> One thing that is
> intriguing about many posts here that I
> haven't figured out yet, is this fetish for
> big, late, mainline steam. Big, late steam
> may be a thrill, but it isn't representative
> of the steam that built and served North
> America's rail transportation system when
> rail was the only game in town. For that, we
> should be looking at ten-wheelers and
> consolidations.

I have wondered the same thing. Smaller engines are much easier and cheaper to work on. There are more places to run them and more things that can be done with a smaller engine. It may be that when you live in a dream world you might as well dream big.

Michigan State Trust for Railway Preservation

> 2. Is there a way to bring the two warring
> parties back to the bargaining table and
> attempt to reach a solution both can live
> with so as to allow the current operator to
> stay in place?

With what we've read about the CHS in extensive, ongoing discussion for months on the Narrow Gauge Discussion Forum, it seems the answer is a definite NO. The CHS is undoubtedly committed to severing all relationships with the present operator. Even with all the obvious failings of the CHS in their abysmal ignorance of the realities of running the GLRR, no one in the leadership of that bureaucracy has had the integrity to step forward and put a stop to the vendetta. Furthermore, no state agency to which the CHS is accountable (if there is such a thing) has done likewise.

I suspect very strongly that the Ashbys and Mark Greska realize that even if some sort of agreement could be reached at this time, they know they'll continue to be faced with the amply-demonstrated idiocies of the CHS and, evidently the entire State of Colorado political machine, in continuing to operate the railroad.

All the evidence seems to indicate, as well, that it's more than just an issue between the CHS and the GLRR operators, with powerful development forces also at work regarding the future of that area along I-70.

From what we've read over these months on the NGDF board, there seems to be no doubt that the CHS and the State of Colorado are committed to the demise of the GLRR, and that the CHSÂ’ trumpeting of their intention to keep the railroad in operation is just a smoke screen to cover up a political juggernaut that's bigger than any of us probably realize.

All of which leaves no doubt that the present GLRR operators are only sane and reasonable in wanting to escape the unbelievable contempt being shown toward them by the CHS and the State of Colorado, even though it means the loss of an historical treasure and the employment of an outstanding team of dedicated professionals. While we all greatly lament the incalculable loss, we can only agree that the GLRR operators are pursuing the only avenue available for their own survival and sanity.

I'm not going to speak for either Lindsay or Mark. I spoke with Lindsay recently and he was not optimistic, but, as I interpreted it, mostly because he didn't think CHS would approach us to attempt to reach a contract.

Please correct me if I am wrong, Ted, but I
> have read very definite statements from Mark
> and had spoken statements relayed to me made
> by Lindsey categorically refusing to reenter
> into negotiations with CHS. Do you have
> other information? I believe the issue has
> been decided by parties on both sides of the
> table, and the only agreement is that the
> horse is most definitely dead, but would
> welcome better news if it is factual and
> supported.

> dave


tedloco@aol.com

You can still send postal mail to Cuba. I've done it for ham radio contacts. Write the the mill Director, inquire about the status of the steam fleet, and express an interest in its preservation until trade opens between the two nations. It isn't that big a deal.

glueck@maine.edu

> Here is a list of those 63 engines, plus one
> 34 1/2" gauge engine that was later
> regauged to 36" gauge. Scrapping dates
> and other current info from "Industrial
> Steam Locomotives of Cuba" and from
> various railfan reports. As you can see,
> there are only around 20 three foot gauge
> engines left and at least half of them are
> formally preserved.

Thanks for the list, Michael. Some updates:

> 105 A. C. Sandino Baldwin 25214 1905
> 36" 2-6-0 12,168 E1209 derelict 1997

Not recently reported; may have been scrapped.

> 105 A. C. Sandino Alco 58746 1919 36"
> 2-8-0 16,467 E1404 in use 2000

Last reported as dismantled.

> 109 Orlando Nodarse Baldwin 42216 1915 34
> 1/2" 2-6-0 12,800 E1210 converted to
> 36", in use 2003 at 105

I believe it is now on display at Estacion Cristina, Havana?

> 624 Roberto Ramírez Baldwin 52257 1919
> 36" 2-6-2 10,200 E1261 preserved 1996

I think by process of elimination this one is now on display at 629 La Demajagua Sugar Mill.

