Steam & Excursion > Valley Railroad Question

Could someone that is in the loop with the Valley answer this question?

I understand that they were recently looking for another steam locomotive.  Is this still the case?  Is is because 97 needs a good deal of work or do they need four locos in circulation?

They are a great operation,  Any locomotive would be luckly to live there!

Thanks in advance!

 

Which valley?

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

MojaveBill Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Which valley?


The Valley Railroad of Essex, CT.


Jeff

One thing I've always wondered about them is why they seem to focus on solely mikados.......surely a consolidation would do just fine as well? 

#97 (their first engine, IIRC) is a Consolidation.  The 2-8-2 now known as #3025 was available when they were in the market.  I don't know the circumstances that led 2-8-2 #40 to the Valley.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/19/17 06:44 by pennsy3750.

Just spitballin' here, but consider they (Valley Railroad) run a pretty robust train service schedule virtually year-round with the holiday trains and all. If you counted up the number of days of service for each engiine each year, I'd be willing to bet you will reach a "nexus point" in the not-terribly-distant future where multiple engines come due for their 1,472-day teardown/inspection at the same time.

​Having a fourth engine in the rotation could very well allow duties and maintenance to be scheduled so that only one engine is in for inspection at a time. That evens out the workload and takes a lot of pressure off your shop forces.

​As for a preference of wheel arrangment, I'd suspect it has more to do with having locomotives that have sufficient tractive effort to haul your typical-sized train (or close to it). Having one teakettle that can't handle the regular trains without help is counter-productive if your goal is a stable of locomotives that can be mixed and matched as needed.

​As I said at the beginning, all speculation on my part, but based on my experience with tourist/museum operations.

​NZ    

They back up half the day.  Having a trailing truck sure is easier not relying on the rear driver to guide the engine when backing up.

Lurch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They back up half the day.  Having a trailing
> truck sure is easier not relying on the rear
> driver to guide the engine when backing up.

​Also a major consideration, having just witnessed several years of work by the steam crew at Illinois Railway Museum rehabbing a VERY tired rear driver on Frisco 1630, a 2-10-0 that spends half its life backing up as well. Not only did it need new tires, all manner of boxes, wedges, brasses and such needed renewing due to the side-to-side "slop" that was introduced into the system by using the rear driver as a steering mechanism.

​So yes, that trailing truck is a big deal if you're not turning the locomotive at each end. Wish I had thought to mention that in the first post, but had forgotten the Valley doesn't turn its locos.

​NZ 

"Real Railroaders Don't Need Trailing Trucks"

                            -- Strasburg Railroad 

I know that the plan in the long run is to return No. 97 to operational status. In August 2015 I was told that she would be ready by 2020, then in February 2016 I was told that it would be ready within the next five years. It would sure be cool to see another locomotive at the Valley as well.