Re: state funding

Fred Folk Wrote:
=======================================================
> I don't understand why you think it would be any
> cheaper putting 492's boiler on 497 frame you
> still have the same amount of work to do either
> way
> Fred
> 1 of the 4 founders of the DRHS
> BOD for 10 years


Because that is what Mr. Bush stated exactly 10 years ago:

After #463 is returned to service is the appropriate time to consider a 6th locomotive. The three best candidates are #497, #492, and #483. The #497 was last used in 2002. It was received in trade from the D&S RR in 1992 and was used extensively until the fall of 2002, when it came due for the required part #230 – 1472 day inspection. As previously mentioned it is sitting in the Chama roundhouse and has not been disassembled other than having its tender separated. It should have its jacket and lagging removed and then should receive a hydrostatic test. There are significant lime deposits in the area of the rear of the boiler barrel and the front of the wrapper sheet as well as on the throat sheet. The hydrostatic test will indicate whether there are leaking seams or cracks in the shell, which is a serious problem or whether the lime deposits are the result of leaking and broken stay bolts which is a much more common and less serious problem. If the leakage is the result of broken or loose stays rather than a sprung seam or cracked shell I recommend removing the tubes and flues, laying out a measurement grid, and calculating a form 4 for the locomotive. While the boiler was built in 1902 and is of older design than the K36 boilers, it was designed to provide a factor of safety of 4, which is the requirement under the new rules as it was under the old ones. If the shell is cracked or the seams are sprung the locomotive should be cosmetically restored and displayed. Alternately the boiler could be removed and the boiler from #492 could be mounted in its place. The 492 received a new barrel and new firebox in 1948. The #492 was retired in 1967. Its barrel and firebox only have 19 years of service compared to 50+ years on the other engines. The reason that I recommend a boiler swap with the #497 is that #497 has a relatively trouble free running gear which still possess some life before requiring a major rebuild. The #492 running gear is a combination of parts as a result of the cannibalization that has characterized the C&TS for much of its history. Swapping boilers between #492 & #497 will probably produce a useable locomotive more quickly and at less expense than doing a complete rebuild of the #492 running gear. Since the flues and tubes are still installed in the #492’s boiler I recommend that a hydrostatic test be performed before they are removed to check the seams, staybolts, and sheets.