More steam for Western Maryland Scenic?

This would be really cool if it comes to pass. I definitely would take a trip behind it.

Jerry

If it happens, I suppose the WMSR will keep the C&O livery or perhaps, a new Western Maryland Scenic Railway livery since "Western Maryland" and the fireball might be stretching things a little too much.  I'd rather see a Potomac but I'd be happy with any big steam.

Poppyl

I'll line up to watch and ride it if it came to pass.  Don't know why for sure, but do enjoy the slow freight drag engines, something I don't really expect to see in my lifetime.  From the surface, she'll need some work.  She is not only heavily weathered with the original jacketing still on, the large steam supply pipes between the front and rear cylinders were cut at some point.  My car once broke down parked in front of 1309, and while waiting for the tow truck spent a good 60 minutes looking it and the 2-8-4 over long after the museum was closed.  

What an interesting locomotive for WMSR.  Did Wild Mary have anything similar?

Bob

I cannot imagine the 2-6-6-2 running on the WMSR.  Well, I can imagine it in my dreams but not in real life. 

Why not? That C&O H-6 is the PERFECT steam locomotive for that tourist operation. The C&O H-4, H-5, and H-6 class 2-6-6-2 compounds were designed for heavy tonnage on steep branch line grades and curves with max speeds of 30MPH. The WMSR has 3% grades and lots of curves.

WM actually had challengers- about ten of them I think - but don't know which territory they were used on.

Hmmm... Interesting.  I'd definitely like to see this become reality.

The "Wild Mary" (Western Maryland) did have some compound 2-6-6-2's, but of a more elderly (1911) design, with square steam chests. they were converted to 0-6-6-0's in 1926, when they became heavy switchers and hump pushers in Hagerstown. They had square tenders, not vanderbuilts. They were numbered 953-958, as 0-6-6-0's, and classified M1-a's. They were retired in 1947. And, paradoxically, maybe even humorously, these lumbering beasts carried the "Fast Freight" fireball!

It would be best from a historical perspective to leave this tenetative new roster entry in Chesapeke & Ohio livery. For the love of God, I hope they leave it in C&O livery!

No. 1309 certainly will bring some thunder to the mountains. 

Merciful heavens.

Thinking more about this (assuming it happens), it will be interesting to see CSX move this beast, given they would not move a maintained 734 a mere 10 miles a couple of years ago.

Bob

What do you bet that it will be moved by truck?

This really makes your steam railroading mouth water so to speak. It is really nice having operational steam close by and this would surely be a nice rejuvenation for me after shooting the WMSR for many years. 

While I am a lot more excited about Oregon Coast Scenic's effort mentioned above..(maybe its return to steam would turn on a lightbulb in some O gauge mfr.), a lot

of people would drive out of their way to see and feel this articulated in operation.

But, I wonder, would it be cost effective for the Western Md. Scenic. to feed and maintain this critter?  They probably aren't going to be pulling trains twice as long

as those behind #734?   And there is the cost of restoring it to operating condition....

Even with the diesel helper, they are likely beating 734 up on every run.  Some tourist railroads (Strasburg has been vocal about this) over size the locomotive for the work in order to reduce long term and hidden maintenance costs/issues.  Less wear and tear on the running gear.

Assuming they get 1309, one could dream about it and a long string of those steam era hoppers that W&LE scrapped a few years ago.

Bob

Will it fit on the turntable at the top of the mountain?

EdKing

Good question. I don't think it will fit. I seem to recall that the 734 is a tight fit, but I don't remember the length of the table.

I think the 1309 is an excellent choice, given the type of operation in place on that railroad. Light axle loadings and lots of tractive effort...exactly what they need.

The Challengers were acquired initially to pull the fast Alphabet freights between Connellsville and Hagerstown.  Once in service, crews found them to be somewhat "slippery", particularly on the westbound grade between Cumberland and Deal.  As a result they often had pusher and front end help getting to Deal.  It made for some great steam action but slowed down the travel time for the Alphabets. 

Towards the end of their service lives on the WM the Challengers operated primarily between Cumberland and Hagerstown (with pusher help on Williamsport Hill) with occasional runs to Lurgan.  By that point the RS-3's and GP9's had taken over west of Cumberland.

Poppyl

While these C&O units were built in the late 1940's, they were of similar 1911 design.

It has been discussed and debated why the C&O, with its ultra modern steam locomotive designs, like the 2-6-6-6 Allegheny, 2-10-4 Texas, 4-8-4 Greenbrier and 2-8-4 Kanawha...bought ten of these 2-6-6-2 Mallets that were of a very early and basic design.

As I understand their reasoning...it was, the C&O has a bunch of 2-6-6-2 and they worked well for the jobs they were assigned.

The C&O, not wanting to spend the time and cash for a new design for something they knew already worked, they told ALCO, build 10 units with the same design as the units that they were already operating.

This design was a basic USRA standard, so ALCO could cookie-cutter stamp out 10 copies fast and cheap...No thinking involved.

So, if they repaint it in Western Maryland livery, it would/should fit in.

My opinion, based on the B&O Railroad Museum actions surrounding the Western Maryland Shay 6 at Cass, WVa...the 1309 will remain in C&O livery.

I would like it either way.

Part of me would like to see a Wild Mary Steam Double Header, rolling around Helmstetter's Curve.

As the C&O is my first love, the other part of me would enjoy seeing the 1309 preserved as she has been for all of her life.

Until that 1309 begins running again, I'll have to make do with my

Right of Way C&O 1302.

