Wish it were so Kevin! I think it is pretty much fully accepted that they were both scrapped with a few pieces kicking around in the yard in Guatemala where they resided.
Jerry and Ron might have more to add, but the idea of building new replicas sorta started as a gee whiz what would we do if we could sort of thing. You may remember several long threads on this board over the last 2-3 years that were "what would you build" as far as engines, and what abandoned rr's would you build if you had the where with. Our 5 mile extension to Union Crk. seems quite doable and grant monies have already been expended to do engineering feasablility, eviromental assesment and the like. I think we members of SVRR have every expectation that the extension will proceed and be completed in the next several years. I believe sufficient grant funding is the one hurdle now to make it a reality. Tim, Jerry, Ron correct me if I'm wrong.
It has been the general feeling of management that we need min. 3 locomotives in the long run, as we feel the number of passengers we could potentially carry with the extension going to a major destination campground with 60,000+ visitors a year would require two locomotives in service, with one under repair or in reserve as the case may be. The #3 wood fired Heisler would not be practical for this due to fire hazard, the ability to secure huge amounts of fire wood and personel to fire it, plus speeds of 15-20mph are pushing it's limits though it is capable of operating at slightly over 20mph. It would be maintenance intensive at best. Conversion to oil might make it a viable back up, but generally no one wants to see it converted.
We brainstormed and exchanged a lot of email between a half dozen of us SVRites as to what would be an apealing locomotive to build. It occured to us that nothing other than maybe a couple std. ga. examples of articualateds operate today in this country. We feel it would be something that besides being a unique offering, new copies could use some subtle late steam and modern technology to make them extremely reliable and economical. I will stop here and if Jerry wants to add more detail hopefully he will.
Now here is the pie in the sky idea that goes beyond what a reasonable person would expect to see happen. How about a new line built back to Baker City? It may be just a day dream that is shared by several of us that is unlikly to ever happen. Much of the original route is impractical to build on. It either is under Hwy 7, and is frequently interupted by the Powder River, which was not a big deal in rr building in 1891, but today with the difficulties due to fish habbitat concerns would make building the # of trestles with hundreds of pilings in stream or in riparian areas impossible to contemplate. There is another answer, which may be equally improbable. Several of us have discussed an alternate route from the Bowen Valley just above S. Baker to Union Crk. by begining a farily steep ascent of the adjacent hills turning into mountains and grading around same above the elevation of the cliff formations in Boulder Gorge, to a connection at Union Crk. Just for fun I worked out a route on USGS maps over the course of a few evenings. The ficticious new route would cross the highway just into the Bowen vly, start climbing the hills to the west at 3% with curves laid out roughly with a compass at 16 deg. I was able to reach an elevation over by Old Auburn that would be a more or less level grade to Union Crk. with the line crossing Union Crk. Canyon over the top of the USFS road and to the west of the Hwy on a trestle. California Gulch would also require a substantial bridge/trestle, plus quite a number of smaller ones. The route is probably about 50/50 USFS land and private land.
Imagine 252/253 operating two trains a day over this! OK, this is a pipe dream, but building replica engines is a serious consideration, for the long range picture.
