Hi everybody!
Was there or was there not suposed to be a “big Boy” movie. Did it fizzle out??
Bill L
I assume you are referring to the movie abour rehabbing the Big Boy in Dallas. That Big Boy is owned by the Age of Steam Museum. The engine was moved (by another locomotive) a few feet to check the condition of the wheel bearings. This move went well and inspectors said the Dallas engine was in the best condition of the remaining Big Boys. The plan was to move the engine to a warehouse next to the Age of Steam Museum for dismanteling and rebuilding. The Museum was in agreement with this, however, they were worried that the engine would be disassembled and the movie company would run out of money and walk from the project leaving a big pile of parts in the warehouse. To protect its property the Museum requested a one million dollar bond be given before the engine is touched. To date no bond has arrived and the project is essentially dead.
As a sideline when the engine was donated to the Museum UP cut the piston rods with an acetylene tourch with the reason given as the tight curves to get into the Museum lot required the cut. I personally think that UP did not want the engine run again. When the excitement of the rebuilding was going full force UP stated that they only had two wyes capable of turning the engine on their whole system and they are 20 miles apart either in Kansas or Nebraska. (forget where). Again I do not think this is true. The Big Boy is a coal fired engine, not fuel oil, which would create logistical problems related to fueling.
W R Watkins, technical advisor to Age of Steam Museum
Why couldnt they have oil fired it? What if someone came up with the money to restore it? Where could they run it? In all likelyhood if they could best guess would be Wyoming, I am not sure but what would it take to install a Wye?
Thanks
Mike K
In 1946 they tried to convert a big boy to oil burning but it was unsuccessful.
One of the very best ways to either determine whether or not a give proposal or project can be accomplished by the “proposee”, contractor, owner, etc., is to require a bond prior to execution of any contract. In this instance, for the group desiring to produce the movie and fund the work on 4018 to have obtained any such bond would have required that they (1) have either a massive and profitable history of “bonding” with one or more “surety” companies (demonstrating a strong likelihood of safety and reliability) or, and maybe ALSO (2) they’d have been forced to put up $1,000,000 in cash or some account held by a reliable financial institution which would agree to place a lock on any withdrawals from such account without the written permission of the Museum. In another part of the (2), they may also have been able to obtain a “bank letter of credit”, which is basically obtaining written evidence from a bank or similar institution (and deemed reliable by the surety company) which effectively states that the bank is backing the bond by guaranteeing that (should the movie group go bust and the surety company has to contract with people to complete the project or give the Museum the money to either do it themselves or “compensate” them for "damages) the bank will UPON DEMAND made by the surety immediately give the surety company the amount of the loss up to the $1,000,000 bond limit, afterwhich the bank would seek repayment from the movie bunch. The bank is thus sort of agreeing in advance to make a $1,000,000 loan to the movie group and they’d charge a tidy sum to make such guarantee because they’d be tying up $1,000,000 of the bank’s money pending the potential need to make immediate payment to the surety until the contract was fully completed and the term of the bond complete. Well, obviously, this type of matter is not one put together in either a moment’s time or without considerable financial backing and wherewithall. Doubltess the movie producers were in no position to put up the financial backing themselv
Hi everybody!
Was there or was there not suposed to be a “big Boy” movie. Did it fizzle out??
Bill L
I assume you are referring to the movie abour rehabbing the Big Boy in Dallas. That Big Boy is owned by the Age of Steam Museum. The engine was moved (by another locomotive) a few feet to check the condition of the wheel bearings. This move went well and inspectors said the Dallas engine was in the best condition of the remaining Big Boys. The plan was to move the engine to a warehouse next to the Age of Steam Museum for dismanteling and rebuilding. The Museum was in agreement with this, however, they were worried that the engine would be disassembled and the movie company would run out of money and walk from the project leaving a big pile of parts in the warehouse. To protect its property the Museum requested a one million dollar bond be given before the engine is touched. To date no bond has arrived and the project is essentially dead.
As a sideline when the engine was donated to the Museum UP cut the piston rods with an acetylene tourch with the reason given as the tight curves to get into the Museum lot required the cut. I personally think that UP did not want the engine run again. When the excitement of the rebuilding was going full force UP stated that they only had two wyes capable of turning the engine on their whole system and they are 20 miles apart either in Kansas or Nebraska. (forget where). Again I do not think this is true. The Big Boy is a coal fired engine, not fuel oil, which would create logistical problems related to fueling.
W R Watkins, technical advisor to Age of Steam Museum
Why couldnt they have oil fired it? What if someone came up with the money to restore it? Where could they run it? In all likelyhood if they could best guess would be Wyoming, I am not sure but what would it take to install a Wye?
Thanks
Mike K
In 1946 they tried to convert a big boy to oil burning but it was unsuccessful.
One of the very best ways to either determine whether or not a give proposal or project can be accomplished by the “proposee”, contractor, owner, etc., is to require a bond prior to execution of any contract. In this instance, for the group desiring to produce the movie and fund the work on 4018 to have obtained any such bond would have required that they (1) have either a massive and profitable history of “bonding” with one or more “surety” companies (demonstrating a strong likelihood of safety and reliability) or, and maybe ALSO (2) they’d have been forced to put up $1,000,000 in cash or some account held by a reliable financial institution which would agree to place a lock on any withdrawals from such account without the written permission of the Museum. In another part of the (2), they may also have been able to obtain a “bank letter of credit”, which is basically obtaining written evidence from a bank or similar institution (and deemed reliable by the surety company) which effectively states that the bank is backing the bond by guaranteeing that (should the movie group go bust and the surety company has to contract with people to complete the project or give the Museum the money to either do it themselves or “compensate” them for "damages) the bank will UPON DEMAND made by the surety immediately give the surety company the amount of the loss up to the $1,000,000 bond limit, afterwhich the bank would seek repayment from the movie bunch. The bank is thus sort of agreeing in advance to make a $1,000,000 loan to the movie group and they’d charge a tidy sum to make such guarantee because they’d be tying up $1,000,000 of the bank’s money pending the potential need to make immediate payment to the surety until the contract was fully completed and the term of the bond complete. Well, obviously, this type of matter is not one put together in either a moment’s time or without considerable financial backing and wherewithall. Doubltess the movie producers were in no position to put up the financial backing themselv