scottyboy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> -I am not kidding or a troll.
> -I do understand that steam engines are very high
> maintenance and very expensive to do said
> maintenance and to operate.

> -I love the idea of the UP 4014 running again but
> only if returned to peak operational performance.

That is the point. 4014 is not now anywhere near "peak
performance," nor is there any intention to make it so.
It is unlikely it ever will be, for numerous reasons,
few having anything to do with cost.

> -I don't want it to be at the expense of UP 3985
> or the UP 8444 or the UP steam program in
> general.

You are a little late on that one. 3985 was thrown to
the wolves almost 10 years ago. It has not run since late
2010 and has been retired.
>
> To me nothing beats the you-tube video of the UP
> 3985 pulling 143 freight cars by itself with no
> problem.

Yes. That was dramatic. There is no desireon part of
current UP management or steam program management to
even try that again.

> I remember one of the east coast class I railroads
> back in the 1990's the had 2 operational steam
> engines that they would use for excursions on
> occasions. Overnight, they eliminated their steam
> program, sold everything, and the engines are now
> in museums.

The only thing they ever used those locomotives for were
railfan excursions. That was part of their downfall.

> I do not want UP bean counters to see the steam
> program as a bottomless money pit and shut it
> down.

> I just want to know if the 4014 will get back to
> near peak performance.

No, it will not. It will always be run only with light
trains and with diesel helpers coupled right behind it,
doing most of the work. 4014 is only an extremely expensive
show horse now, not a workhorse. UP spent many millions,
and that is what they wanted.