It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:31 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: All Dressed Up and No Place to Go (locomotives)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 3:28 pm 

Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:31 am
Posts: 397
I already have a headache so I am not going to go through the whole list. 3254 is done. It is not going to see the rails again. 6039 has a cracked cylinder, I believe, so she won’t be going anywhere, either. 2124 is worn and there is already another T1 under resto in Ohio and a second just miles from Steamtown that will most likely return to service on the R&BMN so it’s redundant. B&LE, the icing on the cake in this thread, is not even worth discussing. Neither is the facebook-based effort to purchase her.

Signing off from Fantasy Land Railway….


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: All Dressed Up and No Place to Go (locomotives)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 4:01 pm 

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 9:40 pm
Posts: 709
Seems more suitable under railfan stuff than preservation.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: All Dressed Up and No Place to Go (locomotives)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 5:46 pm 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 11:26 am
Posts: 3716
Location: Maine
There has long been speculation the Steamtown's 3377 may get rebuilt using parts from 3254. From a restoration point of view, I think that would be fantastic photo-essay and study. Have somebody who understands the process and can write in layman's terms. I suppose that person would have to live long enough to complete the whole story.

_________________
"It's only impossible until it's done." -Nelson Mandela


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: All Dressed Up and No Place to Go (locomotives)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 7:43 pm 

Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:31 am
Posts: 397
Richard Glueck wrote:
There has long been speculation the Steamtown's 3377 may get rebuilt using parts from 3254. From a restoration point of view, I think that would be fantastic photo-essay and study. Have somebody who understands the process and can write in layman's terms. I suppose that person would have to live long enough to complete the whole story.


That would be correct. 3377 had an insanely low number of road miles under her belt after a full rebuild when she was left on the dead line. Although not a completely identical design, many parts which were ‘like new’ were pulled from her to keep 3254 on the rails. What has been rumored is that all those parts and more will find their way home to the forlorn mike. One of them has a bent frame, I think it’s the ’54. There is also the issue of the new aluminum tender that was built, I am sure someone will chime in with the details; I can’t remember which tender frame was used for the new build but I think there are some incompatibilities.

I would love to see 3377, or 2317, or 790, or the 47 back under steam. But as I said in one of several very similar threads, it doesn’t make sense to waste the time or the money. 3713 and 26 will be, for all intents and purposes, brand new. The park should focus on cosmetic upkeep of the rest of the collection and upgrades to the grounds and simply keep refreshing their two ‘new’ locos when the flue clock is due for decades and decades to come.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: All Dressed Up and No Place to Go (locomotives)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 8:10 pm 

Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:31 am
Posts: 397
Speaking of the dead line haha


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: All Dressed Up and No Place to Go (locomotives)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 8:19 pm 

Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 10:08 am
Posts: 234
While some of the specific information may be inaccurate and/or more suited to a "rail fanning" discussion, the big picture issues of proper selection of artifacts for restoration/preservation, collection management, and the many considerations that go into the question of operational vs static display are all topics that have been covered in other Interchange threads. The big difference here is that posters are trying to use specific examples to explore these issues. That alone should not be a cause for a move to Railfanning.

A lot of the discussion has centered on STEA, but that is a natural result of the large size of the collection in Scranton and the fact that several items at the site may be a "1472+" servicing from operability.

There has been much talk on the Interchange about the best use/location of equipment (the "home rails" approach). As this relates to large operations like the Park Service's in Scranton, several of the artifacts are in a state of neglect and are not really serving the function of aiding in the interpretation of the urban industrial ruin that is the DL&W Scranton Yard complex.

If anyone is part of an operation/organization that believes that an artifact, whether it be at Scranton or part of another large non-private collection, would be better off in their care, they should consider putting together a well-supported restoration/interpretation/business plan for that artifact and sending it to the current custodian of the artifact. Generally, it could start a productive conversation that leads to a sale, deaccession/accession, or a swap such that one or more artifacts are better preserved and more well utilized as interpretive aids. With the Park Service, there is a new Superintendent in Scranton who has some very specific priorities. I can not say if any further thinning of the herd is in the cards at STEA, but I can say that collection/inventory management was a topic with the Park Service people who assessed the Superintendent role after Kip Hagen passed.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: All Dressed Up and No Place to Go (locomotives)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 8:42 pm 

Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:31 am
Posts: 397
The park is not going to give up anything unless it really, really wants to. It will rot into the ground first.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: All Dressed Up and No Place to Go (locomotives)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:18 pm 

Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 10:08 am
Posts: 234
6-18003 - The Park Service transferred CP2816 to Canadian Pacific, a for-profit corporation, in 1998.

As Superheater noted in “B&M #3713 Restoration Thread Part 2”, “I don't have details on the transaction, but when we were prepping the 2816, it was with the implicit idea the repatriation of CP 2816 was an exchange transaction. CPR was supposed to provide something of value in return, perhaps favorable moves or diesel locomotives.

As far as I know, nothing and certainly nothing approaching equivalent value was ever received or delivered to Steamtown by CPR. I'd be happy to be corrected if I am in error.”

So, the Park Service’s transfer of an artifact in Scranton to an organization having a well-supported restoration/interpretation/business plan for that artifact is not without precedent.

Somewhat off topic, I believe the new tender for 3254 is constructed of stainless steel. My recollection is that this new tender was never used for 3254 because there was something incorrect about the construction. It may have been that the channel for the stoker auger was not constructed to the proper proportions and corrective action was not warranted due to the declining condition of 3254.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: All Dressed Up and No Place to Go (locomotives)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 10:02 pm 

Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:31 am
Posts: 397
Yes, transferred in 1998. Seventeen years ago.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: All Dressed Up and No Place to Go (locomotives)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 10:16 pm 

Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:31 am
Posts: 397
This quote is from Bruce Mowbray in an old post here on RYPN

Quote:
The new tender tank will go on the 3254 tender frame. It's on the 3377 frame temporarily. The 3377 tender frame is quite different than the 3254 tender frame. 3377 has 2 draw bars. The 3254 has one bar and safety chains. The two types of frames are NOT interchangeable without extensive rework.


So the new tender body is, as far as I am aware, still on the 3377 frame. The original for 3377 was scrapped. Since I will believe that Bruce is correct in regards to differences in the frames, my only question is if the new body is 100% compatible with the 3377 frame? And yes, the new tender body is stainless, FMP.


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: