Steam is king! The fact that a discussion has begun on a wanted restored Alleghany is where it all starts. Look at the Big Boy program and UP’s overall steam program. It is first class and pays for itself in advertising and the exposure that UP gets to it’s big shippers, etc. I am a CSX stockholder and want them to get moving on a project for the Alleghany. The exposure would do the same thing for them that UP gets. The finest in steam means that others are connected and want to be a part of the “action” as well. As the man in charge for Big Boy said, it is like bringing back tyronasurs rex and who wouldn’t want to see one of those! Most people have never heard of Big Boy or ever seen such a large steam locomotive like that under steam, so it sells instantly for the already above mentioned reasons. Let’s all push and ask the B&O Museum and CSX to look into it. The Alleghany at the Ford Museum is the most looked at object in the entire museum by the way.
While an Allegheny is a impressive piece of machinery, restoration of either of the surviving examples just isn’t going to happen. I’d be scared to look inside the boiler to see the condition of the flues and, more importantly, what is the condition of the various rod and axle bearings. The expense involved in any restoration is going to be hard to justify to the shareholders and the sheer size of the locomotive is going to restrict its operating territory.
Trainman4:
An interesting and exciting project. But unfortunately, I think you may have picked a battle that is “a project too far”. CSX has a history that is not too conducive to the Preservation of much of their Historical Artifacts. IMHO.
The only light at the end of that tunnel seems to be that CSX is participating in the cosmetic restoration of their former STEAM LOCOMOTIVE # 1503 (nee: ACL ) in Jacksonville, FL.) See link @ http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11255162.htm</
I know its fun to entertain dreams about seeing the biggest steam locomotives in action, but . . .
One remark is that the UP steam program “pays for itself in advertising and the exposure that UP gets to (its) big shippers.” Maybe it does, and maybe it doesn’t. Maybe UP does it because the UP bigwigs are steam enthusiasts and their corporate board and shareholders give them the benefit of the doubt? Maybe the benefits are not quantifiable, so UP just does this on the chance it is good for business?
Maybe CSX looks at the same business decision regarding steam-as-good-advertising and comes to an opposite conclusion?
Maybe UP does this to cover the remote contingency that oil prices could spike and that maybe, just maybe, they would bring out the steam for some mainline routes – do they have locomotives in storage? I heard something around here that UP was “looking into” an improved smokebox arrangement for their Challenger, and the only reason to do this is if you think there is a remote chance that you might bring back steam some day for real. But corporations need to have contingency plans, or at least evaluate whether such plans even make sense.
CSX was actually a partner in the ACE 3000 project in the early 1980’s, and CSX (or Chessie Systems) had painted their name on the tender of Locomotive 614 for the tests hauling coal trains with a 4-8-4 Northern type over the route that was once the stomping ground of the C&O 2-6-6-6 Allegheny. So maybe CSX has already “run the experiment” of operating a steam locomotive on their lines, both for advertising and for getting some data on whether reverting to steam is an answer to a future oil-price spike, and maybe by not restoring a locomotive, they are making an informed business decision.
“Let’s all push and ask the B&O Museum and CSX to look into it.”
I know what “push” means in the context of passenger trai
[quote user=“Paul Milenkovic”]
I know its fun to entertain dreams about seeing the biggest steam locomotives in action, but . . .
One remark is that the UP steam program “pays for itself in advertising and the exposure that UP gets to (its) big shippers.” Maybe it does, and maybe it doesn’t. Maybe UP does it because the UP bigwigs are steam enthusiasts and their corporate board and shareholders give them the benefit of the doubt? Maybe the benefits are not quantifiable, so UP just does this on the chance it is good for business?
Maybe CSX looks at the same business decision regarding steam-as-good-advertising and comes to an opposite conclusion?
Maybe UP does this to cover the remote contingency that oil prices could spike and that maybe, just maybe, they would bring out the steam for some mainline routes – do they have locomotives in storage? I heard something around here that UP was “looking into” an improved smokebox arrangement for their Challenger, and the only reason to do this is if you think there is a remote chance that you might bring back steam some day for real. But corporations need to have contingency plans, or at least evaluate whether such plans even make sense.
