I never said it wasn't doable. If that was what it came off as, then that was completely unintentional. All I was getting at is that I don't see it happening. That's all.



Unfortunately, no, I don't know that from experience. By the time my passion for steam locomotives had really kicked into high gear, Frisco #1522 had already been retired. I never got to see the ol' girl run (in person, that is). I do hope she runs again someday.



That is, essentially, what I was trying to get at. There are a lot of things that have to align just right for that to happen, and I just don't see it happening.



Here comes my personal taste with steam locomotives. Personally, I'd prefer see UP #844, #3985, & #4014 all running together before all 3 of the N&W's trademark classes would run together. That's just my opinion. I'm just more a fan of UP steam than N&W steam. LONG LIVE, BIG BOY!!!!! The King of the Rails will run again!

Chris -

If we're starting a 3 steamers from one railroad made operational and running together, my vote goes to Chicago, Burlington & Quincy's O1A class 2-8-2, S4 class 4-6-4 and O5B class 4-8-4. Okay, I know we're not changing this thread, so please disregard this missive. But, since you brought it up, how is the cosmetic restoration of Wabash 2-6-0 #573 coming along anyway?

Les

Les,

Last time I saw it back in December, it looked good. The volunteers had to do a lot of work just to get the rot repaired in the cab squared up. The rest of the locomotive received a lot of attention as well. I believe they had PVC pipe on the boiler as "lagging" for installation of the boiler jacket back in December. I'm curious about an update as well.

The 573 actually operated at MOT for a short period after it was donated.

David

Actually, to clarify: "All steam locomotives are restricted to 40 mph at all times" has been in NS Operating Rules ever since 1988. It was in a 1988 rule book/ETT given to me at the Asheville NRHS convention in 1989 and every subsequent NS rule book/ETT/Special Operations section I've looked at since.

It made NS steam excursions in the late 1980s and early 1990s nicely chase-able, even if on rare occasion they may have picked up the speed a tad to make up lost time.....

UP ETT Special Instruction list maximum authorized speed for the E9's, DDA40X, 844 and 3985 as 84 mph, and have for decades.

NS's willingness to move older equipment would appear to be an interesting fall out of the new steam program. I'm guessing this is happening at both the upper and middle management level. In recently times, we've seen NS move C&O 614, now 611, and the huge and complex operation of the various streamliners. And now the Y. Not to mention the operation of 630 and 765 (and soon 4501).

Kudos to all those on this board who are working on these moves, maintaining the relations with NS and making all this happen. Most of you likely can not talk about it, but here is a big thank you, as well as a thanks to NS.

Bob

I kinda saw it as if a Y6 is on display, the disappearance of an A would be less noticeable....

Let us all hope this opens a door for similar short-term display of a certain DL&W 4-4-0c at Steamtown. Maybe now is the time?

Rob

N&W 611 is her way to NCTM. She be back up and running whenever the rebuild is all finish. Here's are some highlights:

Coupling The 611 5/24/2014
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-l7B7gOkoN4

Class J 611 Roanoke VA.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqYs_aM9HFo

N&W J-Class 611 Leaving Museum for rebuild (May 24 2014)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxzeA24YPOU

Farewell N&W 611! 5/24/14 #Save611
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm0f2Ev98b8

611 rolling by for restoration
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNF14YNvMgc

N&W 611 rolling by for restoration
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdWCRoy7d9E

Interesting to see N&W 2156 going to Roanoke to a few years, but what about the other N&W Y Class Loco...

Norfolk & Western 2050
http://www.rgusrail.com/album/ilirmshed/nw_2050_01.jpg
http://www.rgusrail.com/album/ilirmshed/nw_2050_02.jpg
http://www.rgusrail.com/album/ilirmshed/nw_2050_03.jpg
http://www.rgusrail.com/album/ilirmshed/nw_2050_06.jpg

Every time anyone brings up an N&W Y Class it's always about N&W 2156 and NOT N&W 2050. These same people also say that a Y Class locomotive SHOULD be Home in Roanoke. SLMOT & VMT are both going to get something they want in the end.

The Y is most likely the filler engine for the spot where 611 sat. As far as I can tell, VMT doesn't have anything that could really fill that spot.

And I'm with Robert on this one. Hopefully this opens up a door for 952 to make a trip home.

Several posters have mentioned DL&W 952. Many threads have appeared over the years discussing the merits of the litigation regarding that artifact. The relevance to the current thread is in the outcome of the litigation. My take on reading the Decisions is that the Court permanently divided the title to the locomotive from the basic property right of possession.

In reading of the arrangement to return the Y-6a to Roanoke as described in this thread, it will be interesting to see if, in light of the 952 litigation, history will, as it so often does, repeat itself. If it does not, the juxtaposition of these three transactions is a valuable illustration of the necessity to protect one’s interests with a well-drafted contract before any equipment changes hands.

From “Steam Over Scranton: The Locomotives of Steamtown” by Gordon Chappell (1991) page 291.

(Note, this is also available online on NPS’ Steamtown website in the “Special History Study” at the link below)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/steamtown/shs5c.htm

New York, Chicago and St. Louis Railroad GP-9 Diesel-Electric Locomotive No. 514

History: The Norfolk Southern Corporation came to life in March 1982 with Interstate Commerce Commission approval to merge the Norfolk and Western Railway and the Southern Railway into one mostly end-to-end system, blanketing the southeastern United States from New Orleans, Louisiana; Mobile, Alabama; and Palatka, Florida, north to Washington, D.C., and to Memphis, Tennessee (principally the territory of the old Southern Railway), and from Norfolk, Virginia, westward through West Virginia to Cincinnati, Ohio, and as far as East St. Louis, Illinois (largely the territory of the old Norfolk and Western Railway).

