Those C&O tenders were rectangular tenders from ex-C&O H-7 2-8-8-2’s. They had nothing in common with the C&O coal-carrying Vanderbilt tender in Baltimore. In any event, 5511 never used that type either.
Tom
Guys, The point is the UP 5511 tender would be too small. The C&O tender in Baltimore is a coal tender. But converting the tender to oil should not be too hard. The UP 5511 has sort of a vanderbilt tender that is too small for operations in todays railroad environment. I can see the C&O tender being rebuilt to mimic the UP 5511’s shorty tender. Specifically the wooden structure on the back of the 5511 tender. Other UP 2-10-2 locomotives did have larger vanderbilt tenders. Atleast that is what I call this body style no matter what road it is on.
There are two C&O vanderbilt tenders. The tender in Baltimore and there is another here http://www.odcnrhs.org/equipment_roster/records/record_025.htm
The Baltimore tender would be the most likely to be scrapped and would make the most sense for use with the 5511.
Robert
While it’s not Likely to run again(How many times did we hear “A Big Boy will NEVER RUN AGAIN”" I would rather see the 5511 run with an “INCORRECT” tender than NEVER SEE IT RUN again.
Keep the “Correct” tender stored unmodified, and nothing is lost, they can be re-coupled if ever put back into “Display” Status, while not as simple as coupling freight cars, it is not that big of a deal to do.
As far as operating it “Destroying” it’s “Original Fabric” does it have the ORIGINAL FROM THE BUILDER Boiler? I don’t know, but I would suspect that the Boiler or at least tubes and flues were replaced at least once in it’s working life.
Boiler, tube and Flue replacement were normal part of maintance on steam locomotivesso I don’t feel that this is as big a concern as some make it out to be. How many 1932 Ford’s or 1957 Chevys have the original from the factory spark plugs in them, yet they are still highly Valued sought after vehicles.
The boiler barrel, tubes and flues are hidden behind the boiler jacket out of sight, so even cold on display where is the value in the “Original Fabric”? I personally would find more value in seeing the 5511 OPERATING, and at some point IF the boiler needed replacing, then replace a componet that is not visible anyway.
Doug
Maybe we should just agree to disagree. I acknowledge that the C&O tender could give the 5511 greater range in the unlikely event the engine is ever restored to operation. Yes, Fords and Chevies have been restored with non-original parts. New parts aren’t always obvious or objectionable. But to my eyes, this would be something like restoring a Ford with a Chevy trunk. You disagree, and that’s your right.
Tom
My Point was, that I would rather see it OPERATING and have the “Wrong” tender, than to not have it restored to operation at all. After thinking about it more, rather than changing tenders, or modifying the “Proper” tender, it shouldn’t be too difficult to use a tank car for additional water capacity. I don’t know what the oil capacity is, but suspect that it could be sufficient for a days steaming in the expected excursion use, it could be used in. The UP never used Aux tenders in regular service, and nobody seems to complain about the 3985 or 844 using an Aux tender, or even two, so a ubiqutious tank car trailing the tender shouldn’t be too objectionable, to get a short legged locomotive restored, and operating.
Even Steve Lee, claimed that a Big Boy would NEVER, RUN AGAIN. I don’t expect that we will ever see 5511 steam again, but I will stop short of saying never. The 4014 may not be under steam YET, but she is HOME and the UP has publicly announced their intention to restore her to service, a LOT could happen to kill this project, but it is supposedly a SINCERE plan to restore her to service, and a LOT of Good Faith effort has been made.
Doug
Fiinding out now that there might be at least a bigger tender. Does up know about this larger tender? Will they possibly trade something or buy it? Or are they not interested because they want to keep historical fabric?
Actually, in this circumstance, it is possible to have our cake and eat it too.
#5511 will never steam again, but that does not mean she never will run. It is possible to run a steam locomotive in demonstration mode using compressed air. This would solve almost all the difficulties of “restoration” such as the absence of critical cab appliances, the tender being too short, or the engine being too slow. It still would be necessary to restore the piston rods, since they have been cut, but the problems of boiler integrity (and the FRA regulations that go along with maintaining it) would be avoided since the air could be piped directly to the cylinders from tanks installed inside the tender. The drivers then would have to be mounted on rollers rather than rail itself so that the engine in effect would run in place.
Now, who wants to bell this cat? Because I guarantee you the effort would not be free, and UP already is doing more than its fair share of pulling the cart.
The large C&O tender in question is still available and is said to belong to the WMSRR. Alternatively to using the C&O tender on 5511 maybe it will find use on C&O 1309.
I still would vote for the 5511 to get the big C&O tender.
CSX would like to it to be gone from their yard sooner rather than later. Scrapping the big tender would be a true lose considering how few big tenders remain that are not in use already.
