I tend to agree with this opinion. The only other surviving Santa Fe 4-6-4 is from a different class. The emphasis on this groups ideas is a passenger hauling engine. But, where is the market? Amtrak? Commuter operations? VIA? I just don't see it, even if they prove their point. IF this technology has any chance, it would seem to me to have to be oriented toward freight operation. This is the market! And here would be an opportunity using a Chinese QJ class 2-10-2 as a starting point. There are still some for sale I believe. Yes, not free, as number 3463 apparently was, but if the group is to be considered as genuine, the cost of a couple of QJ's should not be the sticking point. And thus an historic preserved locomotive would not be used. I really hope this group is successful in its endeavors. I just hope that it is not with the 3463.

My 2 cents.

Les

Where was this indignance at desecrating a historic artifact when the engine was a neglected, rusting hulk the last 60 years?

As Dave said, it is their engine and they can do what they want with it. Also, however, the public is free to disapprove of it all they want. I disaprove of using the engine as a modern test bed, and they have no way of preventing my disapproval. I also could not be more skeptical of their mission statement. I have the right to be skeptical.

But, as to your statement above where you ask, "How could they not think that they are destroying.... Its like putting a NASCAR engine from today and putting it inside a old Ford Model T."

I understand your point, but it is my opinion that there is a sizable number of people who will not see the point you are making with your comment.

I know but it was the only thing I could come up with to discribe my point on the situation. I just wished they choose an engine that was either smaller or one that had more survivors of its same engine type and class was pick. Plus like Les Beckman said, why could not pick a Chinese engine instead but I know that they too are not as cheap as one on display in a park or museum. Why cant build a new steam engine from the ground up instead?

Have they solved the dynamic augment problems inherent with reciprocating steam power? What railroad is going to give up their smooth running diesels for track pounding steamers?

How will their technology solve the maintenance issues of steam power? From what I have read all they are doing is pretty much replacing coal with some pseudo coal in a modified firebox.

So who is going to start the "Don't Desecrate the 3463" website, open a PR office and give interviews with the news media to combat their plans? Or do you just gripe here where it will do no good?

Or, perhaps lets take a longer look at this, and maybe embrace it. Us rail preservationists are an interesting lot. We can care less when rust reduces our "priceless, last of its kind" treasures back into iron ore, but get all hot under the collar when someone comes along and disturbs that decay for a project to make the locomotive relevant again. Support the effort and lets see if 2012 technology can make a difference.

With the rebuild happening in the twin cities, I have to wonder if the 261 folks haven't already been contacted to handle the physical modifications. If so, then perhaps they would do it with an eye toward reversibility?

The worst outcome may be a locomotive abandoned mid conversion, leaving a hulk that is no longer a Santa Fe Hudson nor is it an advanced steam locomotive.

That is the reason why I am worried about this project. Thats why I wish they would just stick to restoring it to a normal operating steam locomotive like what everyone else does when it comes to restoring steam locomotive's today.

I am new to this forum, but have been around, and operated steam locomotives along with knowing experienced mechanical/restoration experts for years. And as much as I would love to see Steam return to the rails on a regular basis, I do not believe this is the answer.

The answer is to preserve pieces of equipment for our children to experience in the future. Does not matter if its for profit railroads, or museum operations these locomotives need to be preserved. Not saying that you have to keep every piece of historical fabric intact, but lets not butcher something just to try and prove a point.

With the budget numbers I have seen thrown around, a new locomotive would be the better route to go if you choose to attempt this venture. That being said, why would the over 100 year old technology change much from the days of steam. The research and development of steam technology stopped with the production of the the steam locomotive. Look to China who carried on production for many years after the U.S. and see that there designs did not change much. It is just not possible to make a steam locomotive more efficient than a diesel. Do you not think the railroads did there research when they spent the many millions of dollars to convert over?

This really sounds like someone has a crazy idea to test a new fuel product and looking for a way to prove their product with the help of rail fans. Lets face it, if you are looking for a way to raise money to test a product, then you pick a means to test it that stirs emotions and passions. People will give money for the chance (a seemingly real chance) to see a steam locomotive running mainline passenger service.

