Steam & Excursion > SP 2467 Question

Last week I received an invitation from the California State Railroad Museum to become a member. The museum's descriptive letter includes mention of the SP 2467 as a major new addition. Does the museum have any near-term plan for rehabilitation of this locomotive?

Here she is in March 1991 at Oakland, CA briefly stored under the I580 freeway, just 100 feet from Wood Street, quite close to the site of the Santa Fe's long gone Oakland (Emeryville) passenger depot.

---

The California State Rail Museum does not own the SP 2467. It is on loan to them by the PLA which still owns it. The PLA does not have the money to do all the work needed to get it running again. The locomotive is inside in the main building of the museum.

I'm not sure that it's a money issue, but more of a priority issue. At this time there aren't many places to store it under cover or run it if it were repaired to run again (the canyon is not an ideal location to run an engine like that). CSRM made the PLA a good offer that alowed it to be stored under cover and on display in Sacramento for 10 years, and that's what was decided.

I think the integrity of the rail in the canyon was also a factor over 2467's placement in Sack-a-tomatoe. A large rigid wheelbase pounding that line every weekend would create more than enough work for the MofW department.

Sam Reeves
—
http://www.samreevesphoto.com

2467's rigid wheelbase is actually less than a SD-9's. 2467's nominal axle load (60,000 lbs/axle) is same as a F-7, GP-9 or SD-9. All these loocmotives give the ties under 85 lb rail more of a workout than a 44-tonner (22,000 lbs/axle) or a "Harriman" 80' commute coach (30,000 lbs/axle) would.

- Doug Debs

Even if one was to fork over the dough for a Form 4, the problem still lies in the exorbitant operating costs (and labor) to keep a locomotive that size running. Locomotives such as the Quincy #2 are far more practical for the NCRy, not to mention most other operations, which is why you'll likely see more Prairies and small logging Mikes being returned to steam faster than more big stuff will be rolling out of the park. The 2467 probably burned more on a spot fire at Railfair than the #2 burns in a month's worth of actual running!

I think it also had to do with the wear on the locomotive itself from running at low speeds. Someone else can explain this better than I can (I'm not a steam expert), but a big (relatively speaking) engine like that needs to run at speed. Fuel costs are another concern as mentioned in this thread.

samreeves Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think the integrity of the rail in the canyon
> was also a factor over 2467's placement in
> Sack-a-tomatoe. A large rigid wheelbase pounding
> that line every weekend would create more than
> enough work for the MofW department.