This, and I really dislike the trend in vertical format videos using smart phones or whatevers.

Thanks!

The locomotives old boiler was 180 psi boiler according to the roster I have seen.

Robby Peartree

These guys did a great job and now we have the peanut gallery trying to second guess them about boiler pressures? Give me a break.......... any troubleshooting that needs to be done will be worked out in practice.

My point exactly! Who the hell cares?! The 111 is back in service and running. The Loop people have demonstrated themselves as more than capable. They will certainly fine-tune the engine to suit their needs.

Dear Mr. Cormack


Let me get this straight people comment on a great boiler they see in a picture thru (photographic x-ray vision) a cab and a jacket and then latter you complain about what people say about the project? In the picture provided in this thread about all you can tell is they have a nice shinny locomotive with a boiler. I am glad the loop is able to move forward with this project but at the same time it is amazing how someone wants great phrase for what they did or no feed back at all. The consequences of the changes they made to the locomotive are a valid discussion point. It amazes me how many people think preservation is just making a steam locomotive run without considering the history of the artifacts they are supposedly preserving. After all this is Railway Preservation News not Railway Hot Rod news.

Robby Peartree

I tend to agree with Robby...none of this was meant as negative at all. They did the right thing by raising the b.p., you can always go down from here, but a number of friends agree that once you lower the pressure, you have a heck of a time ever trying to recover that. I have complete faith that they will find the right compromise between more power and enough adhesion.
Relax and enjoy the thing.

Peartree,

I'm going to assume you meant "praise" instead of "phrase" along with other blatant misspellings, but what do I know? You have grossly misconstrued and misinterpreted the substance of my previous comments in this thread. I was defending the hard work and perseverance the Loop people have demonstrated in bringing another fine example of narrow gauge steam back to operation. Furthermore, I suggest you take up any personal grievances you have with construction and installation of the 111's new boiler with the Georgetown Loop as clearly, you are the single reigning authority of narrow gauge boiler design.

I'm fed up with these over-inflated narcissists derogating the efforts put forth in this industry to preserve and further examples of railroading history. You speak of consequences as if the Loop should feel guilty for replacing the 111's boiler. Clearly, they are not, nor will anyone's opinion alter this. Why? It's infinitely harder to appreciate the history of an object when it is stored in pieces compared to an operating specimen at a mecca for tourism.

DC

By the way, GLRR is a tourist railroad,not a museum, operating equipment not native to the railroad with the majority of the structures on site not original or replicas of the originals, so............. the criteria that would apply are not those of absolute preservation of fabric. She's not an artifact, she's a working locomotive hauling paying passengers.

I was in that firebox back in the 1990s and can attest to its having some real issues - not surprising that a new boiler was found to be a better option given the very intensive cycling of the power and steaming required on a line that eats locomotives every operating day - and they operate every day in their season.

Dear Mr. Cormack

Excuse me for assuming the Georgetown loop was proud of the history of their locomotives as on their web site the locomotive information they have chosen to post is under the history banner.
http://www.georgetownlooprr.com/
http://www.historycolorado.org/museums/ ... park%C2%AE
Why would anyone be miss-lead that the locomotives or even the park might be marketed as historic?
It is tragic that the state of Colorado has spent so much money thru History Colorado/Preserve Colorado on this replica when the state is a co-owner of a great authentic historical railroad. But Conejos County does not have the political pull of Clear Creek County.
With the statement the equipment is not historical to that railroad is the question that is avoided is the history of the individual piece. We can justify anything if we ignore certain things.
I do not expect the Georgetown Loop Railroad or History Colorado to concern themselves with historic preservation.
Given the direction of not considering the historical significance of each piece Railroad Preservation is headed the direction of creating a lot of George Washington’s axes. The best preserved artifact may be the ignored park locomotive because it has not been improved by “preservationist”.

Robby Peartree

Rob, that was me, not Cormack. The park itself is a Colorado Historical Society property. The railroad is a private industry operating within it. History isn't limited to only that which is original in fabric - if we view it in that perspective we are limiting ourselves pretty drastically, and will appeal to ever shrinking segments of then population. The experience provided by the operators of the railroad fairly substantially recreates those which visiting tourists - and there were some - had over a century ago on that same railroad, only with more trees in the landscape. It has a much broader appeal and is the economically feasible means of providing its service. The most important piece of old iron on site is probably the small stationary steam engine which sits in a sump full of water in the mine shaft, cast and built in a local foundry. The mine isn't operated by the railroad, but by CHS. Its structures are fair replications of original structures based on old photographs.

There's a lot of variation going on here - and it would be well to look at it from different perspectives based on the mission of each piece. Taken all together it is a beautifully successful means of involving a lot of transient people in local historical tourism, which broadens the interest level of the general public touring in the area. This can't be a bad thing........ in relative terms.