Not trying to be a conspiracy theorist here, but someone is out to make some money at the expense of a one of a kind locomotive.

Maybe I was not clear. You made your point fine. I am just saying that there are a lot of people who are interested mainly in steam propulsion, as opposed to historic steam locomotives. So they naturally advocate modernization and upgrading. They want better efficiency, lower maintenance, etc.

That is obviously the motivation of this group with the 4-6-4. So I am a little mystified as to why they would even start with an antique locomotive. They sound like they have unlimited engineering expertise. I would think that the new locomotive they plan to build from the AT&SF engine will require a new boiler, new cylinders, new valves, and new drivers.

I would also think that the engineering for this new locomotive would take several years for maybe a dozen engineers and designers. Has that been done yet?

For what you said in your last sentence has it been done yet. So far no.

Yes I get your point now Ron. I just hope that when this locomotive does come in the future when its completed, it will still look like an ATSF Hudson instead of a new looking engine. I just hope they keep the engines ATSF Looks if this project gets underway

Except that's not what they're trying to do.

Interesting how that quote in the above post was attributed to me when I did not say that, and do not feel that way.

Ummm, locomotives do have throttles, and it wouldn't be run at 130 mph where it was not safe and appropriate.

Second, this is not a fantrip engine, it's a testbed for a scientific/ engineering research program. As such, any use on a loaded passenger train would be highly exceptional (although really cool), and the train's speed would be limited to the safe operating track speed, or safe operating speed of the poorest piece of equipment, whichever is slower.

Steve Hunter

I barely ever post, but I have to put my 2 cents in on this one...

I find it incredibly funny that all those people who are so vehemently against this proposed work on #3463 are only NOW taking up the cause. Before today, they couldn't have cared any less, and would have kept their mouths completely shut if the engine had been left to rot and decay forever.

I don't understand why people whine and cry about "historic fabric" of steam engines. The main argument used is that the engine shouldn't be disturbed and updated with modern appliances because that takes away from its historical authenticity. You say "we want future generations to enjoy the locomotive as it was back when it was retired"...which is fine. But sadly, it seems that usually ONLY RAILFANS actually NOTICE those kinds of details! 99.5% of the people who'd go to view the engine would have absolutely NO IDEA whether any given part on the locomotive were part of it's "historic fabric" or not. Railfans always assume that what they see, everyone else sees. But if that were the case, I think the steam preservation business would be much more widespread and successful.

Ultimately, what usually ends up happening is that this "historically authentic" engine spends eternity as a static, deteriorating hulk of metal....bird crap all over the boiler, holes in the tender, and a plethora of animals making their homes in its nooks and crannies. But they'd rather see that, than see what little of its historic fabric hasn't already been eroded, stolen, or broken be modernized. I know there are cases where this isn't the outcome...some organizations have the money to preserve and beautify their locos without sacrificing authenticity. But I don't think they're in the majority.

Mind you, I'm not saying that instead, EVERY steam engine should be restored to operating condition. Not very practical. I'm just saying that, in cases where there IS a choice between restoring a locomotive to operating condition or preserving its historic fabric as a static, rusting display piece in a museum....go with complete restoration to operation. Steam engines weren't created to stand still...they were created to RUN. The very qualities that make them so endearing even to this day can only become manifested in an engine that's living and breathing. Even if 3463 is restored, becoming nothing close to the state it was in when it was retired in 1957, it'll still make a hell of a greater impact on a budding railfan as she steams by...stack barking, rods clanking, and whistle moaning...than she would if she were simply left to rot where she is now. The more that are given the chance to run again, the greater our chances are for steam to survive into the next generation.

That's my 2 cents.

I am baffled at how some of the respected names listed as "Technical Advisors" are willing to associate themselves with this project.

This is painful to watch. Somehow pixie dust has been sprinkled and all the documented technical limitations of steam propulsion have been wished away.

I too, wish them well.

However, I detect a whiff of the late, unlamented "effort" to restore exUP 4018.