Steam & Excursion > Who owns GN 2584?

I've been wondering this for a long time, who really owns GN 2584?
I have searched here on TO and on Google with conflicting results...

Does BNSF own GN 2584? Does the City of Havre own the 2584?
State you sources.

And what is the condition of the locomotive?  Is it a candidate to be restored to operational condition?
I realize anything can be repaired/restored with enough money- but could it be done without breaking the bank?

Is there any interest in BNSF to restore the 2584?  I realize they have access to ATSF 3751 and SPS 700 when ever they want to run an excursion, but in light of the publicity that the UP 4014 is making does the BNSF want it's own PR machine?
 

 

---

scott9915 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've been wondering this for a long time, who
> really owns GN 2584?
> I have searched here on TO and on Google with
> conflicting results...
>
> Does BNSF own GN 2584? Does the City of Havre own
> the 2584?
> State you sources.
>
> And what is the condition of the locomotive?

Well, she has been on display out outside for more than 50 years.

 Is
> it a candidate to be restored to operational
> condition?

No, not really.

> I realize anything can be repaired/restored with
> enough money- but could it be done without
> breaking the bank?

Nope.


> Is there any interest in BNSF to restore the 2584?

Nope.

>  I realize they have access to ATSF 3751 and SPS
> 700 when ever they want to run an excursion, but
> in light of the publicity that the UP 4014 is
> making does the BNSF want it's own PR machine?

Somehow I don't think ANYONE at BNSF is interested in THAT sort of "PR". Just my opinion.

  

Wow!  She looks brandnew.  How old is that photo?

see https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,4823335,4823805#msg-4823805

Gordon

Love the look of those air pumps hanging off the front and the low headlight! === === = === JLH

One and a half million for starters...

Why does every display locomotive need to be restored to operation? Face it- a well-preserved static display like #2584 appears to be probably reaches more people than a restored locomotive that does a handful of trips per year and is locked up in storage the rest of the time.

It's interesting but stuffed and mounted it generates very little income, a rebuild would feather
a lot of nests.

Out

In the excursion world,
 
A rebuild is ALWAYS  money down a rat-hole...Meaning that it’s always gone & lost forever...with no hope of recovery.
Unless you have a corporate structure with an advertising budget ( income tax deductible) with annually-recurring costs to burn....
So, outfits like U.P. can pour $10 million into the 4012 project, and deduct the costs —- as if it were broadcast network ‘air-time’.
The number of millions of viewers of commercials is captured & statistically calculated, and can be counted as “numbers of views”.
One 30-second commercial, generates more “views” than a century of running steam engines around the system.

The $millions invested in the restorations are never recoverable —— unless you own, or can run over state-owned tracks,—-

If there’s “insurance” involved, the insurance companies are gonna set the premium REALLY high,  
and blame it on the “un-knowable risk” ( not statistically-based & the actual incident-record is so meager,
& not “statistically significant”). 

If they charge the $millions to cover one, or a limited number of trips, and there’s NO incidents—- they keep ALL the cash...
And later, charge a duplicate amount for any future runs....
(the insurance sales force sees enough in these commissions to restore 10 BIG BOYS, with Dickens as the contractor...)

Thus, all ‘operating income’ will go to pay the premium of the “un-knowable risk”.  
The operator will NEVER see a cash flow that covers the cost of the restoration, the daily operating costs and the ancillary costs of the cars and equipment.

So, restoring an engine and operating it are immensely expensive...and the current costs doom any future excursions —exept in rare instances..

iMHO & RRg Experience.
.
W.


 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/07/19 13:05 by wcamp1472.

davew833 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why does every display locomotive need to be
> restored to operation? Face it- a well-preserved
> static display like #2584 appears to be probably
> reaches more people than a restored locomotive
> that does a handful of trips per year and is
> locked up in storage the rest of the time.

I agree. As much as I enjoy the loud whistle & moving machinery of an operating steam locomotive. I get more enjoyment closely studying static display locomotives in relative peace without the crowds and being kept a “safe distance” away, without worry of being moved along so the rest of the people can get their chance to see it, or doing battle with all the maniacs on the road to follow it to its next stop, only to view it again, for a few moments from a safe distance.

Desmond Praetzel, “4451 Puff”

Studying them is a good practice...

i enjoy analyzing and searching for clues telling the story of the mechanics that made things easier...
Like the inevitable modifications to streamline-shrouds   Applied to many locos—- the shrouding was ‘trimmed’, chopped and eventually ripped off...

An example is C&O Allegheny 1604 at the B&O Museum..
They were built with a pair of ladders up from the pilot beam to the front deck —— access to the air compressors, and the running boards.  Over time, it was necessary to repair/replace the steam seals ( packing rings) of the steam exhaust and delivery pipes that were covered by the deck and ladders.

There are cuts in the 4 ladder uprights ( with temporary bolted bracing) so that the deck snd ladders can be easily removed and replaced,...as needed. So, the top half of the ladders were part of the deck, and lifted off , as a unit.  Otherewise there was a lot of un-bolting and additional hardware work...that took too much time...
I love to see these kinds of “work-arounds”

Every engine has some form of shops’ surgery....they speak to me across the ages.
I enjoy the ‘discovery process’ ... .and often laugh out loud, when the humor dawns on me about the stuff they did.

