Certainly exportqation of one's railroad heritage is the less deisrable option when it can feasibly be preserved at home, but preservation is infinitely better than destruction, no matter what the circumstances of preservation.

Imported Chinese steam in the U.S. would never be quite American, but it could raise awareness of our railroading fabric and heritage. Every time I've helped with steam operations in St. Louis we've atracted numerous of the currious and the number of people that say, "I've never seen a steam locomotive before," or "I've never seen onbe operating," is quite impressive. This is in a town where we have one of the premier U.S. rail museums and regular mainline steam opperations.

If you could get steam working on more tourist lines in the U.S. and convince even half the people who'd never seen working stteam before to donate a few dollars we could stand to raise a healthy amount towqards preserving and restoring further domestic locomotives.

Now all of this hinges on just how economical it is to purchase, ship, overhaul, and opperate an imported mainline locomotive. If the price is right, and the Chinese government is unlikely to preserve much at home, this could be seen as not only a move towards a sort of preservation, but an investment for the future of the preservation and operational communities in the U.S. (Tourist lines always seem to get better ridership with steam, if what I read here is any indication.)



david_ackerman@yahoo.com

Hey Hugh
what happened to the little Baldwin outside frame 0-10-0 s that were working on a tin RR at least until the 80s?

If the tractors that are being currently imported from China are any indication, their castings are atrocious, and the machine work looks like the pieces were chucked up and a cold chisle was used to do the work. Losts of pinholes in castings, ect.

Good question- I do seem to remember someone posting a photo of one a few years ago, indicating that they still survived. The best page on Chinese steam, Michael Powell's "Unofficial China Railways Page" probably had the photo, but it is no longer in existence.

It sure would be neat to bring a couple of those engines home.

> Hey Hugh
> what happened to the little Baldwin outside
> frame 0-10-0 s that were working on a tin RR
> at least until the 80s?


The Ultimate Steam Page
whodom@awod.com

In addition, the leak rate on their pipe fittings has been about 30% where I have used them ... DO everything you can to make good old USofA pipe fittings are used. Been burned, US made fittings are getting harder to find around Ohuio.

Wonder how much asbestos is in one of their steamers??


lamontdc@adelphia.net

What was the motivation, economic or otherwise, for bringing the three 2-8-2s over in the late '80s? Also, isn't a 2-10-2 basically a slow drag freight locomotive that wouldn't be good for excursion use?

It seems that if a person or organization with sufficient financial means decides that they want to bring over a Chinese steam locomotive, modify it, and operate it here, it will happen despite any compelling moral, ethical, or historical reasons why it shouldn't.

davew833@yahoo.com

Two have been reported in existance. One, SN 23, is stored in the open on the Jige narrow guage line, Yunnan Province. The other, SN 26, is in good shape and is stored in a shed in Kunming Bei, Yunnan Province, China.

The latter is Baldwin/58298/1924.

There were other US-built steam engines reported in China. Most were preserved in musuem or on display; the others were dumped and may have since been scrapped. Some were retrieved and went to the UK; including an S-160 2-8-0.

-James Hefner
Hebrews 10:20a

> Good question- I do seem to remember someone
> posting a photo of one a few years ago,
> indicating that they still survived. The
> best page on Chinese steam, Michael Powell's
> "Unofficial China Railways Page"
> probably had the photo, but it is no longer
> in existence.

> It sure would be neat to bring a couple of
> those engines home.


Surviving World Steam Locomotives
james1@pernet.net

somebody have the contacts to find out what it would cost to get one here?

