Yeah but assuming you're going to drop in something with the least effort it would be a 12-251. I don't know what changes were made to the frame and mounts but surely going with what was last in there would be simpler. And obviously if you were going to actually run it, all the better. Yes, technically the Santa Fe ran PA1's not PA4's but still.

Steve

Here's a link to the museum's project page for the PA.

http://www.museumoftheamericanrailroad. ... LCOPA.aspx

They're either going to ballast the loco to provide the appropriate weight on the trucks in lieu of the missing engine and generator, or they are interested in the donation of a 12-251 and generator to place within the unit for display purposes.

I'll have to say I'm fairly impressed with the work the museum did replicating an operating Santa Fe F7 using an ex-CN F9 as a base. Obviously the work wasn't nearly as extensive as PA #16 needs, but restoring it to a similar standard, at least cosmetically, doesn't seem to be out of the question.

It seems as if the 12-251 thinking is based around the premise that this locomotive needs to be made operable again. But is that really necessary? Is it worth risking this locomotive to operate it, particularly when Doyle's PA is intended to be operable? There is already an abundance of photography and video of the PA-4 era on the D&H and in Mexico. Would it ever bring in enough revenue for the museum to justify the additional expense of making it operable and then maintaining it in servicable condition?

And if this project takes ten more years, is a 251 still going to be supportable for long enough to recover the costs involved with making the locomotive operable? And how useful is a passenger locomotive with a steam generator going to be, or would you replace that with a HEP skid to make the locomotive more suitable for excursion service, but end up with something even more remote from its Santa Fe origins?

And if there is not any intention to operate it, why not just set an inoperable 12-244 (i.e.: ballast) in the carbody, which would provide a closer visual representation of the way it looked in ATSF service?

Just thinking in writing here, but these are a few issues that might be considered so it does not become the locomotive that devoured the museum.

PC

Well then this raises an interesting question. Is a locomotive better "stuffed and mounted" or would you rather have an operating locomotive for a museum. If a railroad or an individual had the money and desire to rebuild a locomotive, is it worth removing the locomotive from a protected environment so that it can run. An excellent example would be if a railroad wanted to resurect the Trainmaster in Delson should the museum say no, it's too historically significant to allow it to be used in a railroad environment, even for fantrip use only.

Personally my OPINION is that if someone wants to rebuild a locomotive to run, and has a railroad to run it on, it would be arrogant of a museum to deny them that opportunity, based on the historical significance of the piece. The significance of the piece is determined by the public not the museum's board of directors.

Personally I think it would be a crime to fill the PA with concrete and relegate it to a life as a museum display piece.

SixAxleAlco

Just some ramblings...

I think it makes sense to do things that head in the direction of an operating unit even if there are no such plans, rather than things that make it more difficult.

There must be enough 251's out there in various services that parts should be around for a long time. FM still offers them according to their website though how many are actually made I don't know. Even if one had to scrounge old parts the 251 is going to be the better choice, and of course it's a superior engine.

Short of a massive collision, how risky is it to operate? How likely is it that something could happen that's worse than what the Mexicans accomplished in just a few years?

What Doyle is doing is terrific but an operating ATSF PA? Of course people pine for that. Of course, even if Doyle painted his for Santa Fe we'd still want the second to run back to back though I suppose unpowered would be acceptable as well in that case.

Steve

So just for the sake of discussion, lets expand the scope a little....

Suppose the planning, fundraising, and structual rebuilding portion of this project take ten years which is not all that unusual for this extensive a project. You get to the point where you are ready to put a prime mover into the reconstructed carbody and while you were getting there the EPA has changed the regulations and the project is not exempt and has to meet the then-current emissions requirements.

Is a PA operating with a CAT or Cummins in a configuration that never existed on the Santa Fe less attractive to the public than a PA operating with a 251 in a configuration that never existed on the Santa Fe?

Or does it only make a difference to the railfans who show up with cameras to take pictures of the "turbo lag" smoke that the EPA doesn't want you to make anyways?

Just some thoughts for discussion.....

PC

What's wrong with initially pursing a cosmetic exterior restoration for display and later, if and when the funding and other resources are available, going for an operational restoration? Does the museum's mission even include operating equipment?

How many automotive or aircraft museums operate their artifacts?

Walt L.

The museum's ex-CN "ATSF" F9 is operational and used occasionally outside the museum. The PA project scope as I understood it from the project website does not include restoring the unit to operation, but never say "never." I think they want a 251 just to fill the hole in the middle and since it was last configured to mount a 251 and they're relatively plentiful, that was the obvious choice. Most visitors aren't going to know whether they're looking at a 251, a 16-244, a 12-244, or maybe even a block of concrete for that matter.

There's nothing wrong with pursuing a cosmetic restoration first. However, if restoration to operation is contemplated, you would need to do much more frame work than for a static display. In theory, you could restore it to presentability without taking out all those bends in the truss frame. But if you expect to run it, then you'd be undoing a bunch of "temporary" measures at that point.

Heck, one project in Britain I was dealing with ended up having to swap around trucks between units to get the ones approved by Network Rail (cast vs. fabricated) under the ones destined for mainline service.

Go the diesel genset route. Probably plenty of options to fit it all nicely within the rebuilt carbody and you would meet EPA standards.

With what, a few tubs of Bondo? Certainly a competent cosmetic (read "exterior") restoration would include structural restoration of the carbody trusses, the roof, all of that. Leave the inside for later.

Walt L.

For the record, the restoration of the ex-CNR F7 into an AT&SF loco was handled by one volunteer who busted his a** to do it. He even replaced the stolen copper cables underneath the loco and got it to cough up life. As a reward, he was promised to be first to move her under her own power, then was blown aside and told "sorry", when the time came to move her. He quit the Museum after the same experience occurred multiple times.

My opinion regarding the PA-1 would be to fix her body, straighten the frame, ready her for display, and consider replacing the PM and motors as donations come along. Dress her in "war bonnet", and run her with her sister. The gentleman I referred to in the above paragraph told me, it won't happen in his lifetime if experience is a tutor.

So okay....As long as we are conjecturing here. What if a railroad or individual came in who had deep pockets and wanted to rebuild the locomotive for operation? Should the museum give the locomotive to that railroad or should they hold on to it and do a simple cosmetic restoration?

I guess what I'm drilling down to is the importance of a museum piece vs a piece of operating history given the right situation.

SAA

I wonder what Alco friendly railroad could do it? Erie Lackawanna fielded PA's :)

Considering that this "artifact" consists of a ball of twisted metal sitting on two trucks, what would they have to lose? Someone might hurt it? how, by pushing it off of an even higher cliff than the Mexicans did?