CSX was actually a partner in the ACE 3000 project in the early 1980’s, and CSX (or Chessie Systems) had painted their name on the tender of Locomotive 614 for the tests hauling coal trains with a 4-8-4 Northern type over the route that was once the stomping ground of the C&O 2-6-6-6 Allegheny. So maybe CSX has already “run the experiment” of operating a steam locomotive on their lines, both for advertising and for getting some data on whether reverting to steam is an answer to a future oil-price spike, and maybe by not restoring a locomotive, they are making an informed business decision.
“Let’s all push and ask the B&O Museum and CSX to look into it.”
I know what "p
CSX, not UP, CSX was involved with the ACE consortium. I know this because David Wardale says this in his book The Red Devil and Other Tales of the Age of Steam.
[quote user=“samfp1943”]
Trainman4:
An interesting and exciting project. But unfortunately, I think you may have picked a battle that is “a project too far”. CSX has a history that is not too conducive to the Preservation of much of their Historical Artifacts. IMHO.
The only light at the end of that tunnel seems to be that CSX is participating in the cosmetic restoration of their former STEAM LOCOMOTIVE # 1503 (nee: ACL ) in Jacksonville, FL.) See link @ http://www.prwe
“…Sam, I will back you up on the statement that the engine was much heavier than it was expected to be; I could look through my Trains indices to see if I could find the article–and if you and I are pressed, it is possible to do so…”
Thank You, Very Much, Johnnie!
It always seems dreamers must dream, and the bigger the dream the better. But some times there is a slip into irrationality, IMHO.
The existing two Alleghany’s are worthy reminders of some of what Lima accomplished in the era of “Steam’s Finest Hour”. The 1604 was originally at the Virginia Museum of Transportation ( the same that is home of the 1218 and 611!~ [8D] ) Unfortunately it was caught in a Flood of that facility and almost overturned in Nov. of 1985. The Ronoke Shops cosmetically rebuilt and refurbished it. It was the sent for display in 1989 to a location of a future mall at Mt. Clare, Md. The mall was never built and the builder donated it to the B&O Museum where it was moved, and is on display. 1601 went to Ford’s Greenfield Village for display(inside). I have read that they had to remove the end of the building to get it inside). They also have several other steam engines that are listed as operational there. (unfortunately, C&O #1601 is not one.)
Linked @
The Trains article that was mentioned about the Allegheny’s being overweight with it concealed and some creative weighing practices is titled “Doctoring the Scales”. It’s by Eugene L. Huddleston and appeared in the December 1998 issue.
By the way, I believe that’s the correct spelling for these locomotives rather than Alleghany as seen throughout this thread.
“Alleghany”, with two a’s, was the name of the holding company established by the Van Sweringen brothers for their railroad holdings.
Both spellings are acceptable, depending on who you are and what part of the Alleghenies/Alleghanies you happen to be in. A B&O sign at the summit spelled it “Alleghanies”. C&O equipment diagrams spelled it Allegheny. It’s something like the pronunciation of Appalachia. South of the Mason Dixon Line, the third “a” is usually a soft sound as in “bad” or “hat”. Anywhere else, it’s just as likely to sound like “gate” or “lane”.
I too would love to see an Allegheny return to steam, but if we were to be practical with CSX their best bet would be to invest in C&O 614 or L&N 152. I would love to see any steam return to CSX (especially the New River Train). Best of luck to you and your push to CSX. Remember that the rail fan community is behind you.
