When paint matters (and other grievances)

TrainDetainer · **Joined:** Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:05 pm **Posts:** 271

Thanks Kelly, for posting the real information so we can add it to the collective whatever. Was hoping you'd chime in eventually. My 'bubble' came through the grapevine and I never really expect anything that comes as gossip as truthful - usually not even close. But as a great movie character said, "Well, there it is."

And maybe there's a good part of the best answer - it's hard to argue with success.

Howard P. · **Posted:** Sun Jan 08, 2017 3:38 pm

Strasburg's engines all carry Strasburg lettering now, but in the overall style of the original road- #90 looks just like it did in early GWRR days, with "Strasburg" substituted for "Great Western" in proper lettering style and placement. Same goes for 475 and 89. It's a great way to accommodate both historical accuracy and railroad branding.

Howard P.

Dennis Storzek · **Posted:** Sun Jan 08, 2017 3:44 pm

Tom Davidson wrote:

..If number 11 were in a Museum, there would be a good argument for restoring B&H lettering to the tender. But she's not in a museum, and she looks just fine as she is.

Which brings up the other side of the argument... museums that also operate equipment. My background is IRM, which has had a strict policy of painting equipment back to a scheme it wore in service; preferably one that is correct for the form the artifact has been preserved as. That's a good portrayal of the equipment, but as soon as one begins operations, you get the "circus train" effect; a Frisco engine pulling a Santa Fe combine, followed by a mix of Rock Island and Lackawanna commuter cars. Unfortunately, this sort of equipment mix only really portrays the start up of Amtrak. So, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't, so to speak. Each organization has to decide if the equipment AS INDIVIDUAL PIECES is more important to their mission than the unified appearance of the entire train. I could even see the argument being made for having two different policies, depending on the purpose of the equipment; the "historical fleet", and the "operational fleet", perhaps.

I also disdain garish made-up paint schemes. We ought to recognize that, with few exceptions, the equipment we operate does not go well with the Currier & Ives look.

robertmacdowell · **Posted:** Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:55 pm

robertjohndavis wrote:

I remember a time a certain GP-7 was restored... But, for one reason or another, the wrong horn was put in the wrong location for what they were trying to achieve.

When this was pointed out to the museum chief, he blew a gasket. Not at the oversight of course, but at the guy who pointed it out.

And the #1 reason to not be that guy is... You could be wrong.

And the guy who does know, because he did the deep research... might be... understandably... really, really sick of hearing from yet another noob who did cursory research.

Also, depending on how you do it, it can be rude. Paint matters, but courtesy matters too.

Railfans are, after all, a veritable nation of aspberger's, and everybody thinks they know everything, and crave that feeling of certainty, and don't necessarily back it up with depth or quality of research. The best thing you can do is doubt your own certainty. Ask any scientist.

Crescent-Zephyr · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:15 pm **Posts:** 1497

robertmacdowell wrote:

Railfans are, after all, a veritable nation of aspberger's, and everybody thinks they know everything, and crave that feeling of certainty, and don't necessarily back it up with depth or quality of research. The best thing you can do is doubt your own certainty. Ask any scientist.

That's really uncalled for.

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:43 am

Crescent-Zephyr wrote:

robertmacdowell wrote:

Railfans are, after all, a veritable nation of aspberger's, and everybody thinks they know everything, and crave that feeling of certainty, and don't necessarily back it up with depth or quality of research. The best thing you can do is doubt your own certainty. Ask any scientist.

That's really uncalled for.

Not as much as you would like to think.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=31906

robertmacdowell · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:57 pm

Call it what you will... The point is, it's very typical of railfans to demand social graces from others, while giving none themselves. To the point of suffering from Dunning-Kruger effect with regards to the very concept of social graces!

A man was given open license in a group talk to lay out their objections to another person. Outspoken but honest, the best he could come up with was "lacked nuance". A half hour later he challenged the person to a fist fight.

We are a troubled bunch, and proof positive is how railway preservation in our nation is so poor compared to other sectors and other nations. Seriously, how many organizations do you know which are not living up to their potential due to epic infighting?

