I recently ran across a solid assessment of the condition of the six C&TS locomotives done by John Bush back in September 2004, and his recommendations on next steps and why. It also provides a useful summary history of the condition of these locomotives by a guy who knew these locomotives best. It helps explain why 483 has not been a candidate for rebuild, with preference instead going to 463 as the fifth loco, and possible K-37 options for the sixth loco.
Another reason for publishing this now is that from time-to-time questions and opinions about these locos are posted on this and other boards, some misinformed (e.g., Jay's "Politics" post on 3/31 on the Gote). What is also interesting to note is John's emphasis on having sufficient motive power to meet customer demand -- a key concept that was woefully absent back in 2003-2004. So, see below (it's a bit long, but worthwhile).
-------------------------------------------------------
Cumbres & Toltec Scenic RR Locomotive Assessment
John Bush
At the request of Carl Turner, New Mexico member of the Cumbres & Toltec Scenic railroad Commission, I traveled to Chama, N.M. and Antonito, Colorado between Sept. 21 and Sept. 24, 2004 to inspect the locomotives not currently in service. #463, #483, #489, #492 and #497 and to make recommendations as to the various courses of action that will give the C&TS a reliable locomotive fleet sufficiently large to allow the railroad to accommodate its foreseeable customer demands. Throughout the 2004 season only 2 locomotives #484 and #487 have been compliant with CFR 49 part #230 and available for service. Because only 2 locomotives have been available, and because law requires that each locomotive receive a thorough inspection and boiler wash every 31 days, it has not been possible for the C&TS to operate a full schedule of departures.
During the Scenic Railways years after 3 locomotives became available and during the Kyle railways years prior to 1990 when only 3 locomotives were available, the railroad operated a full schedule with daily departures from both the Antonito and Chama ends. When necessary it was possible to double head trains out of Chama to the summit of Cumbres Pass.
Care had to be exercised in the scheduling of boiler washes so as to insure that sufficient power was available on busy days. The limited amount of time available for boiler washes meant that boilers were blown down, washed, refilled, and fired up with out allowing enough time to avoid damaging thermal shock. To properly wash a boiler the fire should be dropped, the boiler should be allowed to cool until the pressure is reduced to zero, then the water should be drained, the plugs removed. The boiler should then be thoroughly washed out using both high pressure water (a pressure washer) and high volumes of low pressure water (water delivered from the water pump used to fill the Chama tank). After the wash is completed and the plugs are replaced the boiler should be filled (with warm water if possible) and a slow fire built to bring the temperature up slowly. When the boiler is filled with cold water and the fire is heavy the uneven heating and lack of circulation in the water causes significant thermal shock. Thermal shock reduces flue life, causes broken staybolts, and contributes to cracking of firebox sheets. Mechanical failures also put severe stress on the system.
Beginning in 1990, 4 locomotives became available. It was then much easier to protect the schedules, provide for double headers when required, do scheduled maintenance, do boiler washes, make unscheduled repairs, offer special events for rail fans, do movie work, and run triple headed trains when necessary.
The current statues of the locomotives fleet is as follows:
#487 received its 49 CFR part 230 work in the winter of 2003-04 in Antonito. This work included partial left and right side sheet replacement, partial crown sheet replacement, new arch tubes, reinforcement rings for the arch tube plug holes, new tubes and flues, new superheater units, new dome cap, and new flexible staybolt caps. The running gear with the exception of the leading and trailing trucks was rebuilt in the winter of 2002-03. As designed by Baldwin and used by both the D&RGW and the C&TS the #1 driving boxes are equipped with centering devices. These centering devices are designed to ease the locomotive into the curves and to reduce “hunting” (side to side motion) on tangent track. The centering device has been disabled by the addition of shims between the “gibbs” on the driving boxes and the sides of the shoes and wedges. The centering device was disabled after a rash of derailments in late Sept. and Oct. of 2003. The derailments were probably due to soft roadbed or cinders packed into the centering device. These devices have worked properly for 75+ years and if set up correctly should improve the cornering and tracking of the locomotive. I recommend that the arrangement of the centering devices be returned to the conditions specified in the blueprints. The locomotive is serviceable but needs an annual inspection including the following: (Boiler) Boiler wash, internal inspection, hydrostatic test, safety valve setting, and steam gauge dead weight test. (Brake system) Air compressor orifice test, dead weight test air gauges, clean brake valves, clean feed & reducing valves, clean distributing valve. (Draw gear) Draw bars and pins should be checked for cracks. #487 also requires some minor running gear work including new side rod bushings, valve gear pins and bushings and valve setting.