I agree that restoring the 614 is a much better idea than trying to bring back an Allegheny. The 614 would be much lighter and more flexible. As a dual purpose locomotive it has a good turn of speed while the Allegheny would maul the tracks with the hammerblow of its small freight hauling drivers at any speed above coal drag norms. also the cost of restoring all the extra machinery involved in two sets of drivers plus all the major auxiliary machinery would be astronomical. Having ridden behind the 614 during its Chessie Safety Special days I can tell you that the engine puts out plenty of smoke and stack talk and shakes the ground in a most satisfactory manner. Finally, any time you try to restore a historical locomotive that’s been dead for some time you run into far more problems than you could ever anticipate. Imagine the effect on the restoration community if they began the overhaul only to find costs far exceeding what they could raise so that the project bogs down with the engine in pieces, the original sponsors tapped out and nowhere left to go but the scrapyard. Ugh!
I’ve ridden behind C&O 614 and I’ve got to agree, it’s a fine locomotive and would be an excellent candidate for a CSX excursion engine. It’s not as good as the N&W’s Class J 611, but a good locomotive nonetheless. 
And in finding more problems than you anticipate in a steam lcomotive restoration? Linn Moedinger of the Strasburg RR would be the first to agree. He says there’s ALWAYS more problems than you’d expect, so be ready and have plenty of money!
I’m still trying to spell Monongeh, Monongahe, Monongeha . . .
And, I am still puzzled as to how to pronounce “Youghiogheny.” I know how to pronounce “Ouachita” and “Guyandotte” (both start with the sound of a “w”), but this one is a bit beyond me. A second cousin of mine thought that his and my grandmother was born in Washita county, Arkansas.
And, of course, any well-educated person knows that the oldest mountain range in this country is the Appalahchians (soft “a”).
You missed on all three tries, Paul. [:D]
Having been born and raised within sight of and having spent a considerable part of my youth in the Monongahela River, I think I can claim some expertise in the matter. Or were you trying to spell Monongah, the name of a small town in northern West Virginia? You wouldn’t be the first to confuse the two and wind up misspelling both.
Incidentally, there is also a small city in Pennsylvania named Monongahela sitting, of course, on the (west) bank of the Monongahela River. It was originally named Monongahela City, but I believe the “City” was officially dropped years ago. Meanwhile, we locals always just called it “Mon City” just as we usually referred to the river as “the Mon” (lazy folks, huh).
“YOCK-o-GHAY-nee” will at least keep you from looking like an outsider in those parts.
Now try “Daguscahonda.” [swg]
You’re wrong, too. The Chessie System, NOT CSX, was involved with American Coal Enterprises.
And this bears repeating ad nauseum until it sinks in to the dense skulls that keep thinking that, because the Chessie System ran steam excursions in 1977-1981, their corporate successors will in 2014:
The CSX Transportation of 2014 has as little to do with the Chessie System of 1981 as Norfolk Southern, or the Conrail that was brokered apart in 1998-99, has to do with the Pennsylvania Railroad of 1965. With regards to this subject, they’re not even in the same book, let alone on the same page.
IF it were likely to happen, it seems like the most practical class of engine for CSX would be a C&O K-4 Kanawha (another pronunciation issue). Thirteen were preserved, and I believe all still exist in conditions ranging from very nice down to utterly deplorable. I’m no expert on restoration, but I suspect a couple of those Kanawhas are now suitable only as parts sources, and their tenders could then be used as auxiliary water tenders. I won’t mention any names. Of course, another Van Sweringen 2-8-4, mechanically very much like certain NKP and PM engines, would never make the big splash that an articulated or a 4-8-4 would make, so the money invested might not be worth it to a big outfit like CSX (assuming they would even consider this kind of project in the first place). There’s another pronunciation riddle for you. It’s usually Ka-NAW-(uh), with the last syllable barely audible or entirely absent. I’ve always wished the DT&I had gone its own way and called their 2-8-4’s or 2-8-2’s the Wapakoneta type, for no other reason than that they could have. How many out there can correctly pronounce Opequon or Monocacy (B&O sleepers); or Tchirege or Tsankawi (ATSF sleepers); or Tioughnioga (DL&W sleeper). And when you look up Daguscahonda in PA, you might also see if you can find traces of the long-gone Altoona & Wopsononock RR Co. Now, what were we talking about???