Yesterday I got a letter in my mailbox from a Railfan & Railroad reader that, in no small words, said that "we must keep the steam locomotives we have running today in serviceable condition at all costs" He was perturbed that I had suggested that the Minnesota Transportation Museum might be better off putting their money into one of their NP 4-6-2 Pacifics rather than use most of it to overhaul their worn out NP 4-6-0 328 (which is one of my favorite locomotives, but really unsuited for what the MTM is doing with their Osceola & St. Croix Valley Railroad at Osceola, WI). The 328, much like Milwaukee 261, has been running so long (and so often) that people seem to regard it as not "special" anymore. Of course, the die-hard fans still come out to see it, photograph and ride behind it, but they don't keep the line running year after year. My reasoning was that one of the Pacifics could handle more cars on the regular weekend trips, and would be more suited to main line excursions work as well - something the 328 is not suited for. The MTM has a very nice musuem in St. Paul where the 328 could have been placed on display in a secure, climate controled environment and would have needing little, if any, cosmetic work to make it look presentable. (But don't worry - they have decided, in fact, to rebuild 328 for a return to steam next year). The tone of the letter was "how dare you suggest that an operating steam locomtive be set aside!" <p>So my question is: Do you agree with this? Is it unreasonable to suggest that if an engine has served a long and productive life on a tourist line that it might be retired and something else restored, if the costs were the same? <p>Of course, I'm not suggesting that an engine should be used up and spit out in favor of something else, just for the sake of something else. This was the way the old Heber Creeper line did business. In 1971 the had Pacific Lumber 2-8-2 No. 35, Yosemite Lumber 3-Truck Shay No. 4 and UP 2-8-0 No. 618 running. No. 35 and the Shay were both beat to death, and when Sierra 36 and Santa Maria Valley 100 (both 2-8-2s) arrived in '76, they were retired along with 618. When 100 and 36 wore out, they replaced them with Southern Pacific 2-6-0 No. 1744 around '82, and then patched up 618 again in '86 after it had been sitting for years. So at any given time at Heber City there were many used-to-run-but-is-now-rusting-and-missing-parts steam locomotives in various states of disrepair. <p>When has a locomotive run to the point that major repairs are to compromise it as a historic property? Certainly a new boiler qualifys as such. Of course, if someone were to put a brand new boiler on a run-of-the-mill Porter 0-4-0T I doubt anyone would raise a fuss. But what if the Nevada State Railroad Museum's V&T 4-4-0 Inyo could not steam again without a new boiler? I'd say that it would be better off retired than to loose much of it's historic fabric with a 21st century boiler. <br> <br>This reader also lamented all the engines that have come and gone over the years. Curious, I pulled out my 1966 copy of the Steam Passenger Service Directory and thumbed through it. I noted that there were photographs of the following engines in service on U.S. tourist lines and museums:<p>Sierra 2-8-2 36 at the White Mountain Scenic<br>Reader 2-8-2 1702<br>Roaring Camp & Big Tree's "Dixiana" Shay<br>California Western 2-8-2 45<br>Grizzly Flats 0-4-2T "Chloe"<br>D&RGW 2-8-2 476<br>D&RGW 2-8-0 346<br>American Railway Equipment Assn. 0-4-0T 2<br>Florida East Coast 4-6-2 153 at Gold Coast<br>Argent 2-6-0 7 at "Petticoat Junction"<br>Savannah & Atlanta 4-6-2 750 <br>"General II" 4-4-0 at Stone Mountain<br>CB&Q 4-8-4 5632 <br>Argent 2-6-0 6 at Midwest Central<br>Bridgton & Harrison 0-4-4Ts 7,8 at Edaville<br>Kelly Island 0-4-0T 11 at Cadillac & Lake Cty<br>Beebe River Climax 6 at White Mt. Central<br>Ely-Thomas Shay 6 at Pine Creek Ry.<br>Great Western 60 on the Black River & Western<br>Southern 2-8-0 385 on the Morris Cty. Central<br>Boyne City 2-8-0 18 on the Arcade & Attica<br>Raritan Sand 0-4-0T 3 on the Leatherstocking<br>Sumter & Choctaw 103 at Middletown & Orange<br>ET&WNC 4-6-0 12 at Tweetsie<br>White Pass 2-8-2 190 at Tweetsie<br>Graham County shay 1925 on Bear Creek Scenic<br>2-4-4T "Maud" at Cedar Point & Lake Erie<br>Oregon American 2-6-2 105 at VSP&SSRR<br>0-4-0T "Henry Clay" at Pioneer Coal Mine <br>Duquesne Slag 0-6-0 8 at Penn View Mountain<br>Elk River 0-4-0 117 at Carol Park & Western<br>Morehead & North Fork 2-6-2 11 at Everett<br>B&HS 2-6-2 250 at Wanamaker, Kempton & South.<br>East Broad Top 2-8-2 12<br>Pennsy 4-4-0 1223 at Strasburg<br>CP 4-6-2 1286 running for Rail Tours, Inc.<br>Cliffside 2-6-2 110 on the Swamp Rabbit RR<br>White Pass 2-8-0 69 at Black Hills Central<br>White Pass 2-8-2 192 at Goldrush Junction<br>CN 2-6-0 89 at Steamtown<br>Birmingham & Southeastern 2-8-0 97<br>Meadow River Shay 7 at Cass Scenic<br>Laona & Northern 2-6-2 4<br>Dardanelle & Russellville 9 at Mid Continent<br>Cypress Lumber 2-6-0 2 at Mid Continent<br>Union Pacific 4-8-4 8444<p>How many of these are still running today? I count 21 out of the 47 in the photographs. 7 more are currently under restoration or to be restored. One has been scrapped in the 35 years that have passed since this edition of the Directory was published. <p>Now look through the 2000 edition of the Directory. How many engines that were not serviceable in 1966 are running today? Quite a few. So what have we lost? Some, no doubt. But look at what we've gained! Sure I'd like to see some of those engines pictured in the '66 Steam Directory run again, but I'm happy that we have so many locomotives that have joined the ranks of the living in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. Dispite what this guy thinks, you can't make them run forever (unless you have very deep pockets) so we better enjoy what we have now. <br> <br>I'll step down off my soapbox now and return to the real world....<p><br>Jeff Terry<br>Preservation Columnist<br>Railfan & Railroad Magazine<p><br>