#484 was returned to service this year with both rebuilt running gear and compliant boiler work completed. The boiler work included partial right and left side sheets, a new partial lower door sheet, a new partial front flue sheet including the knuckle, new arch tubes, reinforcement rings for the arch tube plug holes, new tubes and flues, new superheater units, new dome cap, and new flexible staybolt caps. The running gear has been completely rebuilt including the leading and trailing truck. The shoes and wedges for the #1 drivers have been made extra wide to take the place of the shims that were installed on the #487 (discussed above). As a result the centering device on this locomotive does not match the blueprint and does not function as it was designed. It should be corrected. In addition to the complete running gear rebuild and the boiler work #484 also received new valve cages and new valve rings. It has operated for one season. It is serviceable but should receive an annual inspection as detailed above. In addition this locomotive has stiff valve gear and the valves and valve gear should be carefully inspected to determine the cause of the stiffness.
#488 has had its running gear rebuilt twice and is nearing completion of its mandated boiler work. The running gear on #488 had been rebuilt at the end of the “Kyle” years and the locomotive had one year of service when it was removed from service for boiler work. It was last operated in 1996. Boiler work was not completed before the new 49 CFR part 230 rules were adopted and it has been out of service ever since. While it sat out of service the decision was made to rebuild its running gear again. When the running gear was rebuilt the second time the centering device was disabled by making the shoes and wedges extra wide. This condition should be corrected by re machining the shoes and wedges. The boiler work which included replacement of the lower 2/3rds of the front flue sheet including the knuckle, the upper half of the rear flue sheet including the knuckle, a partial door sheet, new arch tubes, reinforcement rings for the arch tube plug holes, new tubes and flues, new superheater units, new dome cap, and new flexible staybolt caps. After this work was done in the in the winter, spring and summer of 2004 it was discovered during hydrostatic testing that both the left and right side sheets had significant star cracking around the stay boltholes. The affected areas were cut out and large patches have been applied to both sides. At this time the new patches have been welded in and new stay bolts have been applied. It is hoped that the locomotive will be completed before Christmas.
#489 is out of service and stripped down awaiting boiler work, it’s tubes and flues have been removed. It received a new lower rear flue sheet in 2000 because of star cracking between the 2 ¼” tubes. It operated in 2001 but failed to receive a flue extension that fall due to excess scale build up and has been out of service ever since. . Except for the side rods, which have been taken for use on the #488, the running gear is complete and assembled. The #1 drivers have excess lateral motion which defeats the purpose of the centering device built into the driving boxes and spring rigging for the #1 drivers. The R4 driver is reported to have run hot the last year that the locomotive saw service. The flange and tread contours on all the wheels are acceptable. The spring rigging including equalizers, hangers, saddles, and pins show some signs of wear but are serviceable. The frame of the locomotive is in generally good condition. No breaks or cracks were observed and the cylinder saddle is tight as are the cross ties and the valve gear yoke. Some of the pedestal caps (frame binders) are drawn up on their wedges so far that they make contact with the lower frame rails. This allows the frame to flex and makes it difficult to set and maintain tram, loose driving boxes, and stuck driving boxes all contribute to pounding which not only accelerates the wear in side rods bushings but can result in damaged side rods and cracked frames. The drawbar and safety bar are worn. This results in both having the same effective length. Because the both act on the same drawbar pins the effective length of the safety bar is supposed to be longer than the drawbar.
