REMOVED BY AUTHOR.........

I apologize for my speculation and comments.

Tim Wilson

Burn the heretic! :-)

As much as the burn the heretic cries are entertaining, the reality is that it is a valid question. I suspect that all this has come about because of the recent change in GMs up there. This may all be a case of what keeps the new guy worried to death at night simply wasn't on the radar screen on the previous GM. That might explain why WMSR is in the hunt for a 2nd steam engine all of a sudden, which tends to coincide with the change in management.






All valid questions. There are effectively three things that dictate power requirements up there.
1) the short stretch of 3% grade up the C&P for the last mile or two into Frostburg
2) the length of the Frostburg turntable
3) the length of the Frostburg passing siding

That grade is a major headache for the railroad. Pulling up the 1.7ish% WM is one thing, but once you get on the C&P, you've got a bunch more issues to deal with. I don't know the limits for 734, but that grade has to factor in--especially with wet rail and leaves in the fall. 734 gets a workout up there, no question about it.

The other caveat is the Frostburg passing siding. Once again, I'm not sure where the limits are (my only experience up there has been with photo freights as opposed to regular operations). The basic point is that once you exceed the length of the siding, you need the diesel anyway because the steam engine is "trapped" up at the turntable, so turning becomes a moot point. This situation does happen with some regularity, however I'm not sure how much it happens outside of the peak fall color season.

The "problem" becomes the difference between what 734 can take up the hill unassisted, the average train length, and the cutoff point for the Frostburg siding.
Looking at the track layout in Frostburg, I don't think there is room to put a diesel between the west/uphill switch and the turntable, so the MU box is less useful and now you have the diesel taking up the place of a revenue-producing passenger car fitting in that siding. Now, you are making the problem worse.

The question becomes how often do they get into the situation of needing more power than the 734 will produce, but not enough coaches to overflow the siding--at which point, you need the diesel regardless of what you put on the head end. The answer to that question is the issue at hand.






Presuming the issue is one of more power than you can get out of the 734, and the interest in the 1309 would seem to push things in that direction, the other engines only make the current situation worse. 734 has the most tractive effort of anything in the county, and for that matter, anything in the state of Maryland discounting the B&O Museum (which is basically the same answer). Under that theory, looking at something smaller than the 734 is counterproductive, as it's only going to make the problem worse.
Kevin

I'll be the first to admit that the 610 is a sentimental choice, but it's not totally inappropriate for the discussion at hand. You've got a wheelbase that is short enough to fit on that turntable, enough power to pull anything they might need, a booster if you really need more power, a power curve that is totally appropriate for the WMSR needs (unlike, say a high-drivered 4-8-4 that might get into trouble slogging it out on that hill and curves coming into Frostburg), indoor storage, and presuming SR didn't return the engine as a basket case, the 610 should be in somewhat better condition than an engine that has been outdoors since the 1960s.

The cost to move the engine wouldn't be insignificant, but unless CSX has changed their policy recently (remember the snafu with sending the 734 only 10 miles down CSX to the Potomac Eagle in 2010?), you are going to have to truck in whatever they end up with anyway. Considering the 734 came from Illinois, and you have a Reading T1 in Washington and the 4960 in Arizona, stranger things have happened. I'm not holding my breath, but transport cost is only one of many factors that must be weighed in before making a decision.

On the subject of Berks, I would think the C&O 2716 (or one of her sisters) would be a better choice than the 759. I know the 2716 has a booster, which would come in very handy on that 3% slog into Frostburg. I'm not sure if any of the NKP Berks had a booster or not, but am inclined to think the answer is no, given the NKP track profile.

In the end, as you mentioned, the result is that another engine will live again, and the WMSR is doing well enough to have outgrown the needs of a rather large 2-8-0, which is not an insignificant accomplishment. It will be very interesting to see how all this plays out over the coming months.
Kevin

REMOVED BY AUTHOR......