jterry618@msn.com

You make a good case for the static preservation of locomotives. The National Air/Space Museum has a policy which says it will not operate any of it's collection since many are the last of a kind artifacts, and the nature of air disasters makes any loss a fairly permanent one. I'm not content to say that is the case with steam locomotives unless the boilers are dangerous and can't be rebuilt without complete refabrication. Most steamers can be placed back in service if regular inspection and servicing take place. One unusual case is the Pennsy k-4s, #1361. Here we are getting a totally refabricated loco, but no one would register a complaint since she's a nearly unique specimen. Everyone wanted to see a Pennsy K-4 run again. What pains me is when a tourist line uses a loco without a commitment to keeping it operable or museum display shape. My example here would be NH&I #1533. There are enough preserved steam locomotives in this country that locos could be restored, operated, and put in storage for later revival. In the meanwhile, if an antique needs a new welded boiler, my answer would be to go ahead and provide it; but save the original in a secure location for archaeological research. Unless it endangers the engine, <br>run 'em all, provided we don't use 'em up.<p><br>



aurora7@juno.com

Jeff, you make a good point and so does your reader with regards to keeping what is currently in operation running. Unfortunately back when tourist lines were coming into being, little though was put forth into preservation/maintenance and your case with the Heber Creeper is an excellent example. Of course money plays a big part in all of this, yet hindsight is always 20/20. Had these operators built in a plan for the future, we may have still seen many locomotives from that 1966 list still running.<br>Right now up at Railtown SHP in Jamestown, CA the famous Sierra #3 has been put in the Tri-Dam building to have its boiler removed for a firebox replacement.<br>Recently the former Westside Lumber #3 Heisler was completely overhauled at Roaring Camp in less than a year. This included new boiler and running gear. At a mid 6 figure cost, it is no wonder many groups hedge at restoring a locomotive to operation. And this cost was for a 36 ton engine.<br>Bottom line is we can all pine for our favorite locomotives and wish they could all operate. And as avid railfans we need to support financially all the operations we visit. In my opinion, anytime any type of steam locomotive if fired up and running, is a special occasion, we should just be thankful for what is out there still. It could be worse!<p>Nuff said,<br>Jeff Badger<br>



btflco@aol.com

I agree with these comments, but my concerns lie less in keeping the engines we have running then in making sure that those operating them make SURE that correct safety procedures are maintained at all times, and that all the parts are there to operate it correctly. I grew up in probably the greatest steam revival during the early to mid 1980's, and saw a number of locomotives that, much to my anguish, are no longer are running (611 and 1218 are just two of a few). Like most of us, I have rarely met a steam locomotive I didn't like, but running a steam engine on a shoe-string does nothing but invite trouble. This kind of attitude nearly got three individuals killed a few years back, and it was only the inherent design of that CPR 4-6-2 that saved them in my opinion. While this incident<br>changed a great many things, there are still areas<br>that could cause problems in the future.<br> Operation must be balanced with safety and more importantly, good organization. Is it really in the best interest of the hobby to get an engine into shape enough to run, only to have it go down for the next five years because in the rush to operate that park locomotive, they didn't plan far enough ahead to set money aside for repairs? In these days of high insurance rates and<br>quick judgements, I say no. Another Gettysburg could be devastating to the hobby. It was only through the foresight and cooperation of a good many individuals in the rail preservation field and those who regulate the operating of these locomotives (FRA, etc.) that we are able to continue to operate locomotives now. I'm not willing to risk this delicate cooperation to keep a locomotive running that probably shouldn't have gone out on the road in the first place (And no, I do not think the 328 is a basket case). Sometimes, me-thinks, we need to think less like foamers and more like officials. (Shudder, did I actually say that?) <p><br>T.J.G. <br>



