Yep, I'll add my kudos to Mr. Butler and his steam expertise. A contract shop like his does what the owner of the equipment tells him to do. Always in the course of a major rebuild, unforeseen problems crop up and additional work needs to be done. The rebuilder presents the owner with options and suggestions to remedy the problems, but it's the owner who makes the choices.
The (old) Georgetown Loop leased their #40 to the White Pass and they had nothing but distain for the engine and any and all work that had been done on it. It was claimed it wasn't suitable for working on the White Pass, so they returned it after 2 years into a 5 year lease. While it was there, White Pass made some repairs to the engine that were improperly done and had to be redone upon it's return to the Loop. Then they acquired the #69 which was going to be so much better because it was one of "their" engines. I remember thinking if they didn't like the #40 they're really not going to like the #69, as a lot of the things they bitched about with #40 exist to a larger degree on #69 with several additional unfavorable features added.
Lets face it, the White Pass is a fabulous operation. Their #73 is a beautiful engine - a showboat. It's had it's share of problems, as all steam locomotives do. The #69 is no showboat, and no amount of rebuilding, tweaking, or dolling it up will make it anything but a workhorse beast. From my experience, the White Pass guys will only be satisifyed after they have laid hands on the engine, which they are doing now. Only then will they not be able to blame anything wrong with it on a third party.
Phil
