Kelly Anderson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> cwallace Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Each
> > bolt represents new machined parts and a
> skilled
> > process to apply. It is a lot of work.
>
> So does everything else on a steam locomotive!
>
> When #497 ran at the D&S, I'm told that she was
> constantly breaking staybolts, calling for
> frequent unscheduled overnight cool downs,
> repairs, and quick fire-ups to pull the next day's
> train. The fact that D&S approached C&TS offering
> to trade an in service #497 for a totally
> unrestored #482 is a good indication of how much
> extra maintenance went into that older boiler
> design.
When 497 showed up in Chama, inspection revealed at least seven broken staybolts and numerous bolts leaking around the threads. At that time, 5 broken bolts was all that were allowed in an engine. I rode the engine from Needleton to Silverton, which was a extreme rarity during the Bradshaw years. When working hard, the cab filled up with steam leaking around the staybolt threads and through the leaker holes in the broken bolts.
The first year or so we ran 497, It had to be taken out of service because we had an excessive broken staybolts and they needed to be changed out. It is assumed that there were several cracked bolts that did not crack to the point where they began to admit steam and water through the leaker holes. As time went on 497 had less and less staybolt issues. Toward the end it was breaking 3-4 a year, which is not bad util you compare it to a 480 which seldom broke a staybolts. Most staybolts changed on a 480 were a result of the fire burning the ends off the bolt inside the firebox, causing a leak.