I recently came across some photos I shot back in 1998, at the Pacific Southwest Railway Museum in Campo, CA. There are a lot of great shots of former SP steam locomotive No. 2353, which saw use on the San Diego and Arizona Railway. In the late 1990s this beautiful loco was running excursions. Since sometime around 2000 or so, it’s been out of service due to the need for a new boiler.
You can see the rest of the pics here:
I remember taking my Boy Scouts for a ride behind that one in '96 or so. When I left San Diego County in '97, the museum was still rebuilding a different steamer. Whatever happened to that one?
I don’t know. According to the most recent post (2010) on their website, they were looking at their saddle tank switcher as the most likely candidate to get back into the steam business.
Yep . . . it is a shame but the boiler can’t be fixed for 2353, . . and a new one is way, way to expensive. When I was last there a boiler survey had been done on a saddle tank switcher with hopes of getting it operational in the foreseeable future.
Their Shay is running beautifully…cept that its clear out in West Virgina at the Cass Scenic Railroad…
Boilers are the big issue with re-animating a loco. Most reconstruction efforts are run on donations and/or civic money (rarely now days), and can’t afford it. Driver reconditioning is another issue that stops a lot of groups’ projects. At the Roaring Camp & Big Trees Railroad in Felton, California where I rob the trains, they are hard-pressed to keep all their Shays and other logging equipment running. They do it, but it’s an effort.
Roaring Camp also sells tickets which is not really donations or civic money. I’ve been there and it is a great place. When do the robberies occur? When we were there a couple of years ago, there was no robberies.
Joe Zullo said:
Roaring Camp also sells tickets which is not really donations or civic money. I’ve been there and it is a great place. When do the robberies occur? When we were there a couple of years ago, there was no robberies.
Andrew is a free-lance operator. 
I disagree with the museums statement that 2353 can’t be fixed. They said they found a crack on the water side of the firebox side sheet. They had a boiler “Expert” look at it and told them it can’t be fixed.
Now I’m not and expert, but I know for a fact that you can replace sections of a firebox or the whole thing.
SPNG 18 has several patches in the firebox. RGS 41 had both left and right side sheets replaced in 1950(Still in there today.) Sounds to me like the museum either has no clue what they are doing or someone down there doesn’t want 2353 to run.
I think the more likely scenario is probably cost effectiveness; i.e. spending a great deal to rebuild a boiler which likely has future problems vs. building a new boiler.
May I quote from their website:
"In 2008, we contracted with a very experienced and respected locomotive boiler inspector to examine 2353’s boiler. He told us that yes, we could repair the cracked area, but because there already were a number of other patches in the firebox, we could expect further cracking in a relatively short time. Other information we have indicates that the lifetime of the firebox on an oil-burning locomotive is about 12 years. The present firebox was installed by Southern Pacific in 1942, and the locomotive was operated by them until 1956. These facts convinced us that an entire new firebox was needed.
However, the boiler inspector pointed out that it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible to replace the firebox. Having originally been built in 1912, to an old design, the firebox is keyhole-shaped, and of the crown-bar type. The capabilities of present manufacturing facilities to produce the compound curves and flanges necessary to rivet a new firebox to the remainder of the boiler are quite limited. If the job could be done, it would probably cost more than an entire new boiler. And, we’d still have half of our boiler being about 100 years old. His recommendation was to have an entire new boiler built. This would be a modern welded boiler, with a radial-stayed firebox, but would be of the same outside dimensions as the present boiler. BUT, this would cost about $500,000."
In addition, the museum was previously connected to the outside world via the San Diego & Arizona Eastern Railway, which allowed the museum to rent out the locomotive for movies, etc., increasing revenue. This connection was broken when operation over the line through the Carrizo Gorge ceased sometime in the mid 2000s.
This lack of usability elsewhere means that it may not be a great idea financially to operate this locomotive on their (not that limited, but limited) track. The “saddle tank” mentioned is a 2-8-2T logging locomotive with extremely small wheels; significantly more powerful at the speeds they operate at, and likely better suited for their grades.
In the absence of direct proof otherwise, I’m going to assume that they know what they’re doing. I don’t know their financial situation, but I do know that steam costs a lot of money for any museum these days; even Steamtown doesn’t currently have a steam locomotive operational with (albeit limited) government funding, which is significantly more than that of almost any independent museum.
Anyway, back on topic: they state that the boiler is repairable, but isn’t worth it.
At Clark’s trading post, in New Hampshire, boiler replacement has been successful on their wood-burning Climax locomotive. Boilersmith of Ontario completely replaced the boiler for, I believe, less than $200k. Granted the Climax is a smaller engine, but the cost still seemed comparable to the restoration and retubing of larger engines.
Perhaps, the tourist rail industry should be considering these smaller engines for long term ops. Why risk using an old riveted boiler with unknown metallurgical properties when proper welded units are available. After the boiler jacket is zipped on you’ll never miss those old rivets.
Further, as an engineer by trade, I find it strange that there are not more propane fired locos running (outside of Disney). Propane firing would allow for a simpler boiler design potentially, and would also give the crew more control over the fire, thus avoiding damaging hotspots and so forth. Plus there is the added advantage of cranking down the flame to a “candle” between runs to save fuel…less pollution, less risk of starting fires, no shoveling, no black lung, etc…
Jeff, propane has its disadvantages as well. Cost being one. Two you need a pressurized vessel instead of an open bucket as for wood, coal or oil. Filling the tender would require specialized safety equipment, and the explosivesness of propane near the open firebox might be an issue that teh FRA isn’t willing to deal with. (I’m assuming that Disney, while having grade crossings, doesn’t fall under FRA jurisdiction.)
As for the firebox issues, 1) yes, ANY firebox is repairable 2) just maybe not in an authentic to period way 3) or for the amount you are willing to spend
I know the firebox design they are reffering to. Its also featured in the 1920 ALCo 2-8-0 that is operated by the Arcade & Attica. When our engine went down in 2000 for our 40 CFR Part 230 inspection, we found that the entire circumference of the firebox, extending from teh mudring up approximately 22" was beyond safe tolerances.
Formerly the flanged, lapped & riveted design, we had the repairs done with welded in plate steel. Once in place, drilled & tapped, the staybolts were threaded in. In addition, both tube sheets were rebuilt in place. The front sheet was torched out, so repairs could be made to the rear tube sheet, which ended up being replaced. A new front tube sheet was then made and welded in. The tubes were then installed and welded into place. From the outside, the only indications that the engine isn’t the same thing is the mods in the cab, replacement of the tri-cocks with a second sight glass.
Though it took us almost six years and hiring an outside source to do the welding, she was returned to service in spring of 2008. In fact, that fall, after the last excursion of the year, she was called to freight service because our 65-ton GE centercab was down for engine work and the freight load exceeded the capabilities of the 44-ton engine: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLelPL9nZFkvgv5t0XC3zb2f8MYjflJyd6
It seems that it would just cost to much to repair it or build a new boiler. I still disagree with there thinking that a firebox could not be made for it.
Jeff A properly set up oil fired loco has very little problems in the way of hot spots, and you can bring the fire down very low if needed with an oil fire. However if you do this to fast or to often it puts allot of stress on the boiler.
Propane is only a viable fuel if the locomotive is really small. It does not put out enough BTUs to heat even a medium sized loco like our C-19s. We use propane to fire our 2ft gauge Crown Metal Products 4-4-0.(built that way from the factory)
Also Disneyland does not burn propane, they burn bio-diesel. Propane isn’t even hot enough for those small locos.
DJ Disneyland and Knott’s are privet property and do not fall under FRA rule. Only state laws.