Meanwhile, the transportation museum at Roanoke, Virginia, had obtained on loan from the Steamtown Foundation in Vermont for temporary exhibit the "A" Class former Norfolk and Western 2-6-6-4 articulated Locomotive No. 1218. Over a period of years that museum came to regard the locomotive as its property, not a loan, and the Norfolk and Western (N&W) eventually got into the matter when it desired to overhaul the locomotive for operation for publicity purposes, railfan excursions, and other special events. While the Steamtown Foundation apparently had a clear title to the locomotive and the Roanoke museum did not, the N&W put further pressure on the Steamtown group by indicating it would never allow the locomotive to move over its rails out of Roanoke, effectively the only way Steamtown could get it back. Since Steamtown had no answer to this stand, and was by then in the process of moving to Scranton, Pennsylvania, the Steamtown Board decided to accept two diesel- electric locomotives from the Norfolk and Western, which by then had come under the corporate umbrella of the Norfolk Southern, in exchange for giving the Norfolk Southern clear title to No. 1218.

Before creation of the Norfolk Southern, the Norfolk and Western had recently merged with the old Nickel Plate Road, known by the corporate name of New York, Chicago and St. Louis Railroad, and with the Wabash Railroad, acquiring from those firms not only their track but all their locomotives, which left the consolidated Norfolk and Western and eventually the Norfolk Southern with surplus and somewhat out-of-date motive power. Thus it proved no problem for the Norfolk Southern to come up with a Nickel Plate GP-9, No. 514, and a former Wabash SW-8 switcher to offer in exchange for No. 1218, a small price to pay for so valuable and rare a steam locomotive.

I was wondering how long it would take for the 952 issue to rear it's head again. I thought this had been settled in court, and beat to death by the posters on these sites.

What I'm curious about is why there has been no comment from anyone "official" at either MOT or VMT.

It was announced on MOT's Facebook page. Something doesn't have "happen" on RYPN for it to actually happen. Also, from the VMT end, Gary Gray has probably been busy the last week or so.

As this thread develops, I see some of the tendencies that make RYPN and other forums maddening these days. However, to keep the conversation productive, let us address some of the salient points:

1. The 952 case: Scranton Yard's summation of the case could not be further off. The Court decided that the Lackawanna Chapter waited too long to assert its claim on the locomotive, and thus the statute of limitations expired. Case closed. The decision was affirmed by a Federal Appellate Court.

2. The big problem with the 952 was that there was no written agreement, and thus different interpretations of what was agreed to. This problem over disagreement over what was agreed only got worse as the principals involved in the deal ceased to be with us. That is a bad way to do business, period. I would almost guarantee that the agreement with the 2156 is in writing. I seriously doubt there will be a repeat of that event. Anyone that thinks otherwise, does not live in reality.

3. MOT is a national collection, especially the steam locomotive collection. VMT, by their own admission is a regional museum (and a very good one at that). To assert that an item does not "belong" at MOT as it never operated in Missouri displays a basic misunderstanding of the scope and focus of the collection. John H. White praised MOT years ago for assembling the best collection explaining the technological advance of the steam locomotive in the United States.

4. Several years ago, during a break in work, I and other MOT volunteers had a discussion with MOT management. The topic of the collection being a target for other groups and museums came up. The person reported that, on average, MOT gets 1-2 requests a week from other museums and organizations requesting that MOT give up a piece of equipment to them. This is outside the deaccession process MOT went through a few years ago. The requests are for items in the remaining collection. It was reported that most of the requests were polite, but others were outright humorous, demanding that MOT return "their" piece of equipment.

As someone who spent exactly 9 years in St. Louis and most of that time was a MOT volunteer, I find such requests both humorous and a little upsetting. MOT has long been a target by other museums for particular items in the collection, as well as the butt of many a joke about the infamous state of disrepair the place was in during the 1970s and early 1980s. MOT, through its management, Saint Louis County, and its volunteers have made tremendous strides to improve the place since the county assumed control in the 1980s. To pontificate that the museum should disperse its collection, or call it names like "Museum of Trashport" is a real slap in the face to that hard work.

In another thread, someone stated that we might be entering a new golden age of preservation. I tend to agree. One of the fruits of this new age is cooperation. Museums agreeing to loan equipment, events like the one happening next weekend in Spencer, well-planned and executed fundraising campaigns like VMT's "Fire up 611" campaign are all hallmarks of this new golden age. Instead of relying on the same old tactics such as demanding the "return" of equipment, etc., learn to work within this new framework.

If you want 952 on display in Steamtown for a year or two, then you have to ask yourself, what can your organization offer MOT? Frankly, I'd be loathe to let the 952 go to Pennsylvania, lest the Lackawanna group try to get some sort of injunction in an attempt to re-litigate the matter.

If you want another museum to loan you a piece of equipment, think of a plan, make contacts, be polite, and execute it. If you want to fire up "ole 97" look at the VMT campaign as an example of how to do it. If you want to expand your membership, grow fundraising and put your organization on a better footing, learn from other organizations and museums that have done so.

We really do live in a time where there are few limits to the possibilities. The real limit is often ourselves, as exhibited in our own failure to grow and adapt to the times, learn from others, and be willing to try different tactics to get what our organizations want or need.

Jeez, all I did was ask what I thought was a legitimate question. I am thrilled that this sort of cooperation is taking place. I have no axe to grind with MOT or VMT -- I was simply curious. I'm an old guy, and I guess I don't think Facebook is a legitimate place to make such an announcement. That's all. Period. End of story.