The question is, whether you recognize our limitations and adapt... Or ignore them and thus double-down on them.

Anyway... back to OP and the notion of marching up to a project manager and telling them what all they did wrong. Occam's Razor.

robertjohndavis · **Joined:** Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:10 am **Posts:** 2499

robertmacdowell wrote:

robertjohndavis wrote:

I remember a time a certain GP-7 was restored... But, for one reason or another, the wrong horn was put in the wrong location for what they were trying to achieve.

When this was pointed out to the museum chief, he blew a gasket. Not at the oversight of course, but at the guy who pointed it out.

And the #1 reason to not be that guy is... You could be wrong.

And the guy who does know, because he did the deep research... might be... understandably... really, really sick of hearing from yet another noob who did cursory research.

Also, depending on how you do it, it can be rude. Paint matters, but courtesy matters too.

-----

Fully agree on courtesy, but in this case "the guy" was right, the museum chief was "wrong" and went on to solicit money for more projects that were incorrectly finished - sometimes minor goofs, sometimes mindbending errors.

Assuming "the guy" is usually wrong and the restorer is a well-researched expert is a very, very slippery slope.

As for the comment about railfans... not only does it prove my point, but it gives me a chuckle. Imagine that one group of choo choo fanatics are the cool smart kids while others should be mocked. That's some delicious irony right there. We are all railfans. Some of us just like to think we are evolved to some greater calling.

It's like being the tallest midget.

Dennis Storzek · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2017 4:33 pm

robertjohndavis wrote:

Assuming "the guy" is usually wrong and the restorer is a well-researched expert is a very, very slippery slope.

I'll say. To those of you who don't know me, I've made my living for the last thirty years creating products for the model railroad hobby. It's been my observation that there are people out there who are amateur historians specializing in this field that would put professional museum curators to shame. Freed from the constraints of only having a finite number of artifacts available (in theory they can recreate anything as a model, provided they can find the data) they do just that, searching out the most obscure facts.

Having been active in museum restoration work years ago, I do realize that much of what we do is dictated by expediency - it needs a horn, I have this horn, so this is the horn I'm going to use.

But I have to say, I am very disappointed to receive e-mails from time to time that read along these lines: "We're painting XYZ1234 next week... do you happen to know what color it's supposed to be?"

Bobharbison · **Joined:** Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:42 pm **Posts:** 2876

Dennis Storzek wrote:

I'll say. To those of you who don't know me, I've made my living for the last thirty years creating products for the model railroad hobby. It's been my observation that there are people out there who are amateur historians specializing in this field that would put professional museum curators to shame. Freed from the constraints of only having a finite number of artifacts available (in theory they can recreate anything as a model, provided they can find the data) they do just that, searching out the most obscure facts.

Or, they may just happen to have an arcane bit of knowledge that applies to the object at hand.

I recall going to a model railroad show where Pacific Fast Mail was showing off the then new model of Hillcrest Climax #10. They had a couple of configurations, and the model was, overall, remarkably well done.

However, one detail was off. The oil bunker behind the cab had a tall "can" on it, looking a bit like a smokestack. I told the fellow that this was incorrect for the current version, and that it had a lid that was essentially flush with the top of the oil tank, sticking up only a couple inches, sort of like ship's hatch.

He argued that it wasn't possible. "We took photos, we measured the prototype, we used archive images, we documented everything. I'm telling you, what you see there is correct!"

I said "No, I'm sorry, but that bit isn't correct, it's not nearly that tall. I'm quite certain of that. It's just a low hatch now with dogs to secure it." He still wouldn't budge that his version was correct.

I finally lifted up my leg, pulled back my pants leg a bit and showed him a rather nasty gouge on lower leg. "That's how I know. I accidentally stepped into the damn thing yesterday while I was putting oil into the bunker. I couldn't have done that if it was like the model. I don't care what your drawings say..." "Oh..." (Puzzled frown)

Dennis Storzek · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:16 pm

I got a chuckle out of this... since I've had the exact same experience with the late, great Pacific Fast Mail. But this just points up my complaint about people who call a week before they need the data. The guy you think knows isn't the guy who really knows.

