Thanks to John for answering my technical questions very thoroughly. There is one issue about which I am still confused.

It is my understanding that steam locomotives built as saturated engines are generally equipped with slide valves as a saturated boiler is more likely to pass water to the cylinders and this cylinder design can handle the water without damage. Superheated locomotives are usually equipped with piston valves which cannot take the water. If this is true then I ask again if the removal of 136's superheaters was prudent.

AFAIK slide valves were not chosen on the basis of water toleration. Significant water getting into the valves is going to cause major problems in the cylinders regardless of what type valves the locomotive has.

Piston valves were not unknown on saturated steam engines, it's just that they were necessary on superheated engines and came into general usage about the same time superheaters became standard equipment. For instance, N&W #475 at Strasburg and Aberdeen and Rockfish #40 on the Valley RR in Connecticut are both piston valve equipped engines that were built new as saturated locomotives.

Personally, I hate to see the superheaters removed from any engine so-equipped, but I do understand the reasons for doing so (potentially reduced maintenance, simplified boiler repairs, etc). I can think of several locomotives operated since the end of steam that have been similarly modified.

Its been quite a while since the incident with 136. Have any details come to light since?

I haven't heard anything new myself.

John

I get the impression that all the pertinant details of the incident are being withheld. Which seems to be par for the course with that organization.

I don't understand why everything has been kept so low key, but I have been told the TSSA and Transport Canada (Canadian equivalents to the FRA) are now watching them like a hawk.

Two words for you: Eric Smith

What about him? He can choose to keep his mouth shut about what has happened, but that shouldn't stop anyone else from divulging any factually information, especially the TSSA and/or Transport Canada.

Just to refresh my aging memory, what incident are you referring too? The one about removing superheater tubes?

John

The accident that occured there last year. Although few (if any) details have been forth coming, it is believed that while being tested, the drypipe collapsed causing an unknown amount of damage to the locomotive.

Ah yes. Now I remember. Thanks. I told you... a seniors memory. Its like a steel trap, rusted shut.
That said, no, I still haven't heard anything about it.
I can't see TSSA releasing anything to the public about it. There was no public danger as the event didn't happen during operation.
Don't forget though, Eric has been pushing for a new boiler for some time. I'm amazed there haven't been failures in other parts of the boiler during testing.

John

Here's what I've just been told:

There is NO ongoing investigation by TSSA. They just sealed the safety valves to prevent the engine being steamed up in a dangerous condition. When repairs are made, Eric Smith must call the TSSA inspector in to inspect the repair and then a hydrostatic test must be performed and passed before the seals are removed. To date, TSSA has not been called to SSR for any reason.

Regardless of the issue with #138, don't they have another steam locomotive? Anybody know what's happening? I may get a chance to get up there soon, but I imagine they're still running their deisel loco...

That's 136. Its my understanding that 1057 is out of service as well, with some problem around the firebox.

It has been more than a year since 136's dry pipe failure, yet the trains are still diesel-powered. I have been shown a copy of SSR's newsletter in which Master Mechanic Eric Smith states that non-destructive testing has shown there was no mechanical damage as a result of the failure and subsequent shot of water entering the cylinders. He also stated the locomotive would run in 2010.

It was recently fired up and made one run less than half way up the line and back to the shop. Firing it up from cold is a lot of work for a very short run like that. Does this suggest it has major problems?