Steam & Excursion > Trains article on UP 4014 idea?

Magazine subscribers could post info if any, Dec 10 TRAINS newswire item, trn.trains.com/Railroad%20News/News%20Wire.aspx. I did hear that this "rumor" is real.

The rest of us didn't miss the trains article......

9000+ views, 120 comments

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,2936249

11,878 views, 137 comments

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,2935508

and a couple of other minor threads that haven't broke 2000 views yet...

and before you go off the deep end read this one.

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,2938349

Thanks actionmike, but I need the Dec 10 TRAINS newswire article info. I have seen Dec 7 article and all other TO posts.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/12/12 07:46 by Spikes.

A Dec 11 email from a R&LHS member states his own position on the 4014 idea. Maybe I should add my opinion. I often get in trouble when I do. Guess I crave excitement.

WOW PINCH ME I MUST BE DREAMING! A 4000 restored to operation! That would be somthing I would travel a long distance to see!

Calm down, it's only a rumor.

Union Pacific, museum continue Big Boy talks

Published: December 10, 2012

POMONA, Calif. – We will have to wait at least until later this week to learn more about what Union Pacific is offering a Southern California railroad club for its 4-8-8-4 Big Boy steam locomotive, which would become a full restoration project. But we do know that an equipment trade for the Big Boy displayed in California would not include UP steam fleet superstar 4-6-6-4 No. 3985, which is under rebuild at the company's steam shop in Cheyenne, Wyo.

John Mastrobuoni, treasurer of the Southern California Chapter of the Railway & Locomotive Historical Society said discussions Saturday with UP did not yield an agreement on the chapter's 4-8-8-4 Big Boy No. 4014, which has been on display at the Los Angeles County Fairgrounds since 1962. UP said Friday that an unidentified third party is interesting in partnering with the company to restore the locomotive to operation. Mastrobuoni said UP still wants to acquire and move the locomotive in early 2013 and that the railroad plans to present a proposal by Dec. 14.

Mastrobuoni said the chapter would be interested in trading for another UP steam locomotive, possibly 2-10-2 No. 5511, which is stored in Cheyenne, or a Southern Pacific SD40T-2 and a steel caboose.

Another under discussion is revenue sharing from a first excursion with the Big Boy, which would be restored in time for the 150th anniversary of the completion of the first transcontinental railroad. That anniversary comes May 10, 2019. In the trade, the Big Boy would be owned and operated by Union Pacific, and the chapter would seek a first right of refusal to reacquire the engine should the project be cancelled or not move forward, Mastrobuoni said.

Contrary to that "press release" above, the 3985 is currently NOT under rebuild/repair at the Cheyenne Shop, and hasn't been for more than two years!

That's not a bash but rather a simple statement of the partial truth. Yes, it is being
worked on, though slowly. We have pictorial proof, in two and a half months several
sections of boiler wrapper have been removed.

Yuh know, thank goodness for Trains, I would have never known about the Big Boy
rumor without them.

What exactly does "under rebuild" mean? The engine is not serviceable, not stored serviceable, not on display and not scrap. If a project is being rebuilt and people are pulled off of the project for whatever reason, the project is still in the rebuilding process when people leave it. Let's not get too picky with wording nor acting like we have an axe to grind and need to show we know more than the UP.

I'm going to remain "cautiously optimistic" about this one.

Remember, when the Big Boys were in regular service, they were so big that there were a lot of places on the UP where they couldn't run. Weren't they pretty much confined to the Cheyenne - Ogden route?

If they try to run this restored locomotive all over the system for publicity and other reasons, they're going to be hard pressed to find suitable locations and facilities to simply turn it around.

But, good luck. Wish you the best!

The 4000's were built specifically for the districts where they were used, but that's not to say they couldn't have been used elsewhere. And even though not in regular service, they all made it to Council Bluffs from the manufacturer in New York in one piece. And the eight that were preserved were all shipped by rail, and made it eventually. Not many turn tables in use anywhere now, especially long ones, but there are plenty of wyes. But the forward thinkers that put in the wyes made most of them too tight for large steam engines. I remember when AT&SF 3751 came to Kansas, we turned it on the wye at Emporia, because the one at Topeka was too tight. When we turned it in Kansas City at AT Jct. it was so tight that the the cab floor plate dug into the left side of the tender. On a back and forth excurstion, it will have to be turned. On a long cicular routing, they only need to turn it when it gets back home, if then. Some shorter tables had a short piece of entension rail that raised above the end of the table a few feet, which kinda "jacked up" the last tender axle enough to clear the tracks when they rotated the table. Seems like it would be hard on the springs on a centipeede. I think Pennsylvania used a similar arangement turning Santa Fe 2-10-4's in Ohio.

It's like I keep suggesting, just run it between the coal and corn loops, no problems (assuming it'll clear the
loader chutes). Might make for some strange excursions but hey, as fans we're up for things like that.

ddg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The 4000's were built specifically for the
> districts where they were used, but that's not to
> say they couldn't have been used elsewhere. And
> even though not in regular service, they all made
> it to Council Bluffs from the manufacturer in New
> York in one piece. And the eight that were
> preserved were all shipped by rail, and made it
> eventually. Not many turn tables in use anywhere
> now, especially long ones, but there are plenty of
> wyes. But the forward thinkers that put in the
> wyes made most of them too tight for large steam
> engines. I remember when AT&SF 3751 came to
> Kansas, we turned it on the wye at Emporia,
> because the one at Topeka was too tight. When we
> turned it in Kansas City at AT Jct. it was so
> tight that the the cab floor plate dug into the
> left side of the tender. On a back and forth
> excurstion, it will have to be turned. On a long
> cicular routing, they only need to turn it when it
> gets back home, if then. Some shorter tables had a
> short piece of entension rail that raised above
> the end of the table a few feet, which kinda
> "jacked up" the last tender axle enough to clear
> the tracks when they rotated the table. Seems like
> it would be hard on the springs on a centipeede. I
> think Pennsylvania used a similar arangement
> turning Santa Fe 2-10-4's in Ohio.


^This wins the "They can't run hardly anywhere" argument.