Lew Schneider

According to the Model Railroader Steam Locomotive Cyclopedia, the wheel base of a C&O 2-6-6-2 is 87.55 feet. The turntable at Frostburg, I understand, came from the WM Elkins, WVa yard, which regularly handled the WM's enormous Consols (probably comparable to the LS&I 2-8-0 and NYC tender combo). How does the C&O wheelbase compare to a big WM Consol? A 90 foot turntable in Elkins sounds reasonable for a big time operation like WM had.

That table looks nice and "roomy"! The 2-6-6-2 has a longer wheelbase, but a shorter 8 wheel vanderbuilt tank........looks like it would work!

Not sure that this will add anything to the discussion but the relevant wheelbases with tenders for the WM Consolidations were 66.6 feet for the H-7a(707-736); 66.6 feet for the H-7b(750-764); 68 feet for the H-8(770-789); and 74.1 feet for the H-9a(801-850).

I don't have my data with me right now, but if memory serves me, the H-9's did not operate in Elkins due to their longer wheelbases.  Elkins was H-7 and H-8 territory.  But that's not to say that the Elkins tt could not have handled an H-9.

In any event, as was mentioned previously, I'm sure that WMSR has done its homework on the 2-6-6-2 and the Frostburg tt.

Poppyl

Rich, you don't recall, but one time we talked about 765 running on the WMSR. You asked me about the turntable, so I measured it, and this is not a guess, the

table is exactly 100 feet long!

E

Wonder did someone rat me out?

I lived in Cumberland for almost nine years and I saw the good and the bad with the Western Maryland Scenic Railroad.

I like the current WMSRR and they seem to be doing a good job for both the local community and railfan community.

I would like to share that CSX is gonna be an huge issue to overcome in moving the 1309 to Ridgeley, WVa.

Recently, The Potomac Eagle Scenic Railroad invited the WMSR to bring the 734 to Romney for an event.
Both the Potomac Eagle Scenic Railroad and the WMSR asked CSX to move the 734 from Cumberland to Green Spring, MD, just a few miles.
CSX declined.

Now, I will clearly admit I only heard one side of this story, but that story was NO steam locomotive movements, PERIOD.

Poppyl - Small point, not trying to be argumentative, but "the 40 members of class H-9a, Baldwin products of 1921, while the others were amoung the 10 in class H-9a, also Baldwins, delivered in 1923. These 50 modern consolidations were the backbone of the WM on the Thomas Subdivision." Excerpted from p.58,"Western Maryland in Color, Vol. 2" by Jeremy F. Plant (Morning Sun Books). The H-9's were the big 12 wheel tanked 2-8-0's that hauled coal trains out of Elkins, through the rugged Blackwater Canyon and 3.05% grade..........SIX to a train!! That was some railroading!!

C&O #1309 will fit on the turntable with a bit of acceptable overhang.

As for #765 at the WMSR - recall that #759 ran in 1970 over Helmstetter's

Curve.  'Course, back then it WAS Western Maryland and there was no turn-

table in Frostburg - it just kept going!

/Mitch

Poppyl - The WM smaller Consolidations handled the branchline trains that ran into Elkins. Essentially they handled mine run coal collection, which was then combined for mainline trains, Elkins to Cumberland, moved by the big H-9's.

SO fer gosh sakes, can't you at least tell us what engine these people are talking about?   Or at leas leave a link to the original website?

If you read the whole thread, you would see the continuing discussions about former C&O H-6 class 2-6-6-2, currently at the B&O Museum.

I DO recall that conversation, Ed. I did not remember the turntable length, however. At 100-feet we could turn the 765 there.

If you read the entire thread, you can easily see what engine we are talking about.

Wonder did someone rat me out?

No, but it's obvious to anyone who regularly looks at the various railroading web sites where you got the material you posted here. I don't want to get sued by Kalmbach.

Originally Posted by Ed Mullan:

Rich, you don't recall, but one time we talked about 765 running on the WMSR. You asked me about the turntable, so I measured it, and this is not a guess, the

table is exactly 100 feet long!

I DO recall that conversation, Ed. I did not remember the turntable length, however. At 100-feet we could turn the 765 there.

 

---

 

 

Originally Posted by Kent Loudon:

SO fer gosh sakes, can't you at least tell us what engine these people are talking about?   Or at leas leave a link to the original website?

If you read the entire thread, you can easily see what engine we are talking about.

 

---

 

 

 

Originally Posted by superwarp1:

Wonder did someone rat me out?

No, but it's obvious to anyone who regularly looks at the various railroading web sites where you got the material you posted here. I don't want to get sued by Kalmbach.

 

Understood, frankly I'm surprised it has taken this long.

That's what I get for trying to go from memory.  Good catch on your part.  Thinking about Belington, Webster Springs, and Durbin and forgot about Thomas, Bayard, and Blackwater Canyon.  Finally got a chance to review my three Blackwater film clips.  Two are of H-8's but the last one clearly shows H-9's.

Poppyl

A Ceano  H6 under steam...most excellent!   Can a Big K4 be that far behind!  

That's what I get for trying to go from memory.  Good catch on your part.  Thinking about Belington, Webster Springs, and Durbin and forgot about Thomas, Bayard, and Blackwater Canyon.  Finally got a chance to review my three Blackwater film clips.  Two are of H-8's but the last one clearly shows H-9's.

Poppyl

 

Poppyl...what are the titles of your three Blackwater films?  
Are they just scenes from a larger video?
Do you know if these videos are still offered?