The restrooms are also modern and plumbed with indoor sanitary fixtures. Not like the originals, but with a much broader appeal.

Great reply from Donald....absolutely typical for 'someone' to derail this thread because he didnt build the boiler........it will probably get blocked now because of his interjection. Nice whilst it lasted anyway, nice locomotive, nice railway and nice people who run and work on it.

Hi,

I purchased a 1985 Buick Summerset. It was last run about 2008 when it needed its third motor. It was Mom's car and she died in 2012 from cancer. The car had about 150,000 miles on it.

I purchased a 1986 Buick Century and it needed its second motor in 2000 with 300,000 miles on it. Mom and I usually used this car when going somewhere together.

Both cars were taken care of and the new motors were "short blocks". I replaced what needed to be replaced or repaired as needed over the years.

My current car broke in April of this year (2016). It was purchased in 2000 to replaced the 1986 Buick. It had about 200,000 miles on it.

Somehow some think the process of keeping a mechanical item running is irrelevant. That some magical process occurs when an item is retired that the metal in it at the time is historically significant.

That is their right. It is my right to disagree.

For the PRIVATE Non-Museum tourist operation of the GTL, they can do anything with their own property they want. Yes the have a historically significant ROW and rolling stock but holding them to the level of the C&TS or not comparing then to the for-profit D&S is an overlooking of a truth. Four of the seven locomotives (4 of the 6 operating ones) never operated north of Rockwood until after the D&RGW sold the line to the D&S in 1981.

Good stuffed and mounted locomotives that come to mind is the Smithsonian's Southern Railway 1401 and the Collection at the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania that was started buy the Pennsylvania Railroad's historic collection. A very few among many.

Oh well, there will always be disagreements between people.

Doug vV

wow this thread got out of hand fast.

On a few things brought up, there are only 5 surviving Colorado and Southern locomotives, 2 surviving Coaches, 1 baggage car, 1 combine, 1 RPO and 1 Business car. Of course this is just narrow gauge equipment, but thats all that matters in this context.

All of those surviving engines are small, they could haul maybe 3 Coaches up the hill at a time. They hold maybe 40 people each. The loop hauled over 130,000 people last year. Days like 4th of July trains were sold out. During the Kids Pumpkin Fest (featured in the Go Pro video I posted) they ran two trains, 1 with 7 cars, 1 with 5, both packed.

A normal train currently is 9 cars, all converted freight cars except the Parlor car at the rear. Each car seats about 40 people and is about 30 feet long. Each train can hold roughly 350 people (parlor car seats about 26). To run old coaches with historic engines, just to match the capacity of a normal train, you would need 2 trains at least. Since there is only one siding at hall Tunnel, this would slightly reduce your overall capacity unless you could haul 4 coaches at once, which only C&S 74 would be happy doing. 71 might do it, but it would be asking to haul full tonnage every day from an engine built in the 1890's. Of course your also doubling your crew costs, you need an extra engineer, fireman, brakeman and conductor. The only passing track is at hall tunnel (about middle of the line) and even its not historical. You could run two trains at once, but when you get to the big event trains like seen on the Go Pro, where 111 had 7 cars, and the center cab had 5, all full, you would need 3 of these small 3 or 4 car trains to handle that many people, and there is really no way to run a 3rd train without stopping and waiting for an excessive period of time. You could run the second train as a double headed with more coaches, but then either way your still adding more crew needed.

Because there is so little Historical C&S Equipment left, and the 5 remaining engines are all small and from the late 1800's, I really don't see them coming into play as anything more then special event trains. They would make a nice second train by themselves, but I don't see them replacing the 111 or the 9 for daily service.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bRFPDe5PkM


Also, here is another video. Mostly Diesel, but you can see the 111 passing twice.

WOW, pardon me for suggesting this, but can't we all just get along ??? Even somebody with as many bones to pick as I got can be happy about #111 !!! SHE ROCKS, get used to it...

OK, La Uno Once (The One Eleven) was rated by the FIdeCA at 150 tons on a 3.6% grade (after conversion to superheat). Her working pressure was 180 psi. They rated her at 20800 lbs tractive force when working at 85% capacity.

We had a fine trip with 7 cars the other day. The crew was happy, the passengers were happy, and the train was happy. I will say that Uno Once never thought about slipping, none of us smelled a whiff of trouble, we were all enjoying the ride, NOT worrying about adhesion factors or throttle response. (Of course, that's well and good enough for them that wants to...)

Mr Softwerks, you asked about jacketing --- At the time #111 was taken out of service by the FIdeCA, before Don Drawer bought her, she was jacketed over the backhead down to the level of the floorboards on the engineer's and fireman's sides. The bottom three rows of flexible staybolt caps showed on the water legs. I don't know whether this arrangement was applied at the Baldwin works or not.

#111 wants to RUN. Viva La Uno Once !!!!