Will a Big Boy ever be returned to service

...I wish...
They were getting closer, too, with 4018, back when they were doing the movie (Which proved to be nothing more than hot air :hehe::o).

From http://www.steamlocomotive.com/bigboy/ :

This question comes up frequently. Many used to laugh at the question because it seemed so ridiculous. However, when the news of the proposed restoration of 4018 for a movie was announced, some of us waited with hopeful anticipation. As it turned out, the news about restoring 4018 was only a proposal in its infancy and nothing ever materialized of it. If one was to restore a Big Boy it would seem to make sense to start with the Big Boy that is in the best condition. At one time, this would have been 4023, currently at Kenefick Park, Omaha, NE. During the end of their careers both Challenger 3985 and Big Boy 4023 were rebuilt and placed in the Cheyenne UP roundhouse. However, 4023 was later placed on display in Omaha and the weather and environment has taken its toll on 4023. Currently, 4014, displayed in Pomona, CA has been kept in immaculate condition by the Southern California Chapter of the Railway & Locomotive Historical Society.
However, according to many sources, the UP is loathe to run a coal-fired locomotive on their road any longer (the 3985 (4-6-6-4) was converted to oil in the late 1980's). Naturally, the next question one asks is "why not convert a Big Boy to burn oil?". This was tried back in the 1940s or 1950s on 4005 with a single burner, without success. It has been said that it is not feasible to fire a Big Boy with oil, due to the nature of the firebox (which was designed for burning semi-bituminous coal from southern Wyoming) and boiler capacity. However, 3985 was converted to burn oil and its firebox is not all that different from that of the Big Boy's.
Steve Lee (head of UP's steam program) has also stated that it wouldn't make much sense for UP to restore a Big Boy, as there are only two places on the entire system that are large enough to turn a Big Boy, and those places are only a few miles apart. However, the Challenger is often turned using wyes which could also, almost certainly, handle a Big Boy.
Despite the obstacles of restoring and operating a Big Boy, with enough money, anything is possible.
 
Sho would be nice. There are several on dispaly here and there. One or two in reasonably good shape. Cost would be high and they would have to be converted to oil but as I understand it the biggest problem is no turn tables big enough to turn it exist any more and the only two wyes are withing 30 miles of each other (we can till dream tho).

Ben
 
Hi Ferrous:

I heard the same thing about the difficulty in converting it to oil but I think thats just an "out" for them since the 4-6-6-4 was converted and works just fine. Might take a few experiments with burner positions, number, flow rate, etc but I bet it could be done (probably won't tho so back to dreaming). I used to work on gas generators (stationary jet engines) and you can run one on just about anything including bunker C (sludge which has to be pre-heated to get it to flow) and even crude right out of the ground if you get the spray nozzles right. Same principle applies to the firebox burners.

Ben
 
If some one with money paid to have it restored, and gave it to UP and said "here, have a running Big Boy" they would not say no. They would jump at the chance, no one would turn that opportunity down? Hell, who would
 
If some one with money paid to have it restored, and gave it to UP and said "here, have a running Big Boy" they would not say no. They would jump at the chance, no one would turn that opportunity down? Hell, who would
I hate to say this but I dont think they would let anybody restore one.
For one all the bigboys are still "Technically" owned by UP. They are all on Permenant loans.
For another there are not many places to run one. There
The biggest reason would be money. It takes alot of money to do excursions runs with the U.P. Steamers. Not just upkeep but insurance etc.
I myself dont see many more runs for the steamers after a couple more years. Because of how much it costs.
Kenny:)
Ps these are just my take on the suitation.
 
...my lump of coal's worth...

8) ...it's a coal burner...deal with it...

The firebox replacement, coal or oil, is now regulated, and must be replaced with a certified & inspected stainless steel boiler. I don't know the correct numbers, but a new boiler, would be over one-hundred thousand dollars...the total I've heard, is over a million dollars.

Maybe the Sheik who can afford it, can transport it to China, for rebuilding...they have the facilities.

Then there is the bain of the EPA, who have been relatively quiet so far, about over-throttled steam loco's needlessly pumping black smoke, just for aesthetic appeal.

