland, which was one sticking point for weight limitations. From my understanding it was not the bridge itself, but rather the foundations of/and the abutments themselves that were questionable. I'd assume with the scouring that was seen from T.S. Henry on both approaches to this bridge, that they may have been repaired. Obviously, they're running double headed steam over it, so something must have been done. (years back, only the 3, 0-6-0t, was able to be double headed on the line due to its' small size.) Prior to, if the train exceeded the TE of say, 98, for Hockessin Hill, a diesel would wait at Yorklyn to couple up for the final climb up the Hill. Bridge weight limit is also the reason 37 never carried water in the tanks over the boiler, rather always toting the T-215 (aux. tender) behind it.

As for the track itself, what was primarily an under-maintained, 85lb rail, scattered with 100lb here and there, cinder ballasted ROW (B&O days), had slowly been rebuilt by the HRCV after their purchased the branch in 1982. Reality is the B&O/C&O did nothing with the branch to really keep it up after about 1940 when the on line quarries had closed and the overall branch profitability went down the tubes. There were several cases where they (chessie) tried to destroy the line before finally giving up and selling it to HRCV. Chessie couldn't abandoned the line, even though they attempted, due primarily to NVF and other shipper protests. (I still wonder how much of an "arson case" Broad Run really was)

Anyway, under new HRCV ownership, all grade crossings were torn up and rebuilt with new materials starting in the late 1980's and finished up in the early 90's including many cases, crossing lights, with State Aid. More recently, the branch was under a 10 year, State assisted (with regard to matching RR investment) rebuild when Hurricane Floyd hit the Valley in 1999.

This plan was begun in 1997 and was set to see a complete physical plant rebuild completed by 2007. Pretty much, the hurricanes were somewhat of a blessing as had they not hit when they did, the RR would still be facing serious issues with the aging bridges and some infrastructure, but with a nicely rebuilt ROW otherwise.

I think its safe to say, with some exceptions, the 85 pound rail (common originally) is gone from the main line, (the exception maybe being the line from Valley Road east to the Switch at Hockessin proper) replaced at least with 100 pound rail, up to 135lb rail in some cases (crossings and leads). Most switches were either rebuilt or torn out if they were in fact not a necessity. Also, the ROW is now just about fully built on a ballast foundation, unlike say 20 years ago, when it could be said more of the ROW was cinders and old bleached ties than anything. The only section that still needs more work is the Hill, from Yorklyn up....and that is work currently in progress.

Others can add or edit this, I'm sure there are some mistakes or corrections needed.... this is just going from what I know of from my 13 years working down there, pre-T.S.Henry.

The bridges are all steel now after being destroyed and replaced in various 100 year floods that happen every 3-5 years now due to massive poorly planned development in the region.

Neither 8408 nor 114 are part of the National Register listing. The listing was approved in 1980, about when I first joined. The listing was part of the reason HRCV was able to save the line when Chessie wanted to abandon it.

There is also a common misconception that 8408 spent her entire life on this line. Having grown up in the area I can say for sure that a number of the B&O/Chessie SW-1s have operated there. There was even a short time when a B&O Chicago Terminal SW-1 hauled the freight and even pinched hit for an ailing 98.

73 acres (ROW)
1 building (Yorklyn Station)
14 structures (wooden bridges)
9 objects (92, 98, 1 DL&W Combine, 3 DL&W Coaches and ?).

I had assumed that the 8408 was one of those 3 remaining of the 9 total 'objects' (2 B&O cabooses maybe the other two?), being added after the purchase was made, due to the listing, as you stated, taking place 2 years prior to sale of the branch, which included the 08. Maybe it never was added though?

Indeed the 08 was not the only SW used on the branch, but the line still was its' "assignment" which places the historical/sentimental value in association to the branch and falls in line with the HRCV's sole purpose.

Abandonment proceedings were attempted by the B&O/C&O prior to the final process of historical registration taking place....NVF (original name escapes me for sure.. Delaware Fiber?) and the 4/5 other online customers were the primary opponent to those proceedings (early 1970s). Had it not been for the original opposition, would the HRCV even have had a chance to begin their fundraising to save the line?

My recollection (from being around and joining HRCV around the time that the official transfer/sale went through in September 1982) was that 8408 was kind of "thrown in" at the last minute by the Chessie System--which leads me to think that they spared themselves some mandated shopping/inspection by doing so. Nothing published publicly at the time of sale/transfer indicated that 8408 was specifically special to the Landenberg Branch.

I can't believe I've been there for nearly 30 years. I could not find anything on the equipment actually in the register listing but I'm sure it included steamers 92 & 98, four DLW cars, two cabooses, and probably the 4662.

The sale of the line was approved in ICC docket #29921 which became effective on August 2, 1982 and the last day of B&O operation and maintenance was August 13, 1982. The sale included 72.34 acres- 10.2 miles of right of way and locomotive 8408 which was used for the first few years exclusively by the Octoraro Railway who operated the freight service until about 1985. The total price was $90,000 of which $30,000 was paid at settlement and the remainder was held in a 20 year mortgage held by the B&O. This was paid off early. The big gala celebration was September 19th with a doubleheader featuring 98 and 3. The engine house property was not part of the sale and was later purchased in a separate transaction.

As the sale neared the 8408 was sent to Baltimore for some upkeep after a the local diesel guy at Wilsmere found some problems. I don't remember what they did but the folks at W&W were really happy about it. Also there were some spare parts hanging around Wilsmere that came with her as well. Those were the days!