In their possible defense, there are times when, although the idea of enabling preservation of a surplus asset elsewhere might seem like a noble goal, the reality and practicalities of the matter are more akin to offering up one of those vintage automobiles with no engine, no transmission, rusted-through fenders, seat frames at best, and rotted interior. Sure, someone can go ahead and spend $25,000 "restoring" that thing into an operable vintage car--one that will still only sell for $4,000 tops when done.

The difference is that a private hobbyist working in his garage can do an automobile himself/herself with no accountability to anyone else. A locomotive typically involved the effort of a group--usually non-profit, with far too few assets, resources, and volunteers. And if any rich tycoon wants to put a shell of a U-boat in his backyard and not have to worry about the rest of the group, they can figure out how to hunt these folks down and make a cash offer.

Sometimes being the responsible custodian means knowing when something is an albatross instead of an asset. Ask any librarian who has to weed out obsolete library books that have become little more than recycling or BTU fodder (Complete Dummies' Guide to Windows 95, anyone?).

Thanks Alexander for your comments. There are just some units that have more value as donors. SARM has rebuilt several locomotives for local use or for contract purposes. I don't think that everyone understands what is going to happen to 3910 as a part of completely restoring 3965.

First, all wheels and traction motors will be inspected on 3910, and any that are good will be pulled for use on 3965 now, or as spares for it or other projects. This means that 3910 may now be sitting on the ground when this process is done.

Next, all glass, controls, bulbs, and any similar parts will be pulled to replace any parts on 3965 that can be improved, or for spares or other projects. Next, any doors or similar body parts that can be improved on 3965 (or other locos) will be pulled from 3910. We have several of these or similar GE locos that are waiting for parts.

Next to be pulled will be any engine parts, batteries, etc., that are useful that would help keep other GEs running. Cab seats and other parts get saved or used too. The high nose and cab front may have value as several locos with cut noses are around and it can be used to restore them back to their original look

If all goes as expected, what will be left of 3910 is a pile of scrap metal and a bad engine block. Any good parts will be stored for future maintenance and repairs of 3965 and other GEs on site, or to be collected. If anyone wants to acquire 3910, they will have to cover the value of all of these parts and pieces that we will have for further restorations.

Hope that answers why we say 3910 will be parted and then scrapped. We've done several and just understand what is often left.

Sorry...too many numbers. 3910 was the loco we hoped to get as an operating unit. 3937 is what we had already as a hulk. It is 3937 that we will be parting. Sorry, Freudian slip and too many deadlines at work.

A retired NS man, has a youtube account where he posts various videos every day or so, he caught this yesterday!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHjpJ6O0ANo

Going back two posts, you do realize that ALL cars in a push-pull set (with engine at one end, cab car/powerpack at the other) have to have MU cables through them and a main air reservoir line. LIRR had a great advantage in that they used MU cars, with wiring that could be reassigned and MR lines already in place. I am very familiar with the FAs, and have done a bit of electrical troubleshooting a former LIRR (ex-MU) coach, so I do know what I'm talking about...

SARM seems to have their act together. What else need be said ?

Dave

Bart, you folks are doing the right thing.

Unless some of the idea people show up with money, of course.

This is pure argle-bargle.

I cannot seem to find 'argle-bargle' in Black's.

More importantly I think CameronW has misunderstood the term 'scrap' as used by SARM and simply may not grasp either the amount of work and money involved in a locomotive restoration or the reality that the only source for the parts may well be another locomotive. Every usable component of that unit is being saved for use. It is not simply being cut up and tossed in the tip.

GME

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/argle-bargle

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/argle-bargle

>;-)

I've found it in a couple of Scalia's dissenting opinions. Recently, it was featured in Bryan Garner's daily legal writing email, which I receive, along with the term "jiggery-pokery"

Being of Scotts descent I am very familiar with the term. I suspect that one of the reasons I finally chose to study the law was that I was accused of it regularly from the time I could speak.

Brother Wilkins, I do not have a hard copy of Garner's on my desk. (My granddaughter does but I am not going to bother her as I may not hear the end of it.) The online Garner's simply links one back to the OED. I do read his blog regularly and I am aware that Professor Garner is Editor-in-Chief of Black's. I am sufficiently old school (or perhaps that's just old) enough to prefer to keep colloquialisms out of formal legal writing - and it's still my name on the door.

Do not start me on some of Mr. Justice Scalia's dissents.

GME

As a child, my father regularly (jokingly) accused me of partaking in chicanery and skullduggery. Many years later, here I am, a licensed professional attorney.

I keep such words out of my formal writing as well, but RYPN is far from formal legal writing.

My mother bought me the Garner CLE seminar on legal writing for my birthday a few years ago. It was a transformative experience, far more educational than what I learned about legal writing in law school. As a result, I now find Garner's works to be very helpful. In a profession where one is primarily a writer, the vast majority of the profession are poor writers. I've learned that a well-written brief and well-written motion can work wonders. I say this while eating my lunch, taking a break from trying to decipher some gobbley gook from opposing counsel. It makes Mr. Riffin look like Shakespeare.

Would that be Sir Walter Scott, or the paper towel company?

Yours, etc.
Someone of Scots Descent About To Go Out For a Scottish Ale

Och, wouldnae that be Tommie Scott who did sae much ta foond the Southern Railway?

Pass me the Scotch; i need more than a wee dram after that...