And...finally, the cost of upkeep, along with the cost of rebuilding, and of course, insurance, mean the cost of doing this, will never realize a profit...

So unleash the power of the default Big Boy...no...make that two...in TRS2006, set up a seven mile long train, (on Robe River Route), with draft and buff forces applied, and see how far you get....
 
Hi Ferrous:

I heard the same thing about the difficulty in converting it to oil but I think thats just an "out" for them since the 4-6-6-4 was converted and works just fine. Might take a few experiments with burner positions, number, flow rate, etc but I bet it could be done (probably won't tho so back to dreaming). I used to work on gas generators (stationary jet engines) and you can run one on just about anything including bunker C (sludge which has to be pre-heated to get it to flow) and even crude right out of the ground if you get the spray nozzles right. Same principle applies to the firebox burners.

Ben

Heh, I have no doubt about the possibilities, I was just doing a quick-n-dirty quote from another site. :wave:
 
Rebuilding steam locomotrive is becoming a in teresting business here in Europe.
Especially in Germany, Frane and UK mani private corporations has grown to the poit where the have enough money to do such am expensive investment as rebuoding, repairing and even completelly build steam locomotive starting from original drawing (see the sachs K1 in Germany).
Some museums like the one I put here http://www.dampflokmuseum.de/index.php?seite=museum&sub=exponate
have many locomotives ready to run that they use for every kind of special train bay paying to the owner of the routes a fee by Km.
Restoring a big steamer is a really expensive matter. Think about the a complete revision goes to cost more then a million of Euros (about 1.5 Millions $), but the few locations in Europe duing it have waiting listo of years.
Finding the money, the people, the routes are only practical problems that can be solved quite fast (think about that the Furka Steam Railroad went to Vietnam to bui locomotives in a very poor conditions and restore an abandoned line to use it only for Museum trains. A business over 10 Million Euro...).
The real problem is to understand if companies like UP or any other can understand the possibility of making money with such a business, so far away from their core business (moving goods not passengers). To understand this another question arise: there's a merket big enough in the USA for such turistic trains to justify such level of investment. I would say yes. f something like this can happen in Europe, I don't see any reason whay this cannot happen in the USA.
In my opinion the reason of this dubts are mostly cultural, like we see here in Italy.
 
Everyone says they should try engine 4014. Look for a video called Union Pacific Big Boys Collection there guys talking about restoring one and paying respects to the great giants of the 1940s and 50s
 
And imagine the amount of money you'd be losing paying for the thing. Fuel, water, engine crew, maintenance, the list goes on.
As much as we want a Big Boy up and running again, unless its an association that will run public runs that can earn a profit and not lose money, we won't be seeing one any time soon.
 
It is simply amazing how they can keep its brother in arms,the Challenger(s) so to speak,running but not at least keep one Big Boy going is beyond me. They are based on the same basic principles. just one bigger then the other. Just like the steam locomotive as a whole is based on the same principles the very first locomotives were made on. So it all comes down to the green. I'm sure if people or someone put fourth the money to do it. I'm sure UP would just jump on it say sure we will restore one(only if they can make a small* profit off it)


*Small-meaning a small amount of cash roughly the size of Bill Gates pay check before he recently retired from head of Microsoft and became part time.
 
Then keep the damn thing on sherman hill and use it as a helper. If you want to make a profit, use it it as it was meant for.
 
Then keep the damn thing on sherman hill and use it as a helper. If you want to make a profit, use it it as it was meant for.

I think I'll go for what you said there. Plus it could be very resouceful in pulling very long trains with no helpers and will probably help reduce the amount of locomotives used to climb Sherman Hill and other places on the Union Pacific.
 
Now I'm not trying to shoot down the idea, because believe me, I'm a huge fan of steam. But if this idea was followed through, it would most likely be the only operation of its kind system-wide, and this means that only a few enginemen would be available that would know how to do the job. They would most likely be needed to pay these crews more, which would obviously not be practical for the railroad. Our only bet would be seeing a Big Boy in excursion service.
 
Back
Top