> 629 La Demajagua Baldwin no data no data
> 36" 2-8-0 12,000 E1254 preserved 1995

I think this one is now dumped at 640 Frank Pais Sugar Mill.

Here are some more; although they are all scrapped or derelict. I used the same format:

416 Catorce de Julio Baldwin 12278 1891 36" 2-8-0 ? 1133 Out of use, may have since been scrapped
416 Catorce de Julio Baldwin 54251 1920 36" 2-8-0 ? 1134 Out of use, may have since been scrapped
416 Catorce de Julio Baldwin 43335 1916 36" 2-6-0 ? 1135 Out of use, may have since been scrapped
416 Catorce de Julio Baldwin 34048 1909 36" 2-8-0 ? 1153 Out of use, may have since been scrapped
434 Panchito Gómez Toro Baldwin 35776 1910 36" 2-6-0 ? 1154 Gone, may be preserved in either Havana or Ciego province
434 Panchito Gómez Toro Baldwin 13155 1893 36" 2-6-0 ? 1155 Gone, may be preserved in either Havana or Ciego province
434 Panchito Gómez Toro Baldwin 42231 1915 36" 2-6-0 ? 1240 Dumped; not reported in 1998-2003 and probably scrapped
435 Hermanos Amerjeiros Baldwin 53654 1920 36" 2-8-0 ? 1323 Not seen since the early 1990s and presumed scrapped
abandoned plantation nr Bahia de Mata H.K. Porter 7147 1929 36" 2-6-0 ? ? Ex-United Fruit engine; smokebox has rotted away, there is no cab or chimney, but the wheels and most of the motion are still intact
Mosquitero ? ? ? 36" 2-4-0 ? ? Ex-United Fruit engine; derelict, reported 1998

-James Hefner
Hebrews 10:20a


Surviving World Steam Locomotives
james@survivingworldsteam.com

I have said this before but smaller is really better!

In Maine the Monson engines have been running every weekend this summer and at the WW&F their 10 is fresh out of a major overhaul and will run through August and September.

The only large 4-8-4 steaming that I know of is the UP 844 for a couple of short trips.

in British Columbia the Forestry Museum has several narrow gauge Lumber type engines. Even if it is tiny, give me steam over Diesel any day of the year!

Ted Miles

ted_miles@nps.gov

There are 212 steam locomotives in Australia; but all but 3-4 sugar locomotives are in fact 3ft 6in in gauge. Of the 212 in Australia, roughly 50 are so are operational. If these can be narrowed down to 3ft; there are in fact others in New Zealand, Japan, and elsewhere in this part of the world that are 3ft 6in gauge and have some American heritage to them.

That gauge is also known as the "Cape Guage", and there are a 1000 in Africa that are also of this gauge, of which 150 are or were operational. A handfull have already been imported into the country. Once again, I don't know if they can narrowed down further to 3ft gauge.

Worldwide, there are nearly 3000 steam locomotive that are "three foot something" in gauge. Some of the meter guage engines may also be modified to run on three foot gauge track.

I do wonder as others do if this isn't just a ruse to get rid of the GL altogether; it is hard to believe that the "powers that be" can't see what is going on and are powerless to stop it.

-James Hefner
Hebrews 10:20a

> Puffing Billy RR is operating home built
> replicas of the Baldwins we sent them
> decades ago. The frames and running gear are
> generally overhauled and reused while new
> boilers are retrofit as required. Since the
> advent of welded boilers, the shells are now
> generally recycled with new fireboxes and
> tubes. These engines are in the same size
> range as those which would be practical at
> GLRR.

> Australia has also built some very large and
> fast express passenger locomotives - the
> 3800's - with fabricated steel cylinder
> saddles.

> It doesn't have to be done in the USA as if
> we were still using 1880 technology but
> paying 2004 prices. High pressure water cut
> bar frames welded to fabricated cylinder
> saddles and roller bearings everywhere,
> standard pipe threads and fittings, welded
> ASME boilers - and international suppliers -
> might make replication as cost effective as
> overhauling park hulks in first cost,
> especially if the park hulks are highly
> depreciated, and certainly much cheaper to
> run, maintain, and infinitely more reliable.
> I won't even get into the efficiency and
> cleanliness issues here.

