1533 was a grand looking ten-wheeler in the CNR tradition. Why she was disassembled and abandoned as scattered parts is beyond me. I'd love to see her get into the shop and rebuilt before the time comes to replace the 40.

The 1533 was reported to have been subject to a repair attempt that damaged the boiler many years ago. Thus, it was never considered for a restoration in recent years.

Can anyone confirm if this story is folklore, or is true?
Chris.

Well there appears to be torch cut holes in the boiler shell where washout plugs used to be. Apparently, they couldn't get the plugs out the conventional way, allegedly due to excessive scale buildup. My very limited knowledge of boilermaking would prescribe flush patches, but someone with more credentials than I should make that call. Supposedly the frame and lead truck are way out of whack from a reckless joyride through a misaligned switch at a relatively high rate of speed. At some point since being out of service, the boiler was off the frame. I haven't been able to find out if the work was done then or not. Currently the first and third driving wheelsets are swapped. Hope it all gets sorted out someday.

According to a certain online resource, the lead truck was damaged just before the grand opening in July of 1966, during the derailment and even re-railing, so badly so that the truck had to be repaired offsite by Reading shops, then brought back to the loco, which was repaired while sitting in Buckingham the brought back to NH for additional work. The work delayed the official opening until August of 66.

The Boiler was removed from its frame in February of 1976, as part of the rebuild of the loco for backup service on the the Bi-Centennial Service but after further examination, it was revealed that the engine needed FAR more work and time required for that work than originally thought (it was heavily used from 1966 to 1974 with only a few days of service in 75), so # 9 was rebuilt instead since the State service contract required two operating engines for that summer of 76. (mind you, NH&I has never and still does not own ANY diesel locomotives)....40 was the only company owned engine in service at the start of 1976, just as it is its only operating, company owned locomotive now.

Money troubles prevented any additional work to the engine and gradually, it just has continued its slow dissolve since there has never been any funding available for it.

Thought I read somewhere, perhaps on that site, that the engine still suffered from running gear problems despite the lead truck rebuild. So maybe the lead truck is ok but the rest is not? I wonder if the condemning factors in '76 were boiler related, machinery related, or both. I heard that when SRC gave her the once-over in '91 it was determined it could be restored for a not-unreasonable amount of resources. Flues are still in, so of course that means a comprehensive boiler inspection has not been done. So who knows?

--
Daniel J. Kelly

I believe both...it was a well worn engine by that time....the derailment was rather full...not just the lead truck, but the entire engine and tender left the rails, so your theory may be correct.

As for the work, it was only finances that prevented it...it COULD have been done at the time if the money was there, but we all know how often NH&I was not in the black during those time. The estimate of time and money to do the work needed, was upwards of 2 years and 6 figures, which is why 9 was chosen instead. They only had a few months to get a 2nd engine to satisfy the contract.

As far as SRC's work, I imagine since 40 had less years on it operationally, that is why the new management chose it over 33 in 90-91, and even #9 over 33 later on. I would love to have seen 33 roll out the door in 91 with 40....

I'm quite sure if they really wanted to do it now, they could and it would certainly be of more benefit to them in many more ways than the Mexican, but I'm not sure whats in their heads as far as long term goals.

If it were my business, I would rather MY equipment be restored first before someone else's with my money and crews...particularly if I technically only have one operating engine for all of my services.

40 has operated longer than any engine ever to run up there - 21 years now. A testament to their ability to perform and maintain. I am quite sure 33 would be around for many years of service with 40 if it were restored now....and it is a classy looking engine to boot.

You know as well as I do, only time will tell what they chose to do.