peremarquette@hotmail.com

Great topic here, I too find it inexcuseable when I see "museums" run them into the ground and discard them to the display track with little else done to them. There is one museum in the mid-west that has scores of dissembled locomotives all over the place, some of them former operators. I don't want to start a fight, but I have to admit that I cringe to see a boiler in the weeds over here, the tank and cab over there, etc, the other project next to it untouched in 10 years, and I see 3 former operators sitting, and see another one being dissembled for "restoration". Heck, at least keep them in one piece. That said, there has been some great work done by that group that has been truly outstanding, and I never fail to donate to the collection and use the gift shop. I think that if you are going to run an engine, if down the road you find that another one makes more sence to use, you have an obligation to return the one being retired to the most complete and close to servicable condition as possible. In other words, unless a major change (like the Inyo example) is needed, I would like to see the engine restored and "pickled" as it were so that you end up with a collection of restored and preserved locomotives instead of a collection of used up display pieces. Thanks Bob for the great forum!<p>Steve<br>

You hit the spike on the head! <br>Any locomotive that has been operated and is no longer capable of safe operation should be stored indoors, heavily greased, cleaned, and painted. In this manner, generations of fans, including those yet unborn, with have a reserve of restorable locomotives to pull from. Those engines which are disassembled and fragmented in open fields, exposed to the weather, should be collected, stored indoors, or reassembled with all parts intact. The private collection of locos out in Oregon and those in that mid-western collection need to go into a shed. Period.<br>Thank God, the Age of Steam Museum "BigBoy" #4018 wasn't disassembled in advance of her predicted "restoration". <br>Check out the Rumor-web site and look at the Alaskan ng steamers that have been overturned as landfill. Check out the "Lost Engines of Roanoke" site as well.<br>

Richard said:<p>"Thank God, the Age of Steam Museum "BigBoy" #4018 wasn't disassembled in advance of her predicted "restoration". "<p>One of the conditions that the Southwest Railroad Historical Society placed on the project was that ALL OF THE FUNDS NECESSARY FOR THE RESTORATION be in place prior to the locomotive being moved offsite and the restoration being started.<p>There were more conditions and I'm not going to go into them here and now.<p>Flame away.<br>

Excellent points made by Kevin and several others firmly grounded in cold reality, as opposed to fantasy.<p>I always cringe when I see or hear someone use "we,", as in "We should ...etc., etc.," in preservation/operation. Invariably, "we" means either "you" or "someone else."<p>There is a tiny but vocal segment of the foamer population that has lost all perspective, if they ever HAD any perspective in the first place. For these few folks, railroads and steam engines and such have been elevated to something approaching religious objects. Cost, practicality, legality and reality are merely irritating and irrelevant words to these folks. Don't even try to confuse them with facts; their minds were made up long ago! And in their view, we are all unworthy!<p>There will never be enough museums, steam locomotives, or Amtrak for these people. No matter what gets accomplished or what obstacles have been overcome to do something, it is never enough for them. They always want, expect and loudly demand MORE. If a museum has struggled to get and keep one steam locomotive running, these people will hardly even acknowledge that in their haste to condemn the museum because they don't have 2 or 3 or 5 or 14 engines running. We all know the type; They never contribute a dime or a minute of labor, except to criticize and complain, and are a major irritant and destabilizing force. <p>Jeff, your corrrespondant sounds like one of these folks. The world will continue to turn if a steam locomotive gets parked, particularly if it gets parked for safety reasons. Locomotives will come and go over time, for a variety of reasons, as the list posted above illustrates, and we will all be better off for that.<p><br>

I think all the posts have been on target! What we have to realize is we have locomotives out there that are well-maintained,and some that are not dangerous,but not in the best of shape,either. <br> We sidelined our locomotive because we felt that it would be safer for us,and the public,to properly repair the locomotive and rebuild her,rather than take a stupid chance and possibly damage her,and out reputations,beyond repair.<br> Here is a note to all who have never greased a rod,tended a fire,or pull the throttle: Get out there and do some work,see how hard it is,then come back and tell us again what you think.<br> In the not-too-distant future,now that the money is in place,we will begin our overhaul. How many of you want to come and help pull superheater units,knock out refractory brick,or take out flues?<br>



kbcotton@flash.net

"How many of you want to come and help<br>pull superheater units,knock out refractory brick,or take out flues?" <p>I will. =)<p>Stuart "G.F." B.<br>Dallas, TX<p><br>



gf_bran@yahoo.com

I would help too, but a plain ticket from Dallas to Detroit can get a bit expensive if your doing it on a regular basis. In leu of grunt labor however, how can one help monetarily?<p>TJG<br>



peremarquette@hotmail.com