Steam & Excursion > Mr. Dickens's Presentation

Cheyenne Depot Museum sponsored a lecture by Mr. Ed Dickens, UP's Senior Manager-Heritage Operations on Friday evening, May 19th. The lecture was open to museum members. I attended.

I am fully aware that Mr. Dickens is a highly controversial figure on this board. However, I thought there'd be interest in a layman's summary of his remarks and I post this information as a "neutral."

Scott George, UP's Director-Steam Shop, made brief introductory comments. About 75 people were in attendance.

Mr. Dickens began by thanking the Museum for the invitation to speak. He named and praised the current members of the Steam Crew and mentioned how important family support was to the success of the program.

A great deal of Mr. Dickens's presentation dealt with technical aspects of 4014's restoration. Nearly all of it was above my paygrade, so I'm unable to recount that information, unfortunately.

Mr. Dickens mentioned the importance of doing as much work in-house as possible. He did state, however, that some work is contracted out. Strasburg Railroad is working on 4014's wheels. He said "purists" objected to the painting of tires and jokingly referenced a possible contest to determine whether 4014's tires should be painted.

He had 844's throttle nickel-plated.

The subject of diesels came up, why are they sometimes necessary in steam train operations? He said much has to do with the benefits offered by dynamic braking, that UP has plenty of brake shoes but there are not as many carmen as there were in the 1940's. Regarding 844's recent trip to Idaho, Mr. Dickens related that a diesel was used on part of the trip due to issues with a bridge. He said 844 could cross the bridge itself (after reducing water level), however, the diesel was needed to bring the train across. Something about 844's length being problematic in crossing that bridge with its train, I believe, but I cannot recall the exact reasoning.

Mr. Dickens said he'd like to have 4014's boiler work done by the fall, but wasn't entirely confident that milestone could be reached by then. He definitely wants to have it ready by 2019 for the 150th anniversary of the Golden Spike. He said the crew will work weekends and holidays to get the job done.

The sticky topic of his predecessor's views on restoring a Big Boy to operation came up. Mr. Dickens was diplomatic, observing he "respectfully disagreed" it would be unwise to restore a 4000 to operation. He said a narrative developed that it would be impractical to ever run a 4000 on the system again due to weight restrictions, etc. He replied, rhetorically, wondering how UP managed things in the 1940's? His sentiment: if it was done before, it can be done again.

When he was authorized to re-aquire a Big Boy, he said he wanted 4014 because "it was the best." Mr. Dickens noted UP management has been very supportive from the outset. He was authorized to make improvements to the shop and developed multi-year plans for 4014. He stressed to management that running a Big Boy was the equivalent of operating two 800's; accordingly more resources would be required.

There are no current plans to restore 3985 to operation but he believes it will run again one day.

While work was being done on 844, parts were ordered for 4014.

He recounted that 844 causes a lot of activity by hot box detectors causing dispatchers some grief; he advises this is normal because 844 runs hot, "it's a hot engine."

A 4014 part was placed on 844, a new part has been ordered for 4014. Sorry, I can't recall what part.

Lots of discussion about stay bolts and machining new parts in the shop.

Mr. Dickens remembered that 4014's front engine did not lift easily, that the contractors assisting the crew were shaking their heads; eventually, adjustments were made and the front engine was successfully lifted.

He mentioned traveling to Duluth recently to check out a Yellowstone (DM&IR 227, a 2-8-8-4). Mr. Dickens was surprised that the Yellowstone's firebox was smaller than 4014's.

Mr. Dickens fielded several questions from the audience. His presentation included dozens of slides as well.

Photo 1: Scott George, Director (right) and Ed Dickens, Senior Manager (left).

Photo 2: Mr. Dickens.

---

---

The guy looks like Bobby Knight (former, and fired, IU basketball coach for you non sports fans)

PERichardson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The guy looks like Bobby Knight (former, and
> fired, IU basketball coach for you non sports
> fans)

I can't see it. He's not throwing a chair.

Mary McPherson
Dongola, IL
Diverging Clear Productions

Did anyone ask about the current boiler water treatment program? Also, will the Wilson Blowdown Sludge Remover system on 4014 be eliminated, as was done on 844?

HotWater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did anyone ask about the current boiler water
> treatment program? Also, will the Wilson Blowdown
> Sludge Remover system on 4014 be eliminated, as
> was done on 844?

No discussion about the Wilson Blowdown Sludge Remover System (that I can recall at least).

There was a question about water, however. It was along the lines of "where do you get it on the road?" He talked about the extra tender (water bottle?). He then discussed chemical additives being used which to retain proper balance.

Posted from iPhone

ut-1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> ".........The sticky topic of his predecessor's views on
> restoring a Big Boy to operation came up. Mr.
> Dickens was diplomatic, observing he "respectfully
> disagreed" it would be unwise to restore a 4000 to
> operation. He said a narrative developed that it
> would be impractical to ever run a 4000 on the
> system again due to weight restrictions, etc. He
> replied, rhetorically, wondering how UP managed
> things in the 1940's? His sentiment: if it was
> done before, it can be done again............."

