I wonder if these photos will placate all those "Reading steam" fans who seemingly demand the unconditional return of Reading 2100 to Pennsylvania from Tacoma, Washington.............

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=361853

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=361854

Nice to see, even if only a cosmetic restoration. At the current time it seems as if the 2102 has the best chance of ever operating again, but with that said I don't look for that anytime soon given that the 425 needs some work as well as the expenses of operating an engine the size of a T1. I look forward to seeing photos of the 2124 once the cosmetic restoratin is completed.

Steven Ashley

Caption on the guy with the phone pic: "What, me worry?"

dave

I think I know that guy.......Isn't that "Alfred E. Sobcynzski"

Good pictures, hopeful future, but she ain't the 2100. Satisfied?

An observation during the jacketing project.

It reads: B.L.W. 57596 1924

These are the original markings applied by baldwin when they built the 2-8-0s from which all but the first course originated. With the size of the firebox and barrel I can't imagine how immense of a 2-8-0 they were.

You need not imagine. Here's the #2024, the #2124's predecessor, back in 1944. The Reading had 50 of these Class I-10sa Consolidations, built in the 1920's. 30 of them were dismantled in 1945-1947 to supply their fireboxes and boilers to the 30 T-1's.

As a long time proponent of 2124 (and fan of T-hogs in general) this warms my heart. Hard to believe how bad the paint got in such a seemingly short time (Was it really 15 years ago?!)

Any word on if she'll be painted in freight black as she was or in Rambles black/yellow?

I was at the park last night for the photo session. Behind the shop I saw a red cowcatcher, yellow balloon stack and big old headlight with antlers all with chalk marks saying "for 2124."

;-)

If "hopeful future" means anything other than static display, it's only wishful thinking. While 2124 does have it's followers, it's been stated several times that it's too much locomotive for the line and the shop (and the budget). Combine that with the fact that there is another T1 very nearby, and 2124 sinks deeper and deeper on the list.

It will be interesting to see what happens once 26 and 3713 are both completed, if Steamtown starts in on another locomotive or if they take a good five years off and focus on rolling stock. I'm leaning towards the latter, and I think the collection needs it.

If you listen to the doomers there will be no steam after the completion of the cutoff but I don't buy that, excursions may be more limited but I think they will still run them. And as the NPS has stated repeatedly, they would rather keep steam on the premises, but they still want operable steam. So either way, something is going to get restored to working order. Which could it be? 6039? 790? An engine they have yet to acquire? I can't say, but I'm going to bet heavily that it is not 2124 (or 759, or 2317, or 3254).

IF the park restored 790 to handle their "limited" runs, and IF a deal could be reached with the owner of 2102 to provide excursion service, that would carry them quite a ways into the future. I don't know if 790 has the sand to pull a full passenger consist out of the valley but if there was an issue with 2102 they could always run 790 with a lighter consist if necessary. That's the only reasonable way that I would think you could see Reading steam in Scranton again.

I also feel that the influx of diesel power is a good thing for the park, and I am excited to see what possbilities may be explored for longer, more varied diesel excursions.

You talk as if 2102 is ready to run. She needs heavy firebox and running gear work before she'll see fire again. Oh, and she's locked in a shed on private property, the "another T-1 nearby" argument stopped being valid 15 years ago.

The little ex-CNR 4-6-4T, double ended and built for that precise type of operation would make good sense. A complete tear down and evaluation in order to have the boiler certified would be required. I find it terribly sad that 759 came back from the dead to later succumb into a comatose state. Too big? Yes. Leasable? Yup!

I'd sure feel better if all this was set as an integral part of a real plan of how to maintain steam sustainably at Steamtown. I really can't have a "wish list" of what "should" be restored without having a valid context on which to base one, and neither can anybody else on this list despite all the postings.

dave

3254 would fit the need of steam for me....even though she's Canadian..;)

Let's just wait and see...

Martin