Saw this on the V&T Modelers List:"At the V&T Symposium (why weren't all of you there?) last week, the spokesman for the reconstruction effort made a public statement that the phase I contractor which built the freeway over the Overman pit in conformance to FRA standards, was in error and that the phase II contractor would not have to completely destroy the original roadbed, cuts and fills."The rebuilding project, of course, has been criticized for overkill in construction, rebuilding the roadbed to modern standards, thus destroying the original work done by hand labor originally, and erasing its history.

Well, I have been wondering if the much larger than previously used locomotive recently acquired might not require some rebuilding of the narrowest critical bits of the loading gage. Has anybody checked it out? dave

A little perspective, please!I would like to clarify a possible misconception regarding the comments reported in the original post. Don't hang the contractor! On a project of this scope, the contractor usually is provided a very clear and concise set of plans and specifications including plan and profile drawings for track centerline, grades, etc. as well as designed cross-sections and profiles by which the new cuts and fills are to be constructed. These are the documents which the contractors all using for bidding purposes so that the owner gets fair and equivalent competitive pricing. These documents were also drafted, and the project designed, by an engineering consulting firm who is given certain criteria that the project must meet. If there's any kind of federal or state highway or transportation bill funding involved, why would we expect that historical fabric is not the most important design factor? Certain types of funding require that projects be designed and constructed to meet current construction standards.If this railroad is to carry the volume of anticipated riders that I'm sure is being touted, wouldn't you want the NEW track to built on a NEW subgrade (when it's required) that takes into account all of the best practices for strength, longevity and drainage characteristics? Why aren't we simply happy that a project of this magnitude is even happening so that there is ANY kind of railroad track on the original V&T grade? If we're following this logic still, than the 2-8-2 that's going to pull these new trains is a huge mistake because the V&T never had one! Oh, but these will be heavier trains than the old V&T used so it's OK to use an historically inaccurate steam locomotive to pull passenger cars that probably won't be very original or historically accurate either. Come on people. Take some time and think about these arguements before shooting flaming arrows at the people who are making one of the largest railroad preservation/resurrection projects since Steamtown hit Scranton possible.And finally, 99% of the fair-paying passengers won't have a clue that any of these inaccuracies were allowed to pass muster and that's all that counts because it's the average tourists' dollars that will support the new operation.I'll get off my soapbox now. (Maybe this is why so many worthwhile and exciting projects never see completion because too many people are busy being experts about things that are not the main focus of the project.)

Rob, I do very much support the project, and certainly implied my ignorance of the details in my questions, which pretty much have to do with the "freeway" mentioned above. I'm not anything like an expert on the V&T - but I know they are mostly known for retaining a 1890 vintage operation right through to their closure, providing the movie industry with a wonderful array of very old stuff. First, please do clarify the "Freeway" comment as originally posted - it makes no sense as I read it. Are they actually building a road, or was the poster using hyperbole to describe a very large earthmoving project relative to that usually required by a single track shortline?Then, please, from a marketing and entertainment perspective, would recreating the V&T not conceptually require the use of equipment in scale and appearance much more like that for which it is famous? Would that not be a better tourist draw? I don't agree that discussing this topic implies a negative atitude towards the project - rather, a worthy examination of the impact of the decision to depart from the more colorful (and potentially easily sold) concept which was, in this case, also historically accurate. This seeming dichotomy leads to some amount of inquiry from interested parties in the business. If we want to see more of these projects happen, we want to see the ones now operating or on the way succeed and prosper. Branding the new V&T will be a vital component of its ability to succeed. Asking isn't attacking.dave

Since the premise of this project is the reconstruction of the V&T, it is quite natural to assume that upholding the considerable historical fabric of that legendary line will be priority number one in the reconstruction effort. However, I believe that assumption may prove to be quite inaccurate. I have read some of the various descriptions of this project, and it seems to include an incredibly broad scope of objectives, including tourist trains, dinner trains, commuter transit, and freight trains, all of which would also serve as a test bed for the use of alternate fuels.Ron Travis

Yowza! My mistake, i thought they were just building a tourist line. This set of ideas must have been generated by a very diverse set of political interests - getting them to actually agree to proceed must have been a job. Hats off - i think that is the real story, and wish somebody in charge there would write it for RyPN.dave

I think you have identified the problem.This project is not a railroad museum (Carson City already has a pretty good railroad museum, on the south side of town, physically isolated from this project)This is really a tourist railroad (funded in part with local goverment touist development money) rather than railroad preservation. While they are mostly following the old grade, at times they will need to deviate, due to mining activity and other development along the right of way.Where they are building new right of way, the construction techniques are similar to those used by modern roads, rather than old railroads. The orignal V&T was built by pick and shovel and wheelbarrow. The new line will be built with bulldosers and earthmovers, and will possibly look more like freeway. Where they are using the old right of way (most of the proposed route) it will be much more like old railroad construction.The line will cross Hwy 50 on a steel girder bridge.So far they have purchased one locomotive, a Baldwin logging mike, very apporpiate for the work they want to do, but nothing like the V&T operated with.Its a neat project, and it will likely preserve much of the abandond grade, but its not a preservation project.

[redacted]

The exsisting V&T tourist line is seperatly owned, and is not the organization rebuilding the line. Only the former McCloud engine is owned by the new organization. The others are owned or leased by Bob Gray, the current operator of the current tourist line running from Virginia City to Gold Hill. I understand that Bob Gray would like to be the operator of the new line, but that is by no means certain. The current tourist operation seems to be one of those who tend towards using up their rolling stock, then moveing on to new pieces. There are rumors of legal action regarding the condition of the Feather River locomtive.There are lots of idividuals who are involved with Bob, and with the new line, as well as with the NSRM. Sometimes its hard to keep the players straight.