Question for those in the know??? -- Didn't the Big Boy's operate over a very limited territory because of their weight and size? Aren't there even more places that the 4014 won't be able to visit than there was for the 3985?

Old Bob out in Lost Wages



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/17 07:34 by RustyRayls.

many of the routes that see unit trains have heavy rail, just don't turn it. Many of the routes steam takes currently there isn't that much wyeing.

In service, 4000s ran only between Ogden, UT and Cheyenne. They also ran between Denver and Cheyenne, and made rare trips between Cheyenne and North Platte.

That was it. They never ran anywhere else on UP, for many reasons. Merged roads such as MP and WP and MKT could not have taken a 4000 except in VERY limited places.

Until the CNW and SP mergers, it made little to no sense to dump millions of bucks into a locomotive that could only operate on 600 miles of the railroad.

Those mergers changed everything. Most of the SP and all of the exCNW mainline to Proviso could easily handle a 4000.

But the attitude at the very top of UP management at that time was along the lines of ABSOLUTELY NOT, AND DON'T EVER ASK AGAIN!

Funny how that always gets overlooked.

RustyRayls Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ut-1 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > ".........The sticky topic of his predecessor's
> views on
> > restoring a Big Boy to operation came up. Mr.
> > Dickens was diplomatic, observing he
> "respectfully
> > disagreed" it would be unwise to restore a 4000
> to
> > operation. He said a narrative developed that
> it
> > would be impractical to ever run a 4000 on the
> > system again due to weight restrictions, etc.
> He
> > replied, rhetorically, wondering how UP managed
> > things in the 1940's? His sentiment: if it was
> > done before, it can be done again............."
>
> Question for those in the know??? -- Didn't the
> Big Boy's operate over a very limited territory
> because of their weight and size? Aren't there
> even more places that the 4014 won't be able to
> visit than there was for the 3985?
>
> Old Bob out in Lost Wages


According to William Kratville's book Big Boy, the 4000's were cleared to operate over a large portion of the UP system including into Los Angeles and all the way to North Platte, NE. According to Kratville, it was not thought that a Big Boy ever ran to LA in revenue service, but they did on occasion run to North Platte. Had it not been for diesels, there was some thinking within UP that additional Big Boy orders would be placed, allowing them to operate over nearly the entire UP mainline (this *would* have required rebuilding at engine terminals, with longer turntables, etc.). Obviously that didn't happen, but it wasn't because the locomotives were too large to run on the road. The Big Boys were operated over the two most demanding grades on the UP transcontinental mainline (1.14% Wahsatch grade in Utah and 1.55% Sherman Hill in Wyoming) because they could handle full length time freights over these stiff grades without doubleheading or breaking the train in two. Both of these practices were expensive in the steam era since they required extra locomotive crews. A 4000 class could handle a 3600-4450 ton train over the Wahsatch grade or a 3200 ton train over the 1.55% Sherman Hill grade unassisted.

There was little incentive to operate their 25 Big Boys outside of the Ogden to Cheyenne stretch because they could haul significantly more on the flatlands than UP's standard fast freight power, the Challengers and the 9000 class 4-12-2's (of which the railroad owned 105 and 88 locomotives, respectively).

This was all a long way of explaining that the Big Boys tended to run between Ogden an Cheyenne on the 1940s-1950s UP for reasons of operational efficiency, not because they were too big or too heavy to operate elsewhere. The same operational constraints don't apply to hauling a 15-20 car passenger train.

Scott Griggs
Louisville, KY



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/17 10:18 by sgriggs.

Yeah, but we're talking about a BIG BOY! When looking at steam programs (and other things),
management thinks about what they're going to gain out of it in publicity, etc. The fact that
the 4000's were the largest locomotives ever built and run, and (assuming) once the 4014 is
in operation, no other railroad will ever be able to surpass that. Even if they only run it
in the areas mentioned above will still provide a huge amount of exposure.

Family support is the success of the program? The old crew treated their members and fans visiting like family, haven't heard much with this crew about it, I'm still looking for someone to put Ed into the fire and make it hotter each time he keeps making dumb butt excuses like what he's done yesterday!

ut-1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cheyenne Depot Museum sponsored a lecture by Mr.
> Ed Dickens, UP's Senior Manager-Heritage
> Operations on Friday evening, May 19th. The
> lecture was open to museum members. I attended. ....

Thank you for taking notes and taking the time to post this. All interesting stuff. I hope to make it next year, with family members.

Did you notice if anyone was recording the presentation?

Its kinda amazing to me the interest that this 4014 project is generating. I was speaking to some colleagues from work in Australia, and they brought it up to me, out of the blue. They've viewed Ed Dickens' presentation from last year (I think), and were asking if there was a new one.

Ed Dickens and UP is doing a good job.

Mike Soriano
Denville NJ

YardGoat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ed Dickens and UP is doing a good job.
>
> Mike Soriano
> Denville NJ


Oh bless your lil' heart!


Well, from a glass half full perspective, I do hope he is learning some valuable lessons. But from a 'realistic' perspective, I'm not holding my breath.

ut-1 Wrote:
--------------------------------------------------

> > ".........The sticky topic of his predecessor's
> views on
> > restoring a Big Boy to operation came up. Mr.
> > Dickens was diplomatic, observing he
> "respectfully
> > disagreed" it would be unwise to restore a 4000
> to
> > operation. He said a narrative developed that
> it
> > would be impractical to ever run a 4000 on the
> > system again due to weight restrictions, etc.
> He
> > replied, rhetorically, wondering how UP managed
> > things in the 1940's? His sentiment: if it was
> > done before, it can be done again............."


SGriggs wrote:
--------------------------------------------------

> > According to William Kratville's book Big Boy ...

> > ..... This was all a long way of explaining that the Big Boys tended to run between Ogden an Cheyenne on the 1940s-1950s UP for reasons of > > operational efficiency, not because they were too big or too heavy to operate elsewhere. The same operational constraints don't apply to > >hauling a 15-20 car passenger train.

> >Scott Griggs
> >Louisville, KY



Thanks for posting that helpful information, Scott.

From his bio, William Kratville seems like a reliable source. I just ordered an used copy of "Big Boy" from Amazon.

Mike Soriano
Denville, NJ



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/17 10:48 by YardGoat.

Mr. Kratville was very well connected within the UP Operating and Mechanical departments. His books are in many cases the only source of UP internal engineering test documents.

I think you will enjoy your copy of "Big Boy".

Scott Griggs
Louisville, KY

sgriggs wrote (in his first message in this thread):

>There was little incentive to operate their 25 Big Boys outside of the Ogden to Cheyenne stretch because they could haul significantly more on the flatlands than UP's standard fast freight power, the Challengers and the 9000 class 4-12-2's ...

I don't quite understand this statement. Are the "flatlands" that are mentioned on the Ogden to Cheyenne stretch?

Or should the "could" really be "couldn't?"



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/17 17:12 by johnsweetser.

RustyRayls Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Question for those in the know??? -- Didn't the
> Big Boy's operate over a very limited territory
> because of their weight and size? Aren't there
> even more places that the 4014 won't be able to
> visit than there was for the 3985?
>
> Old Bob out in Lost Wages

Buried in a thread posted a year or two ago is the fact that 3985 can handle turning radius tighter than the 844, so in theory, 3985 can probably visit more places than the 844. Can't say the same for the 4014.

Weight has very little to do with it. The axle loadings are less than that of a loaded freight car. Far less than today's 286,000 lb. cars.

BUT, there are far more axles in a very short distance, especially when you add the weight of water cars and diesel pushers into the equation.

The overhang of the smokebox to the outside of curves, especially curves in cuts or tunnels, is the big deal. It's more than a 3900.

Which explains why, between the time the 4000s were ordered and when they were delivered, UP did a massive amount of trackwork between Cheyenne and Ogden.

The distance between track centers was increased on curves, cuts in curves were widened, and the curved tunnels between Devils Slide and Morgan were opened up in width.

There were some locations on curves where timetable special instructions prohibited 2 4000s from meeting or passing each other, due to the smokebox overhang.

This is all in Kratville's book.

johnsweetser Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sgriggs wrote (in his first message in this
> thread):
>
> >There was little incentive to operate their 25
> Big Boys outside of the Ogden to Cheyenne stretch
> because they could haul significantly more on the
> flatlands than UP's standard fast freight power,
> the Challengers and the 9000 class 4-12-2's ...
>
> I don't quite understand this statement. Are the
> "flatlands" that are mentioned on the Ogden to
> Cheyenne stretch?
>
> Or should the "could" really be "couldn't?"

By "flatlands", I was thinking in particular between Omaha and Cheyenne, although there *are* also vast stretches between Ogden and Cheyenne that are relatively flat. According to a UP drawbar pull chart of different locomotive types, a Big Boy could produce about 18% more drawbar pull at 60 mph than a Challenger. Having Big Boys, Challengers, and 9000's operating together over the flatter parts of the railroad would mean trains which were at the tonnage limits for Challengers and 9000's would be handed off to Big Boys, which would be operating substantially under their tonnage limits. Not very efficient. The UP decided (correctly, I think) that their 25 Big Boys were more effectively employed over the most demanding transcontinental grades where they could haul full length trains which had been brought into Cheyenne or Ogden by the smaller standard power types (4-6-6-4's and 4-12-2's) up the steep Sherman Hill or Wahsatch grades unassisted.

Scott Griggs
Louisville, KY

ut-1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He said the crew will work weekends and holidays to get
> the job done.

By the way, thanks for taking the time to attend the presentation and following it up with a report.

This comment sticks out like a sore thumb, since it sounds so involuntary. I've worked weekends and holidays (while in high tech), but as an exempt employee, and this occurred near project deadlines where work schedules can't be known 2 years in advance. As a non-exempt (bargain) employee, I've only worked weekends and holidays to cover for staff shortage (sick calls) and implicitly, mismanagement (thinking the world is a perfect simulation, where nothing goes wrong).