​W.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/07/19 16:51 by wcamp1472.

The pilot truck on this locomotive is a unique design that wasn’t utilized as much as the open wheel design. Does anyone know if this design has a name and if there were any advantages gained by using it, other than the roller bearings?

Thanks in advance for any replies.
Mark V.
The Fort in Indiana

Posted from iPhone

I, for one, am glad that there are engines like AT&SF 3759 in Kingman, AZ that are still being taken care of and you can actually get up close to without a fence. Will it run again? No. But it's there for the public to enjoy.

Tom

Agreed Wes, and often the shop didn't care about asthetics, examples: Randal Cabs on the C&NW, Santa Fe CF7s, that ugly hump thing that NS uses for testing, etc.

Victor A. Baird
http://www.erstwhilepublications.com


wcamp1472 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> An example is C&O Allegheny 1604 at the B&O
> Museum..
> They were built with a pair of ladders up from the
> pilot beam to the front deck —— access to the
> air compressors, and the running boards.  Over
> time, it was necessary to repair/replace the steam
> seals ( packing rings) of the steam exhaust and
> delivery pipes that were covered by the deck and
> ladders.
>
> There are cuts in the 4 ladder uprights ( with
> temporary bolted bracing) so that the deck snd
> ladders can be easily removed and replaced,...as
> needed. So, the top half of the ladders were part
> of the deck, and lifted off , as a unit.
>  Otherewise there was a lot of un-bolting and
> additional hardware work...that took too much
> time...
> I love to see these kinds of “work-arounds”
>
> Every engine has some form of shops’
> surgery....they speak to me across the ages.
> I enjoy the ‘discovery process.... .and often
> laugh out loud, when the humor dawns on me about
> the stuff they did.
>
> ​W.

That GN engine looks better than almost any other engine on display.  Really nice.

Goalieman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The pilot truck on this locomotive is a unique
> design that wasn’t utilized as much as the open
> wheel design. Does anyone know if this design has
> a name and if there were any advantages gained by
> using it, other than the roller bearings?
>
> Thanks in advance for any replies.
> Mark V.
> The Fort in Indiana
>
> Posted from iPhone

An outside bearing truck, whether on a steam locomotive, a passenger car, a freight car, log bunk, or anything else, provides better balance and more room for widely spacing weight bearing stresses on centering devices, thus improving the stability of the unit, improving the ride, and reducing stresses on the track structure.

Other than that - it is a mystery 《G》.

- John

wcamp1472 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In the excursion world,
>  
> A rebuild is ALWAYS  money down a
> rat-hole...Meaning that it’s always gone & lost
> forever...with no hope of recovery.
> Unless you have a corporate structure with an
> advertising budget ( income tax deductible) with
> annually-recurring costs to burn....
> So, outfits like U.P. can pour $10 million into
> the 4012 project, and deduct the costs —- as if
> it were broadcast network ‘air-time’.
> The number of millions of viewers of commercials
> is captured & statistically calculated, and can be
> counted as “numbers of views”.
> One 30-second commercial, generates more
> “views” than a century of running steam
> engines around the system.
>
> The $millions invested in the restorations are
> never recoverable —— unless you own, or can
> run over state-owned tracks,—-
>
> If there’s “insurance” involved, the
> insurance companies are gonna set the premium
> REALLY high,  
> and blame it on the “un-knowable risk” ( not
> statistically-based & the actual incident-record
> is so meager,
> & not “statistically significant”). 
>
> If they charge the $millions to cover one, or a
> limited number of trips, and there’s NO
> incidents—- they keep ALL the cash...
> And later, charge a duplicate amount for any
> future runs....
> (the insurance sales force sees enough in these
> commissions to restore 10 BIG BOYS, with Dickens
> as the contractor...)
>
> Thus, all ‘operating income’ will go to pay
> the premium of the “un-knowable risk”.  
> The operator will NEVER see a cash flow that
> covers the cost of the restoration, the daily
> operating costs and the ancillary costs of the
> cars and equipment.
>
> So, restoring an engine and operating it are
> immensely expensive...and the current costs doom
> any future excursions —exept in rare
> instances..
>
> iMHO & RRg Experience.
> .
> W.
>

Wes,

That is why I asked my initial question "Who owns GN 2584?"
Ownership of the locomotive seems to be a big question.
If it turns out that BNSF still owns her, then the possibility exists that BNSF could potentially restore her.

Should BNSF decide to restore her, then her restoration expenses could be written off as a "PR expenses".

Besides I'm hoping that deep down Warren Buffet is a big steam train fan- and that he decides that that the GN 2584 would be a good look for the company.. 

Scott
 

Like many others, I'm very skeptical that something like that would happen. But as we have learned in the past--never say never. But if I were BNSF and I went that route, it would easier to just adopt the 4449 or one of the big Santa Fe engines.

Victor A. Baird
http://www.erstwhilepublications.com