The boiler shell, wrapper sheet, back head, throat sheet, and dome have all had grid lines applied in preparation for thickness measurement. All the above listed items appear to be in good condition and no repair or replacement should be required. As with the other K-36s the dome cap will require replacement with thicker material so that the stress calculations will fall into an acceptable range. The front flue sheet has oversize holes in the lower bundle (oversize by as much as 1/8” inch) and the 2 ¼” holes in the upper bundle are out of round. When the holes in the flue sheet are out of round it is difficult to roll the tubes in. In order to get them tight enough to seal they get over rolled and thinned out. As a result they are prone to early failure. The knuckle appears to be in good shape and no evidence of grooving or pitting was found. The rear flue sheet is generally in good shape. The upper knuckles were replaced in 89/90 and the lower tube bundle was replaced in 2000/01. When the tubes were installed they were over beaded, which resulted in annular grooves around the tube holes. These will need to be welded up and ground smooth. The side sheets show evidence of welded cracks, and pad welded stay bolts. A substantial number of the stays have overworked and cracked heads. There is significant accumulation of scale in the water legs above the mud ring on both sides. The crown sheet looks to be in good condition however there is scale buildup around the roots of the crown stays, which makes it impossible to determine the true condition of the sheet and stay at that location. Sandblasting will be necessary to determine their actual condition. The door sheet has a bulged patch below the door hole and welded cracks. In all likelihood based on the observed condition and the evidence of scale build-up along the side sheets, the area below the door hole has significant scale build-up and the lower half of the door sheet will have to be replaced. Some of the flexible stay bolts will have to be replaced due to having over worked and cracked heads. The sleeves for the flexible stays appear to be in good condition. The caps for all the flexible stays should be replaced and there are enough new caps in inventory to do so. The center grate support bar is cracked, eroded, and bent from years of exposure to the heat of the fire and should be replaced.
Because the locomotive has been stripped the brake valves and gauges have been removed. They were not inspected but will need cleaning, lubricating and calibrating. The following exceptions were noted in the foundation brake rigging. The brake shoes are a combination of composition and cast iron. The #4 brake heads should be replaced with heads fabricated to accept composition shoes like those applied to the other 3 axles. The holes in the brake rods, levers, and hangers are elongated and the pins are worn. While they are serviceable, new pins should be applied and the holes should be welded up and re-drilled or the levers, hangers, and rods should be replaced. Changing to all composition shoes and better linkage geometry will result in better braking and more even wear on the tires.
The tender was not available for inspection. It is reasonable to assume that the wooden deck needs replacing. The truck bolsters are probably cracked and the wheels may need replacement. The estimate reflects these assumptions.
#463 last operated in 2002 and has been stored still assembled in Antonito. During the summer of 2002 it broke a side rod segment between the #1 and #2 drivers on the left side. A side rod was borrowed from #464 at the Huckleberry RR in Flint, Michigan and the season was completed. Other than needing a new side rod segment the running gear is complete. The locomotive is riding low at he rear and at a minimum spring rigging work will be needed at the trailing truck to pick the rear end up. The rest of the running gear looks to be in relatively good shape. Although it shows signs of wear none of it is condemnable.
#497 is sitting assembled but out of service. It operated in 2002 but like the 463 has been removed from service because it needs the 1472-day inspection required by the new federal rules. The running gear appears to be generally serviceable and flange and tread contours are acceptable. There is evidence of significant leakage under the boiler jacket in the area around the rear of the 2nd boiler course and the front of the wrapper sheet. At this time the source of that leakage is unknown. It could be something as minor as some broken stay bolts or as serious as leaking seams or a crack in the shell or wrapper.
#483 is partially disassembled and its jacket and lagging have been removed. This locomotive was removed from service at the end of the 1976 season needing both boiler work and running gear work. Over the 28 years that it has been out of service it has been heavily cannibalized.
#492 has never been in service on the C&TS. Like the #483 it has recently had its boiler jacket and lagging removed. Over the years it has been cannibalized though not as heavily as the #483. The #492 received a new firebox in 1948 as well as new 1st and 2nd coursers. The seams on the 1st and 2nd courses are of the same modern design as the seams on the K-36 boilers. The longitudinal seams on the #497’s boiler are an older design.
