[redacted]

My understanding from a mix of reading the MTM Web page (which is ambiguous) and conversations with former MTM personnel recently is that NP 2156 is now at the head of the line for operating restoration with 328 slated for reassembly for static display.

You can get an update here:

http://www.mtmuseum.org/index.html?body ... ation.html

The index page says clearly 328 is slated for cosmetic restoration now, but the detail page still speaks of operating restoration.

So take all this with a grain of salt--an email to MTM might get you a definitive answer.

The 328 is currently undergoing a cosmetic restoration. Before winter the boiler had been cleaned and paint applied. I would expect the loose parts to be going back on once it warms up here.

The 2156 is continuing to make slow progress. The UT is close to being complete and the spring rigging is out being shopped. Hopefully we will see her back on the drivers soon.

Has a plan been developed to repair the freeze damage?

I know that several potential solutions have been purposed since the original repair plan became too expensive.

I believe the route they are heading is converting to external pipes and installing a sleeve into the cylinder. Sister NP 2153 also at MTM has a similar setup with the external pipes.

But I cannot say for sure that is the final decision.

I was wondering what condition the 2153 was in. Would it be more cost effective to repair her or is she in worse shape?

Just curious,

JD Johnson, Morehead and North Fork Railroad Historian

Just a guess, but I'd imagine that since 2153 spent almost 20 more years sitting in the open with the lagging still on her, 2156 would be in better shape, boiler-wise at least. 2156 also spent most of those years outdoors, but at least the lagging was removed during the 1981 restoration attempt. The last I heard (as of about 3-4 years ago) about the cylinder repair was that it was to be stitch-welded. Is this no longer the case?

Richard Jenkins

I live mostly in the diesel department so I really can't give specifics about 2153's condition.

IMHO, the reason for continuing on 2156 was that the effort and progress lost by switching to 2153 was greater than the cost of fixing the cylinder.

In 2004/2005 they were prepared to have the stichweld repair performed, however the price from the contractor was more than double the original estimate. This is what led to looking for other alternatives.

Here is a thought, since these are sister engines why not just swap cylinders? Would be my plan were I the project manager. Though the question in my mind is that of the justification for overhauling such a large locomotive. Seems a little much for operating over just a bit of track(compared to operating conditions that would allow the loki to operate at some level of efficiency).

Jason,

I had the same thought. It would be a great undertaking to remove the saddles and switch them. A lot of parts and frozen bolts to burn and retap.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see what they do.

I wish them the best in their endeavors.

JD Johnson, Morehead and North Fork Railroad Historian

Although they are sisters they have some noticeable differences.
2153 has bigger cylinders that 2156.
2156 has a stoker 2153 does not.

Unfortunately, 328 would essentially need a new boiler to return to operation.