> Further, suppose there exists in India or
> China or Poland patterns for casting, say,
> cylinder saddles suitable for the
> application? Lots of engineering,
> patternmaking, and other startup costs just
> vanished. Nobody to my knowledge has
> searched. Many old patterns remain in the
> Glover collection, but are not available for
> use.

> If steam is to continue to operate in the
> USA on intensively worked tourist lines,
> replication isn't an if but a when. At some
> point, everything will fatigue or
> crystallize or simply wear out. Many tourist
> railroads have already replaced major
> portions of their existing locomotive fleet.
> We'd best be looking around now to assure
> that resources won't disappear before we
> need them.

> dave


Surviving World Steam Locomotives
james@survivingworldsteam.com

UP 844 has not run since May 1999 when a tube blew back into the firebox & cab at Sacremento & was towed home.............Wooly

> I have said this before but smaller is
> really better!

> In Maine the Monson engines have been
> running every weekend this summer and at the
> WW&F their 10 is fresh out of a major
> overhaul and will run through August and
> September.

> The only large 4-8-4 steaming that I know of
> is the UP 844 for a couple of short trips.

> in British Columbia the Forestry Museum has
> several narrow gauge Lumber type engines.
> Even if it is tiny, give me steam over
> Diesel any day of the year!

> Ted Miles


wooly421@charter.net

> There are 212 steam locomotives in
> Australia; but all but 3-4 sugar locomotives
> are in fact 3ft 6in in gauge. Of the 212 in
> Australia, roughly 50 are so are
> operational.

Sorry James, but to set the record straight. There are many Standard and 63" gauge locomotives in Australia. At a rough quess, about a dozen each in 2 foot,2 foot 6, 3 foot 6, Standard, and 5 foot 3 gauge are operable/operating.

Also FWIW, there is legislation called the "moveable heritage act" that would prevent (make very difficult) the export of any steram locomotive.

So, sad, but there's no untapped source of 3 foot gauge locos anywhere downunder.

3 foot is such an odd gauge!!

> Sorry James, but to set the record straight.
> There are many Standard and 63" gauge
> locomotives in Australia. At a rough quess,
> about a dozen each in 2 foot,2 foot 6, 3
> foot 6, Standard, and 5 foot 3 gauge are
> operable/operating.

I am sorry about the confusion. There are indeed steam locomotives of wide variety of guages in Australia; the various states did not settle on a standard gauge until late in the game.

I have 613 steam locomotives listed for Australia; of which roughly 128 are operational. The numbers I quoted were for those of 3ft or 3ft 6in guage only. The above total includes five steam locomotives of 15" and 18" gauge; most of which are modern replicas.

-James Hefner
Hebrews 10:20a

Surviving World Steam Locomotives
james@survivingworldsteam.com

> With what we've read about the CHS in
> extensive, ongoing discussion for months on
> the Narrow Gauge Discussion Forum, it seems
> the answer is a definite NO. The CHS is
> undoubtedly committed to severing all
> relationships with the present operator.
> Even with all the obvious failings of the
> CHS in their abysmal ignorance of the
> realities of running the GLRR, no one in the
> leadership of that bureaucracy has had the
> integrity to step forward and put a stop to
> the vendetta. Furthermore, no state agency
> to which the CHS is accountable (if there is
> such a thing) has done likewise.

> I suspect very strongly that the Ashbys and
> Mark Greska realize that even if some sort
> of agreement could be reached at this time,
> they know they'll continue to be faced with
> the amply-demonstrated idiocies of the CHS
> and, evidently the entire State of Colorado
> political machine, in continuing to operate
> the railroad.

> All the evidence seems to indicate, as well,
> that it's more than just an issue between
> the CHS and the GLRR operators, with
> powerful development forces also at work
> regarding the future of that area along
> I-70.

> From what we've read over these months on
> the NGDF board, there seems to be no doubt
> that the CHS and the State of Colorado are
> committed to the demise of the GLRR, and
> that the CHSÂ’ trumpeting of their intention
> to keep the railroad in operation is just a
> smoke screen to cover up a political
> juggernaut that's bigger than any of us
> probably realize.

