UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

User avatar
BrianMoore
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:05 pm
Location: Plymouth, UK

UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by BrianMoore » Mon Dec 10, 2012 5:57 pm

Not a joke. UP is giving serious consideration to bringing a Big Boy (4014) back into service. Look to the web, and you will find the proof.

All the problems and doubts are being chewed upon, but the owners of 4014 have been approached.

http://trn.trains.com/Railroad%20News/N ... rvice.aspx

Astonishing.
Brian Moore

User avatar
torikoos
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 10:46 pm
Location: Newton Abbot, Devon, UK .
Contact:

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by torikoos » Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:38 pm

yes I read it on Big Blue forum. Exciting, but would be great if something similar would happen with the only surviving Cab Forward too.

Koos
Koos Fockens -Devon UK. North American Model Railroading
Age is just a case of mind over matter. If you don't mind, then it doesn't matter.

User avatar
BrianMoore
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:05 pm
Location: Plymouth, UK

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by BrianMoore » Mon Dec 10, 2012 7:41 pm

torikoos wrote:yes I read it on Big Blue forum. Exciting, but would be great if something similar would happen with the only surviving Cab Forward too.

Koos
The chances of SP 4294 being resurrected by UP are nil (despite the fact that we would have said that about a Big Boy...).

It's non-UP, and has friction bearings, which are not liked by modern railroads - cars that have them are banned from being interchanged. Creating a replica would also be much harder than the A1 Tornado project, due to how US steam locomotive frames were manufactured.

But just think of a modern Challenger/Big Boy double-header, like we see in the DVD's...
Brian Moore

User avatar
torikoos
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 10:46 pm
Location: Newton Abbot, Devon, UK .
Contact:

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by torikoos » Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:10 am

hmmm interesting point you mention there Brian. I'm not that familiar with steam locomotive construction, but interested to know just how american locomotive builders constructed their frames as opposed to British, or perhaps european mainland (german) methods (if there's a difference between them)?
The visible difference between UK designs and German was the way the various valves, pipes etc were either fitted externally on german machines (which is also common on American locos in many cases), and far less so on British locomotives. Also the dutch railways were using designs ,very heavily influenced by British designs (clean looks), but to the european loading gauge. (Here's an example although some external features are visible on this side of the loco, the other side is very clean : http://www.mobiliteitsmuseum.nl/obj_stoloc_NS_3737.htm)
But what else (besides sheer size) makes US locomotives so much different?

Koos
Koos Fockens -Devon UK. North American Model Railroading
Age is just a case of mind over matter. If you don't mind, then it doesn't matter.

User avatar
BrianMoore
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:05 pm
Location: Plymouth, UK

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by BrianMoore » Wed Dec 12, 2012 6:14 pm

As I understand it, US steam locos had a cast main frame, whilst British ones were manufactured from flat plate (as was Tornado). The ability to create/manufacture such a complex piece of moulding is now apparently lost in the USA.
Brian Moore

Mike_R
Posts: 381
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:05 pm

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by Mike_R » Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:54 pm

Earlier and smaller US steam had bar frames, said to be much more flexible on the rough early lines.

The big advantage cast frames had were when the cylinders were part of the casting, that made them very strong and rigid, but makes for a huge casting. The knowledge can probably be brought back, but also you need the facilities to cast that size.
Mike Ruby

User avatar
Gloriousnse
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 5:32 pm
Location: Exeter, UK
Contact:

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by Gloriousnse » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:55 am

Martyn Read

Mike_R
Posts: 381
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:05 pm

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by Mike_R » Wed Jul 24, 2013 6:40 pm

If any company can afford it, then it is UP, their profits were up again last quarter. Plus their experience with the current preserved fleet.
I look forward to it to being back in steam.
Mike Ruby

User avatar
BrianMoore
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:05 pm
Location: Plymouth, UK

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by BrianMoore » Wed Jul 24, 2013 6:47 pm

Absolutely, Mr Ruby. Ditto!
Brian Moore

antonyjq
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:05 pm
Location: North London
Contact:

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by antonyjq » Mon Jul 29, 2013 10:33 am

With reference to a previous post stating that a cabforward will not be restored because of the bearings and the fact that it is not UP (despite being a fallen flag), can anybody confirm what I recently read on an American forum that UP will not allow 4449 on its rails because it does not have UP in its livery?
Ant


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

User avatar
BrianMoore
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:05 pm
Location: Plymouth, UK

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by BrianMoore » Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:44 pm

The "no UP in its livery" preventing SP 4449 from running on UP rails is an unfounded rumour, passed around by people who loudly opine what they'd like to believe.

However, there may be more substance in the view that, since SP 4449 is not owned or maintained by UP, unwelcome issues of liability may arise in the event of a mishap, and that's why UP wouldn't be keen.

Also, and from what I understand, the "Friends of SP 4449" who operate the locomotive, have never asked UP for permission to operate on their trackage anyway.
Brian Moore

antonyjq
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:05 pm
Location: North London
Contact:

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by antonyjq » Mon Jul 29, 2013 11:22 pm

Thanks Brian,
I thought it sounded strange - until I read the earlier post on here.
Ant


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Mike_R
Posts: 381
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:05 pm

Re: UP to resurrect a Big Boy?

Post by Mike_R » Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:37 am

I see 4014 will be earning its keep even before the rebuild. UP plans to move it for most of the route in daylight to published times so people can see it pass.
Mike Ruby

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest