Is it even remotely possible that one of the ex-GTEL turbine engines could still be running somewhere? Seems unlikely that anyone would even want to given the tremendous progress that has been made in turbine technology over the years.

Simple, Just use the exhaust and blow all the those nimby zombies away.

Given the unique nature of the GTEL units I think having the 18 run again for special outings would be worth while.

For how many decades did we all say a Bigboy would never run again? Seems like forever to me.

Robert

Suuuureee. You don't mind if all other restoration work ceases for five years. And that's if the turbine looks like it could run because critical parts like compressor or turbine blades are going to be simply unavailable period and not things that can be made unless you truly have unlimited funds. Are they titanium on these machines? The rest can be gotten or substituted but what a lot of time, money, and effort if the turbine ultimately fails.

Compare that to a Big Boy which is just a big steam locomotive with no exotic technology and it's just a matter of doing (note that UP has not even started) and is eventually doable unless there is a major frame casting failure.

A more reasonable plan would be to get brakes and controls working enough that it could be put on the point of a train with power coming from an MU'd diesel like is sometimes done with our Centennial.

I imagine the turbine and compressor blades are both stainless steel.

That's what other GE applications at the time on ships and such, like the LM1500 type gas turbine, utilized as I recall. That's also the model type that I always assumed these utilized, although I've never seen it specified through the years in any publication.

I wouldn't be surprised if parts are much more readily available than their retirement dates may suggest if it's a common model like that one derived from the J79 that powered jets like the Phantom. You're still looking at prices in the thousands of dollars for major new components like turbine blades though, but parts are readily available and companies still have plenty of business servicing installations that use them.

That said, they're also long-lived parts that aren't often replaced. They're probably fine on it unless you specifically know that IRM's example was pulled from service by Union Pacific for an issue in that area or if that's why she kept her turbine rather than get cannibalized like her sisters did.

I bet one is much more maintainable than some might think and with the right company like IRM has a knack for finding during restorations, a return to service could even be financially possible where some expensive to source components are concerned. She'd only be good for occasional service though since they're thirsty machines and you'd have to issue earplugs to your visitors every time you fired her up. ;)

Doubt she'd ever run again since there's too many issues against her like missing traction motors and you still end up with a machine that's rather impractical for IRM to operate if you successfully restore her, but technically, I don't see it as impractical at all.

Let's put it this way:

You know how many "foamers" say that "if I won the Powerball lottery, I'd fix up [loco of their choice] and run it!"? Usually spoken by wishful thinkers too young to even play the lottery?

That's exactly what it would take. Someone bequeathing multiple millions of dollars to one of the two owners with the express restriction that it be put only to getting the UP GTE running.

And even then, an astute museum BOD would attempt to find ways to challenge the covenants of said bequeathal on fiscal grounds.

Not to say that it would not be fun if it could happen.

IRM is very capable. But, If I was like Donald Trump and could give IRM a check for X amount I bet I could have the 18 shunted to the UP main and become the owner of said locomotive.

Restoring such a thing is not impossible for a third party organization. But Uncle Pete would be in a much better place to tackle said project.

That said, If a person with alot of cash was able to buy the 18 and undertake forming a organization with the express intent of restoration and operation of the GTEL then anything is possible.

Matter of fact minus the tender the GTEL 26 being only a cosmetic complete GTEL in my opinion is ripe for stripping of usable parts for a UP #18 restoration. Not that there is much left to pick over inside from what everyone keeps telling me.

Such a organization would benefit from recruiting members with extensive knowledge in Jet Aircraft maintenance and operation as well as power plant ground turbine experience.

The goal would be to find a way to pitch the idea to the public and corporations to help raise funds or even get certain parts donated. I would be bent for leather on getting GE involved in at all possible since they have extensive power and aircraft turbine experience and being the original builders of the UP #18 internals.

The very real problem is the missing main generator and tender heater alternator. They maybe gone forever and would be the undoing of having all 12 motors powered again for the full 10K HP output.

Are the trucks solid cast or could new fab and welding replace the mounts for the traction motors??? What type of DC traction motor did these GTEL use??? How expensive or rare are they???

Robert

According to the link below, they used GE 752E3 traction motors.

http://www.engine-driver.com/article/sh ... horsepower

Can't attest to its accuracy, especially with such a glaring error later on where it states "Union Pacific saved two GTELs from the scrapper’s torch". That of course wasn't the case at all.

Hey, let's rebuild it to that site's specifications as theirs only needs 2 main generators. I just cut that task in half!

Technical article I read said the first few turbines were only capable of 45 miles per hour. After UP complained of speed the generators were hooked to a switch that ran each pair of generators in parallel, for slow high draw-bar pull, or in series to get the 65 MPH speed. Having three motors per truck made it difficult to do the series/parallel switching there.
The gas turbine itself on a cold day, closer to sea level, at the GE test stand was capable of reaching 13,000 HP. UP attempted to use that up to 10,000 but the wear on the electric components was too great. They eventually allowed loading of 8500 to 10,000 for a few minutes when starting a heavy train. But never exceeding 8500 continuous.

"Nothing is ever impossible or unreasonable to those who dream it up but don't have to make it happen themselves."

Also, "Nothing is ever impossible or unreasonable to those who dream it up if they have the ambition, skills, tools, work location, and funding to make it happen"

Sadly, most people and organizations look at badly deteriorated equipment and give up before trying, because they lack the ambition, skills, tools, work location, and funding to make it happen, or simply have far too many competing priorities.

There is definitely a place for individuals or small, dedicated organizations who are willing to focus on a basket case and resurrect it.

We need more of these folks.

Steve Hunter

I agree wholeheartedly, especially with your first sentence.

What we DON'T need more of, IMO, as I was trying to point out, are more pie-in-the-sky people who have none of the things you listed, but make it their business to go around pointing out what someone else should do with their priorities, skills, finances, tools, time, etc. to make the dreamer's fantasy come true, with little or no effort or output or investment on the part of the dreamer.

By then, the dreamer will have gone on to bigger and better dreams anyway, and could not be bothered.

Yeah, I know, where would be without dreamers.

I'm not suggesting restoring a GTEL is a worthy or possible goal, but no one ever thought an SP Krauss- Maffei would run again under its own power either, and look what's going on at Niles Canyon.

You want to do a emissions test Mr. EPA?

OK, Just stand right here and we will start it up.