> I dont get this. I dont understand why you
> want to pick this operation apart to say
> "I dont like the TSRR and I think it
> should go away, or loose its funding or
> whatever"....The big picture is that
> its STEAM LOCOMOTIVES THAT RUN.. and they
> are kept in good shape!
> Which would you rather, the TSRR as it is,
> or return the engines to the parks they came
> from?

> And if your going to go the route of saying
> state money is being wasted on TSRR, I'll
> say state and federal funds are wasted on
> lots of things everywhere and Im glad some
> money is being wasted keeping something I
> like alive; the difference is I dont
> consider TSRR funds a waste.

Nobody said the TSR is a waste of money, we just observe that they have been known to WASTE money.

I love this old stuff to the point that I have committed a great deal of my life to it, have rolled many a tube and dropped a driver of two in my day, and SPENT MY OWN TIME AND MONEY TO DO IT.
Just because you get to hear the whistle blow doesn't make it right.

I would rather see the State spread its rail preservation efforts around to several smaller operations that could make a difference in many small communities.

Well I agree with you.
If I had any legislative power, I would earmark funds for all preservation groups.

..ah If I were king...

Alan


adofmsu@aol.com

> you might be a
> little too critical of some things TSRR has
> no control other.....like the paint of its
> locomotives.

No control? I see you've worked there, so maybe there are things we're not aware of. Did the Texas Lege mandate red and green boilers?

> If you had the option of making
> your railroad as smooth s possible,able to
> take the weight of any locomotive you might
> want to use,wouldn't you take it?

In all honesty, Ken, no.

I would make sure the track was smooth for the speed I planned to operate, and even a little better if it extended the life of my locomotive's running gear and passenger trucks and kept my maintenance costs down. I can make a business case for that, and show a return for that investment.

But I wouldn't go hog-wild at the public feed trough, to the point of creating misleading justifications for expenditures.

I would ask for what was needed. I wouldn't gold-plate.

Just curious - if the Texas DOT built a new headquarters building and spent $10 Million on things it didn't need - better carpet (it'll last longer), higher-output HVAC systems (in case it really gets hot due to Global Warming), art in the lobby (in case a legislator drops by) - with your tax dollars, would you be as forgiving? Or would you prefer the state be a better steward of your money?

Unfortunately, the same railfans who gripe about taxes and government waste would gladly support waste at the TSRR or a steam railroad close to them. I don't.

> As far as the boiler issue is concerned my
> sources tell me that the two replacement
> boilers were needed,especially by the oldest
> locomotive.

I have heard different from several sources. In fact I've heard Templin's comment above - that they were open about not really needing new boilers, that more common Part 230 work would have resulted in locomotives with a long service life for much less money.

> Let me pose a question for you John...if the
> Texas Legislature sent out an RFP to operate
> the TSRR,who would you nominate?

The first person who comes to mind is Lindsey Ashby - he has a great track record of high-quality operations using infrastructure owned by others.

American Heritage strikes me as someone who would do well if they chose to enter this line of business, as opposed to owning everything themselves. They have done a great job bringing a sense of history to the Durango & Silverton - more so than during the entire Bradshaw era, and better than the D&RGW in the 70s.

And it would be relatively easy for an established short line operator - RailAmerica, for example - to cherrypick a John Bush or another high-calibre member of the community, and pair him with Preston Claytor or another VP to run the operation. I wouldn't have the slightest hesitation to outsource an operation to a team like that.

Fourth, go outside the box - put some railroad operating experience with a company like Xanterra, which has tons of experience managing publicly-owned properties and lots of customer-service infrastructure.

There are three options off the top of my head that can be trusted not to bleed profits off in the short term. And another that might be uncommon, but that might give a state authority a better comfort level.

If an operating contract is awarded, the concessionaire will inherit a property in great shape. A few low-cost tweaks to the operation could result in a "museum" the state can be proud of.

And with the proper controls, it can work. Does anyone see Xanterra running the properties it manages for the National Park Service into the ground and bleeding profits? Has it let the El Tovar deteriorate? It's all in how you structure the agreement and the oversight - as the C&TS example amply shows.

Again, Ken, not a personal attack. But to say "it's steam, it's great, spend whatever" is no more right than taxpayer waste in education, defense, roadbuilding - it's just pork, and in the long run there will be a backlash.

What you are seeing is the backlash. TSRR management got away with overdoing it for a while - and someone got wise. I'm not making that up - I talked to several people who received calls from that auditor last year.

JAC

> But I wouldn't go hog-wild at the public
> feed trough, to the point of creating
> misleading justifications for expenditures.

The original justification (or rationalization...or excuse) for the extensive trackwork was the intent (or the fantasy) to repair and operate the 610. The 2-10-4 would have to have high-quality, heavy-duty track to operate on had that come about.

> Unfortunately, the same railfans who gripe
> about taxes and government waste would
> gladly support waste at the TSRR or a steam
> railroad close to them. I don't.

Amen.

Keep in mind there were extensive changes in TSRR's upper management recently. At least one position was held by the same person since the park opened 25-30 years ago. It will be interesting to see how things operate with the new folks in place.

71446975@quixnet.net

> Amen.

Not that you would EVER be the type to gripe about the givverment, now, woulja? ;)

WAKE UP UHMERICA!!

JAC

(you wanna know what makes me SICK?)

The ideal operator of TSR would be Strasburg RR...they have the proven safety record, high calibre quality of work/craftsmanship and boiler maintenance acumen to make the TSR a well-oiled machine. Not that it isn't already, but the TSR would be in good hands if privatized. I could sleep well at night if the TSR was in the good hands of Linn, Kelly, et al. I'm praying that EBT and C&TS someday ends up in SRR's hands as an operator. They would be ideal.

> Keep in mind there were extensive changes in
> TSRR's upper management recently. At least
> one position was held by the same person
> since the park opened 25-30 years ago. It
> will be interesting to see how things
> operate with the new folks in place.

GE,
The National Park Service can't advertise at all, but since we are a seperate company, there is no restriction on us advertising, although anything that mentions the NPS has to be OK'd by the park.

B. Allan

http://www.cvsr.com
cvsrkahuna@aol.com

And the new extension makes the paper ... this should be quite a ride! Link provided in case you don't check Flimsies


http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ss
lamontdc@adelphia.net