Recommendations:
Based on my inspection and experience I recommend that a full season be planned for next year as it can be accomplished even if only three locomotives are available. I also recommend that locomotive #489 receive its 49 CFR part 230 work starting this fall if money is available to do so. This engine is chosen because it is already disassembled, presents fewer challenges than the #497 and is more powerful than the #463.
The #489 can be moved to Antonito to receive its 49 CFR part 230 work if it is deemed that there is not enough shop space available in Chama. A combination of the Chama and Antonito boilermakers should be able to complete this work by May of 2005 in either location. I recommend that the running gear not receive a major overhaul at this time but only the work required to insure that it will run cool and without excess lateral in the #1 drivers. If the lateral in the #1 drivers is set to the blueprint dimensions and the centering device is set up properly it should be able to run one or two seasons before a complete running gear rebuild is necessary.
The 463 should be returned to service after #489 is completed but before either #483, #492 of #497 for the following reasons. Because it is smaller and lighter than either the K-36s or K-37s it is easier on track. C&TS track is still in need of ties and ballast, some areas are consistently soft due to springs and poor drainage. In the spring when the roadbed is soft on the whole railroad and at all times due to the lighter construction on the east end #463 is less likely to damage the truck than the heavier, longer, and stiffer 480s and 490s. Additionally returning #463 to service makes good political sense for obvious reasons. Before #463 is stripped it should receive a complete hydrostatic test with the jacket removed to determine the condition of the staybolts, staybolt holes, firebox sheets and seams. Had this test been performed on #488 substantial time could have been saved during the rebuild because problems with the side sheets would have been discovered and could have been addressed earlier.
The running gear on this locomotive needs some Attention but does not require a complete rebuilding. The running gear was thoroughly rebuilt when the locomotive was first returned to service in 1994. A new left front side rod segment will have to be fabricated to replace the one that broke the last year it operated.
After hydrostatic test the tubes and flues can be removed. The boiler should then be marked off in a grid, measurements taken and calculations done for a new form 4 based on the existing structure.
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.
The K-37’s #497 and #492 are slightly heavier than the K-36s but more importantly the trailing axles sits one foot farther back than the trailing axle on the K36s. It is the general feeling of the operating crews that the K-37s are harder on track than K-36s and are prone to kicking the curves and out of line. If the track is well anchored and well ballasted, the #497 should not be unduly hard on the curves. One of the strong reasons for recommending that the #463 be returned to service before either the #497 or the #492 is that it allows the railroad more time to make the necessary upgrades to the track structure.
The #483 was the first engine used by the C&TS beginning in 1970 and was used until it ran out of flue time. It was retired in 1976 after it failed to receive a flue extension. #483 has been out of service for 28 years. When it was retired it was in need of both heavy boiler work and heavy running gear repairs. In addition over the years it has been partially cannibalized to keep the other K-36s running. As a result it is missing a number of specialty parts that will be expensive to recreate. It will be more costly to return this engine to service than any of the other locomotives. I recommend that it not be returned to service until 6 other locomotives are serviceable and the track structure upgrades have been completed. Although as a K-36 it would be somewhat easier on track than the K-37s it would be a false economy to spend the extra monies necessary to restore this engine instead of the #497 or #492. Weak, uneven, soft, irregular, and kinked track increases the maintenance costs for all the locomotives. After the #463 is returned to service the track repairs should be the #1 priority. After the track is upgraded it should handle the K-37s as easily as the K-36s.
The following spread sheet provides a detailed estimate of the costs of returning the #489 to service in compliance with 49 CFR part 230. It is based on actual costs of work done on #484, 487, and 488. Mark Yates of the Cumbres and Toltec Scenic RR was a great help for providing me with data concerning the costs of the work done on the #484, 487, and 488. Any errors in the spread sheets are mine alone. This estimate is not for a completely re-manufactured locomotive (ie, all parts and components rebuilt to like new condition). Where parts or assemblies have a reasonable service life remaining I do not intend that they be replaced or rebuilt until that service life is used up. As a result the spread sheet has items listed for which no costs are shown. This cost estimate is based on having a skilled experienced supervisor actively involved so that work undertaken is done right the first time and in an efficient manner. It is also based on the assumption that work that does not need doing is not done.
