Sunday was far less crowded, so maybe next year & Thanks for watching.

yea, "Jointline" has a great vast knowledge of these big brutes, very nice guy

yup visit his Facebook page #844 #3985 Info

I remember my younger years with the old Baldwins Santa Fe had, I do know UP 844 was never retired from service, great video of some great old memories.

keenan7434 Rumors of 3985 and 844 demise have been greatly exaggerated, but they are receiving some needed repairs, and shall return to the rails!

Damn it go directly to ed dickens & get him on tape so we get the WHOLE STORY

L.D. Wood So you must be about 95 years old

thay are not retireing UP 3985 that wod be a big wast if they did that so what does steve le have that nobody else does to save a steam locomotive from out of retirement that was has plains are so not puting a locomotive in retirement that bull crap info >=/

They're called staybolts. Simply put, they hold the firebox to the boiler.

Thanks! It's nice to know new stuff everyday

4014 hasn't operated since the 50's. 3985 last ran in 2010, 844 last ran in 2013 before this year. It's out running as I type this, actually.

@@ZachPumphery funny that it got restored in 2019 to operation

Several KZfaq videos say FRA mandated (required maintenance and inspections) needs to be completed and certified before it can run again. It's still in operating condition just needs this work done

It's almost like finding out you have a broken arm

844 has bushings on the Rods. I remember them re-machining them a few years ago for new ones.

bcbloc02 i am this talking about a roller bearing steam locomotive 844 is one of them ( not the side rods ) all right bcbloc02 =)

Roller bearings on axles only on these engines. the Rods all have bushings. Bushings have more friction than roller and needle bearings, but they are far more shock resistant. Bushings have far more strength than roller or ball bearings. U.P. picked the best of both worlds, when they had there late period steam engines built.

I would disagree. The N&W J class had engines run 3 million miles and per the ASME landmark designation article in 11 engines over millions of miles they only had two bearing failures. The roller bearings were used both to reduce friction and WEAR. With the highest tractive effort of the 4-8-4's I think they were certainly capable of handling the loads and with longer times between shopping and more road miles per month than the UP engines I think the full bearing compliment worked out well for them.

Pound for pound, bushings are more resistant to shock. I've got pratical experience with bushings and bearings, and no one is going to change my opinion of that. I also learned a lot from a grandfather who was a master machinist. Also is what the U.P. Steam crew told me themselves. While it's true NW 611 has rollers on it's side rods, they are much larger and heavier than bushings would be for the same loads. We will never know for sure, but I'm guessing that 844 could attain a higher speed because of lower side ride and bearing masses. Rollers may last longer in some situations, but a railroad also has to take into account long term maintenance costs. Bushings are far cheaper, and can be machined for a repair in the field, while rollers are hugely expensive and can be hard to come by at times. I still think U.P. made a good compromise by putting rollers on axles and bushings on the rods. I should add, that they are probably "oillite" type bushings. Impregnated with graphite and/or some other lube, not solid brass or bronze.

Yes.

Really you just said that.

3985 is down for it's 15 year boiler inspection. It takes a while to do. The UP steam crew is not large by any stretch of the imagination, and seeing as they were moving a big boy from California, and driving 844, it's not a huge surprise 3985 got put on the back burner. Summary: nothing is wrong with 3985, just routine maintenance.

Knew about the inspection but had heard they found a major problem.

Michael Strickland probably just another rumor. UP steam says everything is still good.

oh ok. but is it possible to guve a steam locomotive and type of dynamic braking? because the big boy has 16 drive wheels, doesnt that mean 16 brakes?

NightdoesStuff Not to mention the air brakes on whatever it's pulling.

It is not practical, or even possible, to add dynamic braking to a steam locomotive.

J&M Studios Diesel electrics are used for several reasons. The diesels are used to provide power for the passenger coaches, when a generator car isn't available. They are also used as backup, in case of a steam breakdown. Schedules must be adhered to. And also, some of the younger "management" isn't 100% trusting of the steam. As far as dynamic braking goes, steam engines can do that by using the reverser, and applying throttle.

Well, nice, pretty commentary, but so far from what is practical and possible that it's a joke, and a bad one at that!

***** I agree with you, biofuel and steam locomotives don't mix. I remember the Nevada State Railroad Museum tried some biofuel on the #8. That thing could get a head of steam save its life! Besides, #5 fuel oil and used automotive oil does a fantastic job of getting a good fire going at nearly 1/2 the cost.

one of the main reasons UP dosen't do coal, is because the infrastructure for coal isn't there any more, with oil, they can stop at any diesel refueling area on their line and take on a load of fuel oil

This is false. UP steam locomotives do not burn diesel fuel. They burn refined used motor oil from a burner oil refinery in Iowa. It is shipped by truck to wherever the engine(s) might be.