You present a very good summary of a factor of the preservation debate. Leaving it where it is, as it is, serves no purpose to the people who will get some benefit from viewing the artifact. On the other hand, once it's again in the hands of people, it faces the dangers of exposure, vandalism, misuse, and even wanton destruction. There are those people who state that scrapping an entire class of locomotive or a historic ship, then leaving the rest to photographs, documentation, and memories, is the only dignified and economical way to keep history. In the case of certain preserved and restored aircraft, the "preservationists" have flown them into the earth and completely destroyed them, yet leaving them inside a glacier or at the bottom of a lake bed does nothing in terms of the real reasons historians try to preserve machinery.

I personally, would like to see most of the RMPA collection operated once again, yet the Museum wants the historical fabric of the locomotives unaltered. I can't say they are wrong given the context of their mission.

Being a bit of a military historian with an interest in the WWII eastern front, I did some web research a couple of years ago on surviving Soviet T-34 tanks (the type recovered). The recovered model apparently is actually quite rare (76mm main gun) since it's an early model and most were later updated (to a 85mm gun). Most survivors of this type that were stuffed and mounted were the later types. Add to it that this tank both saw actual combat and was captured and apparently used by the Germans, this one is not only rare, but has an amazing history.

Googling around will find several websites that document recent recoveries of usually Soviet hardware from some of large battlefields. In several locations large pieces that weren't recovered in the years after the war have sometimes sank into permafrost and bogs or have had so much vegetation grown up around them in extremely remote locations that hunting them has become sport since there is a bit of a collector's market out there for entire pieces or parts.

Sure hope these folks have the resources to take care of it long term.

Bob

Time to move a record from one database to another.... :)

I don't want to second guess Mr. Crawford, but I would love to know the evidence.

Rob

I don't quite understand your point. If the tank was to be left in the peat bog, then it might as well not exist at all. You must ask yourself what is the purpose of preservation? Is it to keep objects for its own sake, or is it to use objects as tools for educating about the past?

If we are to keep objects for their own sake, then bury the stuff in an oxygen deficient environment and be done with it. But if we are to learn from historic objects, it is imperative that the objects be in a location where it is actually possible to do so.

It is the idiocy of humans who allow historic objects to deteriorate by parking stuff outside and forgetting about it while going off on the latest and greatest machine hunt. Its always more exciting to save a new piece than it is to maintain what you already have.

I agree with everything you said except the last sentence. In reality it should read, " Its always more exciting to HUNT AND CAPTURE a new piece than it is to maintain what you already have."

Because that's what it is, the thrill of the hunt. After that's over, the rest is just hard work.

What few people want to admit is the additional burden each new acquisition imposes on the organization. Funds that could be used to erect a building over the existing collection are pissed away on a new conquest. Money that could be used for meaningful conservation of existing pieces goes instead to buying yet more new tarps to cover last year's old news. Meanwhile the fixed costs continue to increase until they consume ALL the available resources, and then NOTHING gets done.

I keep reading about all the exciting new discoveries, and people lamenting that no one is going to "save" them. There is a reason these things haven't been "saved". No one is interested in them. They aren't important. They don't tell us anything about the history of railroads, or the technology, or the sociological impact of it that we don't already know. All they happen to be are handy toys to massage someone's ego, and when the few people who arranged to acquire them lose interest, they just sit and rot. Better that they should have disappeared long ago, so that no one would have been tempted to divert precious resources to prolonging their agony.