The guy at the model company has two, three, four volunteer "consultants" feeding him helpful, but sometimes conflicting data, and he has to try to make sense of it all. Plus, as the project enters the build stage, those helpful consultants have to be kept at arms length... they are neither paid, nor share any financial risk, but would just love to spend your money like water as they belatedly realize they made an error, or might have. Once the project reaches the point where it is time to "shoot the engineers and put it in production", if there are errors in the data, there will be errors in the product.

For our purposes, you have to get beyond the model manufacturer, who has his own needs of expediency, to his sources, which would pretty much be pure academia, if this was a recognized academic endeavor. These are the people who tend to inhabit railroad historical societies, but even contacting the societies doesn't guarantee a quick answer; the query often gets bounced from person to person for months until it finds someone who has the data.

p51 · **Posted:** Wed Jan 11, 2017 1:18 am

G. W. Laepple wrote:

The Southern Railway sold two surplus 2-8-0's, nos. 630 and 722, to the East Tennessee & West North Carolina Railroad, which renumbered them 207 and 208 and used them for many years. The the Southern traded two RS-3 diesels to the ET&WNC for the two steam locomotives. Should the Southern have left them lettered and numbered ET&WNC?

I get what you mean, but keep in mind the tenders on both of those were modified during their time away from the Southern...

robertjohndavis · **Joined:** Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:10 am **Posts:** 2499

Dennis,

Your posts are right on the money. Admitting to a mistake requires a certain amount of self-confidence, and that transcends whatever label anyone would use to describe what kind of train fanatic someone is.

I have worked with a handful of model companies gratis just to get the right info to them on a model I was interested in (no different than when I have shared info with preservationists on restorations). Some of the results?

One made replacement shells and sent them to everyone who had bought a mispainted model.

One delayed a model to correct a sound file.

One continues to get things about 80% right (and this one is really frustrating as they will get really cool nitpicky details spot-on and then botch something big and obvious).

Interestingly, the one who went the extra mile on replacement shells has also turned out to be the one with the most reliable quality overall (of the three I mentioned). It's all in how much one cares.

Which brings me back to the GP7 in the first post. No great crime against humanity was committed by the horn boo boo. Admit it and move on, or change it. Either is cool. Mocking the person with the knowledge is not.

Rob

Rick Rowlands · **Posted:** Wed Jan 11, 2017 9:41 am

I guess the underlying question here is did the WMSR misrepresent their intentions for the 1309 when they solicited funds from the membership of the C&OHS? How did this solicitation take place? Does anyone have copies of the promotional material that WMSR either published in a C&OHS publication or sent to their membership? I am kinda curious because that is how this whole thing got started.

Walter · **Posted:** Wed Jan 11, 2017 11:14 am

Alexander D. Mitchell IV wrote:

Not "envious" of them at all. I know them well enough to know they have a bit more humility than to think of themselves in the fawning attributes assigned to them by folks who believe that they are apparently superhuman or possessed with magical powers of infallibility. They're amazingly good at what they do.

But shouldn't those same "fanboys" be denigrating them mightily for lettering the equipment "Strasburg," as opposed to doing perfect restorations to original schemes?

(PLEASE NOTE: I'm throwing sarcasm here by the tenderful.)

And before the original pot-stirrer chimes in, YES, I know that the Strasburg doesn't come to us soliciting tax-deductible donations to fix up steam locos or cars. (The RR Museum of Long Island does for that G5 project, mind you.....)

But, but, but.......they use PLYWOOD to reinforce their wooden coaches under the sheathing!! That's not historically correct, so henceforth I will never patronize them again!!! Plus, they don't use the same hardware supplier as the original builder, so these reproductions are worthless!! << sarcasm^2 >>

You are free to decide that you won't donate to the million-dollar restoration of a steam locomotive because of a couple dollars of paint shaped the wrong way. It's your right in a free country, and your money. And we are concurrently free to consider such a judgement the most over-the-top, nitpicking pedantry we've seen in ages.

When paint matters (and other grievances)

Who is online