
I have been in contact over the last several months with several folks at the NB after we first found Mr. Snow's planned presentation for their quarterly meeting.  Richard Backus(IMA) and I have both expressed our concerns(that Snow speaks of)as have many others.  The committee that has been created has nine members on it.  Only two are NB employees(Mr. Snow & 1 other).  The other 7 are from the "trenches" so to speak, with Bruce Babcock(you all know his excellent qualifications) being one; Steve Dunn, a former Oklahoma Steam Threshers Board Member from Oklahoma and engine owner/restorer; another steam engine owner/restorer from California, and others who have extensive experience around these engines and boilers.  Their task is to review/discuss/revise Appendix C to bring it in line with some of the current issues.  It is not meant and will not be a fishing expedition to tighten the vise on engine owners.  The over-riding factor in all of their plans is to promote a sensible inspection regimen, with the understanding that 99% of these boilers are only operated less than 5 times a year.  One cannot argue with any common sense that a boiler is going to deteriorate to any degree when it is used on such a limited basis and is laid up and stored properly.  To worry that "the sky is falling" would be a little extreme at this point.  The care that is afforded these engines is far in excess of what it was 80 years ago, and this should be our main thrust on which we proceed.  Of course we must evaluate our boilers on a comprehensive basis, then repair or replace areas that show thinning to the point of being unable to carry the working pressures that we would like.  That is common sense.  I think some folks just aren't willing to admit that their boiler needs repairs.  These are the folks that I worry about.  At some point we all have to face reality if our boiler is in fact in need of attention, and I think that that is what this committee is charged with fostering.

Our job is to inform these committee members of our ideas as to realistic inspection criteria and maintain a steady input to them.  The NB does not want to become the "inspector general" for historic boilers.  Their job is to provide guidlines and recommendations for adoption or inclusion by other governing bodies/states.

We should be thankful that they haven't been as forceful and restrictive as the FRA has been on the excursion steam locomotive industry.  I don't think we'll see that kind of legislation come from this committee.

Someone does need to inform the NB of their grave reporting error on the alleged fatal accident from 1985/1970.  Someone with that information please send it to Mr. Snow, and post their response here.

On a final note, this weekend is American Threshermen in Pinckneyville, IL.  We are having a National Keck Gonnerman meeting there to discuss the 2005 Reunion of the Keck to take place in P'ville in August '05.  We plan to have 6 sequential serial numbered Kecks plus 5-10 others.  I don't think there is any other manufacturer that can claim to have that many sequentials still in operation.  If you are a Keck owner or have interest in Keck Gonnerman, please contact me offline and I will give you more information.  I am also the unofficial historian of Keck Gonnerman engines, having the records for almost 200 engines still in operation.

Thanks for all the good information,
Jeff Detwiler
Board Member, Oklahoma Steam Threshermen
Keck Gonnerman #1786
Russell #15887

--- Jeff Smith <steamenginesmitty@yahoo.com> wrote:
I sold one of my engines this year for many different
reasons and purchased a new 1/2 scale 65 case boiler
that is to current ASME standards, but Dan's concern
was one of the major deciding factors.  Time and
storage were the biggest issues, I just don't have the
time right now or the place to store a full size
engine for a restoration.  Another deciding factor was
it also needed a lot of repair to the boiler; to the
point that I just wanted a new boiler from a
cost/benefit standpoint.  In the end I decided against
that and sold it because I was losing my storage space
at the time and needed to find a place for it fast,
and where it could have been stored was outside neat
the ocean.  I just didn't want it outside near all of
the salt spray so it found a new home with a man that
has many other engines.

I still have two other riveted boilers and one other
ASME code welded boiler, but they are not on traction
engines so I decided to go the 1/2 scale route.  I
might be losing money someday on the two riveted
boilers from some type of crackdown, but I am willing
to take that chance because I like those engines.  I
just wanted an engine that I MIGHT be able to take
from state to state on vacation in the summer, but it
appears that the days of honoring other state
inspections in the states that I was planning to go to
is a thing of the past.  So I can either not go, or
get a bunch of inspections a year, but I just don't
want the hassle of that nor all of those hydros so I
am learning to go to shows and not have to operate
something, but that is hard for me to do.

I was at a show this past weekend in PA, and one of my
father's old steam friends told me that he just sold
all of his engines but one, and his comment was that
he thinks that sometime soon all engines in public
areas will require a new welded boiler.  That may be a
bit extreme, but maybe not.  It sure took me by
surprise though coming from him.  He lives in Maryland
and he was tired of the hassle, so he kept one engine
that he has that was purchased new and replaced 6
months later with a gas tractor so the engine is like
new, but he still doesn't take it anywhere now.

Does anyone know why Willis Able sold all of his
engines but a few?  He had 30 engines that could
operate the last time I went to his place.  Going
there was like going to a big candy store and now that
is a thing of the past.  I can understand if he just
got tired of PA and their views on historic boilers
though and threw in the towel, he would have to go
through inspections 30 times a year.  I can't even
imagine the amount of work that must have been and my
hat is off to him for all those years of dedication. 
I think that trying to be patient with the entire
inspection process for 30 engines would have put me in
a straight jacket........

Dan, apparently you are not the only one with those
thoughts though, the gentleman in MD and myself had
the same concerns.  I am sure that many others have
also, but so far we are the only ones that I know of
that acted upon them, but we could be wrong.

Jeff

>I have been leaning to the
> position that I should
> plan on finding an engine that has a boiler in poor
> condition and plan to
> spend the money to build a new boiler to ASME code. 
> That way my investment
> will not be lost due to tightening codes and a
> National Board that may start
> condemning historic boilers right and left in fear
> of their own liability
> and reputation at stake.
>     Is there anyone with these same concerns or am I
> being too pessimistic.
> I currently live in a state that has absolutely no
> inspections on historic
> boilers but believe that it is just a matter of time
> before all states adopt
> Appendix C of the NBIC.
> 
> Dan Donaldson



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
_______________________________________________
Steam-engine mailing list
http://www.stationary-engine.com/mailman/listinfo/steam-engine


