James,

I didn't say not to raise them, I am saying that if you do it would be costly. When they can raise Russian submarines from 300' down in the Arctic Ocean; surely they can raise these engines. But that is the easy part.

Sometime about 1960 a Great Lakes wooden coasting schooner called the Alvin Clark was found off the coast of Michigan. It was raised and identified. But there was never any serious money to conserve the vessel. It desproyed the owners life, left him bankrupt and was eventually dumped into the landfill. A sad story all around.

Study them sure, Maybe even take them apart under water, but leave them down there for some future time when more advanced chemistry is available than now.

You know better than most that there are so many steam engines above water that need preservation. Help them first.

You were going to e mail me about my beam engine; when you get a chance.

Ted Miles

ted_miles@nps.gov

> From the web page: "They rest on the
> bottom, about twenty feet apart and are
> virtually parallel to each other."

> That they are both parallel and at least one
> is upright (possibly both, but the web page
> does not say) argues against their being
> washed, or dumped overboard.

> Without more information, I suspect the ship
> or barge they were on foundered, and went
> down gently. Chances are, a search of
> newspapers or insurance records for ship
> wrecks in the time frame James suggests will
> provide the answer.

I agree and I'll bet the locos are resting on whats left of the ship. For two additional successful raisings see:
http://www.1856.com/
http://www.nps.gov/vick/cairo/cairo.htm
and learn a little about our past, including steam technology.

lamontdc@adelphia.net

> Wasn't this site mentioned in a Brief on
> RYPN around this time last year? I know that
> I saw this page somewhere before.

You know Dave, I think it may have been.. I've seen the page before as well...

eledbetter@rypn.org

Note that the locomotives could be raised and preserved much more easily if we keep them in water. Since the Hunley's raising, it has been kept in a tank of de-oxygenated cold fresh water. Granted, you need a big tank and some significant mechanical equipment, but you don't need the array of chemicals and years of treatment that dry storage would require.

Chemical treatment of the Hunley hasn't started yet, and they have been able to periodically drain the tank (for days at a time) to allow artifacts to be removed from the sub's interior. This same technique would allow the two locomotives to be examined in detail on the surface.

Plans are to eventually do the full chemical treatment on the Hunley which will allow prolonged exposure to air without the sub disintegrating. That step could be put off indefinitely for these locos, or until such time that Bill Gates (or someone similar) acquires an interest in steam!

Good Steaming,
Hugh Odom

The Ultimate Steam Page
whodom@awod.com

For those few of us "into" 19th c. steam, this is very cool indeed! Thanks for sharing.

K.R. Bell

> Noted hardhat-diving authority Jim Boyd
> (yes, the former Railfan editor) has alerted
> me to the following web site, highlighting
> two identical 2-2-2's discovered off the
> coast of New Jersey.

> Investigation of the wreck and the locos is
> continuing. Apparently what threw off the
> investigation was earlier identification of
> a 1942 sinking of a ship known to be
> carrying locomotives. That vessel has now
> been determined to be several miles from
> this one.

> Several minor artifacts have been recovered
> in hopes of identifying the loco, including
> an unmarked loco bell and a whistle made by
> H.N. Hooper of Boston(?). All signs,
> including the wheel arrangement general
> design, copious amounts of nonferrous metal
> used, etc. point to a VERY ancient
> locomotive, possibly of British origin.

> Jack White has been summoned into the
> investigation. Stay tuned.


http://rrmuseumpa.org

James,

Just a slight correction. Patterson is quite a few miles from the Hudson River.

You do raise an interesting question about whether these were being shipped from a NJ builder. That would be a pretty cool event.

I used to think the engines at Allaire were the closest to my house, but if these girls are off the Hook, they are my neighbors!

;-)

Rob Davis

> The "mud hole" where these
> locomotives are located are near Sandy Hook
> and the mouth of the Hudson River. Paterson,
> NJ is on the Hudson River, and three
> railroad builders (Rogers Locomotive Works,
> Cooke Locomotive and Machine Works, and New
> Jersey Locomotive) were located in Paterson.
> ("C. P. Huntington" was built by
> Danforth, Cooke, & Co. in 1863.)

trains@robertjohndavis.com

Rob, if you have a swimming pool we can use Rudd can rig an electrolysis tank.

Dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

I was looking for a job I can retire from at 90!!!
I realize you meant this in jest, but in seriousness, electrolysis prob. isn't what you'd want here... the treatment the Hunley is getting is better, you don't have to separate EVERY piece.. that would include separating the boiler sheets from ea. other for example. Electrolysis is great for single objects (cannons, projectiles, and the like) but doesn't work on assembles too well..

> I was looking for a job I can retire from at
> 90!!!

Think we will live that long? If so I will help you out.

Dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

> Let me say this about these engines. THEY
> SHOULD STAY WHERE THEY ARE!

> Conservation of metal that has been under
> water for long periods is difficult and
> expensive. What rail group has millions of
> dollars to spend on them?

> The USS Monitor artifacts and the CSS
> Hundley are costing millios of dollars to
> conserve.

> Even if there was the money available; I
> would rather see an operational East
> Broadtop RR or a new J1A Hudson or miles of
> electric Interurban line with restored cars
> running over it, to name a few items off the
> top of my head.

> Ted Miles

Overall, I have to agree with you. As a community (railfan) we need to choose our projects carefully because of the limit on our financial resources.

That said, we should consider the historical value and location of these locos. If the locos were a common 0-6-0 switcher lying at the bottom of Lake Superior near Isle Royale, I would say LEAVE IT. Cold, low oxygen freshwater is a remarkable preservative. For example, the S.S. Kamloops is in great preserved condition at 20 fathoms. I've heard that some of the bodies from the wreck in 1927 (?) were in preserved condition when Cousteau visited in the 1970's.

However, these early 2-2-2 are very uncommon and are in salt water. Salt water is one of the most destructive solvents of metals known to man. Part of the reason that they raised the Hunley and Monitor was to arrest decay.

I would suggest that these locomotives would be of interest to the Smithsonian and they would have the resources, technical expertise, and institutional support/overhead to tackle such a project.

So, if you want to preserve these locos, contact your representatives and the folks at the Smithsonian.

Charles

bg23338@binghamton.edu

If it's true that "only the good die young", crotchety old f**ts like us should live forever!
(which would, BTW, prob. be about how long it would take me to run all those pieces!) If you could give a hand, I can see a great number of evening's at Vinnie's Pizza after the day.