> All of which leaves no doubt that the
> present GLRR operators are only sane and
> reasonable in wanting to escape the
> unbelievable contempt being shown toward
> them by the CHS and the State of Colorado,
> even though it means the loss of an
> historical treasure and the employment of an
> outstanding team of dedicated professionals.
> While we all greatly lament the incalculable
> loss, we can only agree that the GLRR
> operators are pursuing the only avenue
> available for their own survival and sanity.

For openers, there will be NO winners come Oct 3, 2004 when the last train pulls into the Silverplume station at 4:51pm per the time table!!
This will in deed be a VERY sad day for the operators, employees people who have worked along side each other for one season to many seasons.

There will be no winners for the local business that get alot of there foot traffic from tourist driving thru town. In fact with the train gone what reason will people driving up I-70 have for getting off the highway during the summer? Yes they had a marthon, jeep rally, one day events or weekend events once or twice a summer will not replace the numbers of people walking or driving thru town that the train brings!

WHEN WILL THE LOCALS OF CLEAR CREEK COUNTY and the Town of Georgetown WAKE-UP and try to stop this from happening? Most likely not till they don't see people in the streets next summer and the CHS has said sorry we dont have train maybe next year. There will be NO WINNERS!

If, a new operator is there next year where will he get GOOD QUALIFIED people to operate his train? A, 4 percent grade is not flat!! If he derails a trains how does he plan to get medical to the hurt people. No roads run along the track.
The current operator has established themselves well with business and banks accepting there checks for goods, services and payroll for employees. How is a new operator going to be looked at. First time they will try it. But what IF a check bounces for goods or services then what? What if the payroll checks bounce? From what I understand CHS want to control all moneies to the new operator so he has to have VERY VERY deep pockets to foot the bills up front then hope that CHS will pay him back what he's paid out! There are NO WINNERS!!

To date, no one has asked the current employees if we would work for a new operator. If the current operator has a place to run there trains next summer hopefully I will be there to run them!

Howard
Engineer Loop RR



HMBJR9033@aol.com

James,

Thanks for the updates. My list is a transcription of the actual Minaz 1974 loco numbering list. As such, it may contain some errors, plus there are known to have been some renumberings since 1974.

No. 1323, plus 1324 are listed on the Minaz list as being 30" gauge engines from Mill 407, Abel Santamaria, which is why they weren't on my list. The "Industrial Steam Locomotives of Cuba" lists both 1323 and 1324 as being 36" gauge.

Engines 1133, 1134, 1135, 1153 from Catorce de Julio and engines 1154, 1155 and 1240 from Panchito Gomez Torro are 30" gauge, not 36" as you have listed them.

I had not heard about the Porter. Thanks for that info.

Michael Allen

trainrider47@aol.com

> I am sorry about the confusion. There are
> indeed steam locomotives of wide variety of
> guages in Australia; the various states did
> not settle on a standard gauge until late in
> the game.

> I have 613 steam locomotives listed for
> Australia; of which roughly 128 are
> operational. The numbers I quoted were for
> those of 3ft or 3ft 6in guage only. The
> above total includes five steam locomotives
> of 15" and 18" gauge; most of
> which are modern replicas.

> -James Hefner
> Hebrews 10:20a

James,

I did think that 212 was a bit low. By my, very rough count, there are way fewer than 50 (about 30!)operating on 3 foot 6. There are over 100 2 foot gauge steam cane locos about, and several dozen working.

The following site is fairly accurate
http://www.australiansteam.com/ - he lists only 576 locos though. Only one is 3 foot gauge - and there's not much of that one left
I'm happy to try to resolve any discrepancies for you.

> So, sad, but there's no untapped source of 3
> foot gauge locos anywhere downunder.

Apart fron your capability to build new ones, which seems to be greater than that in the USA.

dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

> The only large 4-8-4 steaming that I know of
> is the UP 844 for a couple of short trips.

Not to pick nits, but in fairness we can't forget the amazing job the MILW 261 people do--they've been out every year for a decade. Also, Jerry Jacobson's vest-pocket GTW 4-8-4 is turning into a regular performer in the east.

OK, pedantic nit-picking over, just want to be sure good work is not overlooked.

eledbetter@rypn.org