Robert
[quote user=“Dr D”]
UP 5511 2-10-2 was a drag freight engine from the era when just keeping the train moving over the line was the issue. UP 5511 was one of many drag freight engines kept on for “pusher service” getting freight over Sherman Hill.
Unfortunately, the modern steam excursion business is about moving at passenger speeds in such a manor as is contemporary to todays diesel passenger power.
UP 5511 is unique, she is a historical class act so typical to Union Pacific of the 1920’s. She belongs to "the days before Northerns, the days before Challengers, the days before Big Boy. When the only UP power was 4-12-2 and 2-10-2 and 2-8-2. When Union Pacific passenger power was 4-8-2 and 4-6-2!
She is an unqualified movie actor from an age of generic freight trains that went “Everywhere West!” I see UP 5511 and I see the OLD WEST of which Union Pacific has a substancial historical part! UP 5511 is part of American railroad history of which there are very few remaining actors.
No other 2-10-2 Santa Fe’s, only one 4-12-2 Union Pacific, no 4-8-2 Mountains, no 4-6-2 Pacifics and just a couple of old 2-8-2 Mikes. Wow!
A close look at UP 5511 reveals that the feed water heater was removed at some point and that after her movie appearance she was to be scrapped and her piston rods were cut with a cutting torch. Some unknown hero just never ordered her sent her off to the dead line.
The small four wheel tender makes her out to be just “that much more grunt” than a large freight Mikado 2-8-2. The engines that moved the freight in the days of Woodie Guthrie.
My personal story of UP 5511 comes about in the 1960’s when I was traveling west with my parents in a 1966 Airstream trailer pulled by a 1966 Chrysler New Yorker. I had a copy of Ron Ziel’s book Twilight
[quote user=“Dr D”]
UP 5511 2-10-2 was a drag freight engine from the era when just keeping the train moving over the line was the issue. UP 5511 was one of many drag freight engines kept on for “pusher service” getting freight over Sherman Hill.
Unfortunately, the modern steam excursion business is about moving at passenger speeds in such a manor as is contemporary to todays diesel passenger power.
UP 5511 is unique, she is a historical class act so typical to Union Pacific of the 1920’s. She belongs to "the days before Northerns, the days before Challengers, the days before Big Boy. When the only UP power was 4-12-2 and 2-10-2 and 2-8-2. When Union Pacific passenger power was 4-8-2 and 4-6-2!
She is an unqualified movie actor from an age of generic freight trains that went “Everywhere West!” I see UP 5511 and I see the OLD WEST of which Union Pacific has a substancial historical part! UP 5511 is part of American railroad history of which there are very few remaining actors.
No other 2-10-2 Santa Fe’s, only one 4-12-2 Union Pacific, no 4-8-2 Mountains, no 4-6-2 Pacifics and just a couple of old 2-8-2 Mikes. Wow!
A close look at UP 5511 reveals that the feed water heater was removed at some point and that after her movie appearance she was to be scrapped and her piston rods were cut with a cutting torch. Some unknown hero just never ordered her sent her off to the dead line.
The small four wheel tender makes her out to be just “that much more grunt” than a large freight Mikado 2-8-2. The engines that moved the freight in the days of Woodie Guthrie.
My personal story of UP 5511 comes about in the 1960’s when I was traveling west with my parents in a 1966 Airstream trailer pulled by a 1966 Chrysler New Yorker. I had a copy of Ron Ziel’s book Twilight
Isn’t at least one of these a Vauclain compound? I know at least one of them originally was.
To reactivate a Pacific, you’d need a modern one like the #3234, and why go with the lighter-pulling engine when we have the Northern?
There simply is no reason for UNP to resurrect these older engines – assuming they even could be, given that they’ve been outdoors for decades.
If you want a ride behind an old UNP locomotive, wangle a ride on the Heber Valley tourist local. They have one of the later Consolidations and were still in business the last I checked.
The tender issue for 5511 in theory could be addressed if any of the original rectangular ex C&O tenders still exist. Most went to SP and ended up behind AC9 2-8-8-4 cab forwards. According to Kratvile’s book the War Engines, somehow three such tenders survived the steam era somewhere on UP as work train cars/maintainance of way. Reason to find it? For those not totally familiar with 2-10-2 history on the UP, at least three 2-10-2’s were re equiped with these tenders at some later point in their careers! Great compromise if a larger tender was an issue. However, they could always consider enlarging the exisitng oil bunker of 5511’s exisitng tender and use a smaller water compartment since most UP steam trains today use a water bottle. More than one way to skin a cat.
The real issue is just, what do they need it for? It is a drag engine. Would therefor be an ego engine just to say we can. The drivers pound rails too much to be a practical excursion engine, so running at speed tears up track and the engine. We can always dream. Have heard rumors that some in the steam program have drooled over 5511 before!