> Goodness! So much happens when you are gone for a few days.
I read the above thread with great interest, especially in veiw of the fact that in the ten plus years since the three locomotives were imported from China, no one has done it again (well, Walter tried but his sank).
A few random comments:
1) The price that a company in the US (or other First World country) pays is at least three times what a Chinese company would pay for the same item. I realize that this would seem unfair, short sighted, etc. but that is the government policy. Developed countries can afford to pay more, and even at price x 3, the price is less that one would pay in their own country. While I was in China as inspector during the construction of our SY, I met and chatted (via phrase book) with a fellow from a steel mill near Shanghai who was "picking up" a new SY for their mill. He told me the price that they were getting theirs for: less than a third of what we were paying. But,
2) our SY had a number of modifications, such as right hand drive, crown stays larger in diameter than standard, no asbestos insulation (now a standard feature on most if not all Chinese locos), etc. I would note that,
3) the use of French firebox steel might have been due to our requirement for heavier than standard firebox sheets due to the opinion of our mechanical engineer that the standard sheets would be difficult to keep from warping during welding in the staybolts using a full penetration weld rather than the standard fillet weld (this may or may not have been overly cautious, but in any event, the firebox never gave us any trouble at all). I would also note,
4) that the circumferential joints in the boiler are full penetration welded (as are all other seams), the pins that Stevie Z. refers to are used in place of mudring, boiler brace, etc. rivets. They too were full penetration welded.
5) As I have noted previously, our SY was a really good locomotive, with an excellent boiler and precicely made running and driving gear. The finish was more "workman" like: OK for a machine, which to the folks who built it, all it was. We had a good deal of trouble with the various cab, etc. valves: they were made with bronze disk and steel seat which rusted, tearing up the bronze disk. We replaced all the smaller valves with US made and renewed the (replaceable) seats in the large ones with stainless steel and solved that problem. The one problem we couldn't solve,
6) was how to pay for the locomotive. Ours cost us $300,000.00 delivered to Camden, NJ. The payments on the loan we took out to buy it were about $6,000.00/month. Had we been smart, we would have arranged for a yearly payment towards the end of the summer when we had money, but we didn't and when the Savings&Loan banking crisis hit in 1991, our bank wanted to call in the loan.We were not in a position to pay it off or find another lender. In many ways it was fortutious that Walter's loco. sank at that time, he wanted an SY and we had one that we had to sell. The profit from the sale enabled us to finish the rebuild of our No.40 which we hadn't been able to continue due to lack of funds.
7) There are plenty of SY, QJ and JS (and a very few JF) available. All left hand drive, all with fillet welded staybolts, etc. If you have about $275,000.00 to spend, give me a call at The Valley, we can chat (I'll be back from Western Maryland Scenic on April 12).
J. David


jdconrad@snet.net

> Paul: You make a good point regarding
> heritage, but I have a strong suspicion that
> it wouldn't matter if the average Chinese
> citizen wanted to preserve his railway
> heritage or not; the state will cut up for
> steel anything that is available, and to
> heck with history. Let's go one step further
> and say that I want to restore operation to
> a line nearby where I live, or assume a
> railroad scrapped all it's steam in
> "the great purge of the 50's",
> then this would be a great opportunity for a
> steam heritage revival. Rather than see it
> as a drain off North American restoration
> projects, I would see it as a chance to
> expand the public re-introduction to
> operational steam. As a foremost capitalist
> (rail)roader, the potential for purchase of
> a rebuilt and fairly modern 2-8-2 or 2-10-2
> seems very appealing. Rather than turn my
> back to it, I'd say grab at the brass ring.
> Let me also say that I see your point very
> clearly and it does hold a great deal of
> validity.

If you want to do this as a commercial enterprise, ala NYS&W, then it does make some sense. The SY class 2-8-2's and QJ 2-10-2's do have an American look to them, although they are left side operating. I was really taken with the older 4-6-2's, but they're probably gone by now.

If you wanted to do something in narrow gauge (major advantage in not having to deal with the FRA), the 750mm light railway 0-8-0's really have a lot of charm, and some of the one's in Manchuria had cold weather vestibule cabs and very British looking 3 axle tenders. They also had some very classy coaches for tourists. They were a favorite of mine, and I have to admit to more than passing thoughts of how to get one here myself.

pww57@hotmail.com

Not being a machinist or mechanic, this may sound a little naive, but maybe the best answer to the cost of importing a Chinese engine would be to just bring in the parts that can be easily used here, like frames and running gear, and have those parts that tend not to be up to our standards fabricated in the U.S. or other countries that can still do the job. Is Poland still building boilers?

There is still the narrow gauge option for avoiding the FRA, and if it is for a commercial tourist operation it might be preferable. You can still move large numbers of people with narrow gauge and keep costs down. And you wouldn't have to worry about regauging the equipment for an amusement operation.


pww57@hotmail.com

> There is still the narrow gauge option for
> avoiding the FRA,

Narrow Gauge per se does not "avoid the FRA." Less than 2 foot gauge, yes. But anything 2 feet or over that meets the other criteria spelled out in section 230.2 is under FRA jursidiction.

> Narrow Gauge per se does not "avoid the
> FRA." Less than 2 foot gauge, yes. But
> anything 2 feet or over that meets the other
> criteria spelled out in section 230.2 is
> under FRA jursidiction.

Again I show my lack of complete knowledge on the subject. What are the other criteria for narrow gauge to come under FRA jurisdiction? My guess would be that interstate operations would be one of them, what are some others and why (as I have been led to believe) is the EBT exempt, since it was the last narrow gauge common carrier East of the Mississippi?

pww57@hotmail.com

I am surprised noone has mentioned "Multi Power International". The handle the importing of ALL chinese steam loco parts and appliances.

jasonsobczynski@yahoo.com

Are these oil or coal burners?

Just curious,

Stuart

Help save the 87
gnufe@apex.net