Isn't the rationale not if they need it, so much as if they want it? NKP 759 would be a great choice to get back in service, for all the reasons we've talked over in the past. A C&O Kanawha would be right at home. Any C&O locomotive would be right at home, including 1309. The Pennsy Decapod is unrealistic, yet I have a passion for seeing her run one day, and I only mentioned her out of that passion.

Is there something to be said for operating a locomotive that is of a unique wheel arrangement in preservation, or a representative of a railroad not yet seen in revival? Railfans don't necessarily put bread on the table of such and operation as WMSR, but they are drawn to see something totally new. Just wondering what other think?

Never discount the value (at least short-term) of "new, shiny, flashy," etc. especially when backed with a crafty press release writer.

Case in point: the "Steam Into History" program in York County, Pa. brought thousands out of the woodwork on a line where most of the locals over a certain age should have already gotten bored, checked off their rare mileage, etc. under more than one previous operator.

I got to thinking about this a little bit. One thing that the WMSR has tried to do is bring back the flavor at least of the old Western Maryland. Number 734 is a fairly good replication of one of their 2-8-0's. Most of the other locomotives mentioned previously in this thread are not something that could so easily be accomplished. There is one locomotive type however, that would be a dead ringer....the Russian Decapod. The old WM had 10 of these beasts, and ran them to the end of the steam era. And there are still a number of extant examples out there. I don't know what might be available, but as long as we're just dreaming.....!

Les

Yes, let us dream and not ground this discussion in any basis of reality. It's kind of sad when speculation over what the WMSR may or may not be doing garners FIVE pages on RYPN of discussion and the boiler water treatment thread garners very little.

Les, this isn't an attack against you, but such speculative threads should be moved to the Railfan forum.

My comment would be that railfans in general are more drawn to photograph the new and unusual than to actually pay for a ticket to ride behind it. Really, any engine that the WMSR is considering is probably bigger than the 734, and therefore, big enough to draw most people's interest, regardless of what they pick. Once you go beyond a 2-8-2, most people's ears perk up.

The rare and unusual will certainly draw people to begin with, but in the scope of a 15yr runtime, it probably won't matter much in the long run. You've got a good run, turning facilities on both ends, scenery, grades, a tunnel and a good tourist draw already established. As far as rare and unusual though, the 759 would probably bring the LEAST amount of attention of anything out there of comparable size, especially with the 765 and 1225 running, along with the viable possibility of the 763 coming back at some point.

The regular tourists are what is making this possible, and "steam engine" is probably enough for most of them. Beyond that, it's a case of what is the best engine for WMSR, and that's all down to what is available, lease terms, condition of the engine, transport fees (given CSX, I'd think trucking is the only option), and all the other things that go into something like this.
Kevin

I still think a Chinese QJ would be a great base for making the WM 2-10-2 that never was. It would require more cosmetic work than anyone has done to a QJ yet, but it would be an interesting project. I’d start by stripping off all the Chinese trimming (elephant ears, skyline, running boards, etc) and build a new non-enclosed cab and convert the engineer’s position to the right hand side. I’d also side mount the air compressors, or fabricate a pump shield more like what was used on the Potomacs and Challengers. A new or modified smoke box front that looked more “Baldwin” would also be in my plans. The biggest cosmetic problem I see is that terrible looking long, high, double dome. I’ve not yet seen a QJ in person, so I’m not sure how much of that is just sheet metal that could modified and how much is actual dome integrated into the boiler. But I’d Americanize that configuration as much as possible. Add the rest of the proper styled windows dressing (headlight, bell, etc) and anyway, I think with enough changes you could make a believable WM engine out of it that is large enough for the relatively demanding needs of the WMSR but also small enough to still be practical for “Every Day” use.

We have enough Chinese junk in this country. I'd rather see American engine restored rather than making a Chinese engine look like a american engine.

BL&E 643.

(runs and ducks for cover!)

Just a quick thought on the whole 2716 idea, didnt the Southern remove her from service shortly after she was restored because her cast frame cracked?

C&O/SR 2716 had a leaky firebox. There is a story in Steam Camelot about the efforts to keep up steam. N&W 611 was outshopped about that time and the rest is history.

Wesley