Every operating program out there can and should invite interested young people to take part under suprvision. Parents are usually willing to subsidize these efforts through puchasing memberships which cover workers comp, safety equipment which every worker should personally own, etc. We don't need a special fund to make this happen. Costs are outweighted by benefits in terms of youthful, vital people getting work done and whatever incidentals are incurred can be figured into project budgets.

Keep working on that endowment, TJ.

dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

At the present time the 4-6-0 #66 is buried upside down almost on top of D&RG rotary ON near mile marker 4.9.The lead truck for the # 66 is sitting up near the right of way. 2-8-2 # 196 is buried just to the north of them. The top of 4-6-0 # 67's boiler is visible when the river is low it is buried near the cemetery. 4-6-0 # 62 is buried near the road out to the cemetery. At least two tender tanks are visible in the rivers edge. The are two tender tanks that were uncovered in the late 80's in the weeds near the old courthouse. 2-8-0 # 61 and 4-6-0 # 60 are presently stored at the north end of the Skagway yard. In May the # 61 was sold shortly afterwards it was stood upright after laying on its side since it was drug out of the river in 1988. It will be moved to Wisconsin for restoration.

greenchili@tds.net

> At the present time the 4-6-0 #66 is buried
> upside down almost on top of D&RG rotary
> ON near mile marker 4.9.The lead truck for
> the # 66 is sitting up near the right of
> way. 2-8-2 # 196 is buried just to the north
> of them. The top of 4-6-0 # 67's boiler is
> visible when the river is low it is buried
> near the cemetery. 4-6-0 # 62 is buried near
> the road out to the cemetery. At least two
> tender tanks are visible in the rivers edge.
> The are two tender tanks that were uncovered
> in the late 80's in the weeds near the old
> courthouse. 2-8-0 # 61 and 4-6-0 # 60 are
> presently stored at the north end of the
> Skagway yard. In May the # 61 was sold
> shortly afterwards it was stood upright
> after laying on its side since it was drug
> out of the river in 1988. It will be moved
> to Wisconsin for restoration.

To WHOMEVER at Mid-West:

Thanks for the great update on these "rip-rap" locomotives. You have really given us the goods on what is located where. Great to realize that some of these will/have apparently been recovered and will be restored.

Thanks again.

Les Beckman (Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum/North Judson, Indiana)


midlandblb@cs.com

> 5) TV did not exist (and probably still does
> not in some parts of the country) until
> fairly recently. eg, from what I remember,
> in Wellington NZ, TV did not exist in the
> '60s. So, you still have a generation of
> people who grew up without such mind-numbing
> distractions.

> Just my thoughts on a fascinating country.

About 15-18 years ago the brother of a good friend was a Coast Guard officer attached to the US Embassy in Wellington. I am told that he likened New Zealand to the USA in the 1950s.

Like to get down there some day.

Brian Norden

These NZ locos and the WP&Y loco stories give inspiration to a huge number of would-be loco restorers. I do believe there are three Santa Fe Mikados in a river basin, someplace out west. Periodically, one see photos of a driver or axle sticking out of the dry river bed. The engines were the victims of a washed out bridge, if I recall correctly. At least one has been partially butchered to remove obstructions in the waterway. Is there any reason to think that one or two restorable locomotives might be built from the parts of three? Is anyone going to go after them? Anyone have pictures?


glueck@maine.edu

> These NZ locos and the WP&Y loco stories
> give inspiration to a huge number of
> would-be loco restorers. I do believe there
> are three Santa Fe Mikados in a river basin,
> someplace out west. Periodically, one see
> photos of a driver or axle sticking out of
> the dry river bed. The engines were the
> victims of a washed out bridge, if I recall
> correctly. At least one has been partially
> butchered to remove obstructions in the
> waterway. Is there any reason to think that
> one or two restorable locomotives might be
> built from the parts of three? Is anyone
> going to go after them? Anyone have
> pictures?

Richard:

As I recall the story (originally published in the old Locomotive & Railway Preservation Magazine as I recall), I believe that at least one of the locomotives was a AT&SF 2-6-2 Prairie type. I also seem to recall that the bridge and river were somewhere in Kansas. Still, it sure would be nice to recover on of those AT&SF Mikado's, none of which were preserved by the Santa Fe.

Les Beckman (Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum/North Judson, Indiana)

midlandblb@cs.com

The three locomotives are:

2-6-2 #1035 (Baldwin 19764/1901)
2-8-2 #3167 (Baldwin ?????/????)
2-8-2 #4076 (Baldwin ?????/????)

All three are off the AT&SF bridge over the Kansas (Kaw) River in Topeka, Kansas. All three were parked on the bridge in the hold they would keep it from being washed away; they obviously didn't. I have also heard that one was torn apart to clear the way for navigation; but I don't know which one.

These are three of 49 steam locomotives I have heard are sunk across North America, along with 8 buried and at least seven abandoned in remote locations. All but maybe the buried ones would be basket cases now; neat to see, but questionable if they should be retrieved while we leave endangered and derelict park engines in far better shape to rot or to be scrapped.

To put it another way: I have listed 147 steam locomotives in New Zealand. Of these, 49 are/were operational, 25 were under restoration, two sunk in deep water, three derelict, and 14 (including the three in the original story) dismantled. In other words, 50% of their locomotive fleet are either operational or undergoing restoration, while 14% are dismantled or derelict.

In comparison, of the 2215 I have listed in North America, 424 are or were recently operational, 100 were undergoing restoration of some kind, 26 are derelict (some would argue many more if you include many park engines I have listed "Display/plinthe"), and 10 are dismantled.

So, of the North American fleet, roughly 24% are or could be made operational while 4% of ours (including sunk/buried/abandoned locomotives) are dismanted or derelict.

The number of "park queens" in New Zealand is tiny (I only have nine listed as "Display/plinthe"), while roughly 75% of ours are static exhibits above water/ground, many needing cosmetic restoration, fencing, and shelter. It would make far better sense to invest money in preserving our display locomotives (several of the AT&SF locomotives I have seen on display could use it) than to invest a large amount of money into retrieving the ones that are lost.

The dramatic efforts you hear going into retriving and saving warbirds is taking place because all of the remaining examples are in private hands or museums; with few if any rotting on display in a park somewhere.

-James Hefner
Hebrews 10:20a

> Richard:

> As I recall the story (originally published
> in the old Locomotive & Railway
> Preservation Magazine as I recall), I
> believe that at least one of the locomotives
> was a AT&SF 2-6-2 Prairie type. I also
> seem to recall that the bridge and river
> were somewhere in Kansas. Still, it sure
> would be nice to recover on of those
> AT&SF Mikado's, none of which were
> preserved by the Santa Fe.

> Les Beckman (Hoosier Valley Railroad
> Museum/North Judson, Indiana)


Surviving World Steam Project
james@survivingworldsteam.com

James,

Those are some very interesting and telling statistics.

Along this line, I've often wondered why the Smithsonian saved hundreds of aircraft from certain scrapping but only a very few steam locomotives. It's a real pity there isn't a "Silver Hill" containing examples of some of the "extinct" classes of steam locomotives.

Does anyone know why the Smithsonian didn't save more steam? Were there any efforts by them to do so?

Regards,
Hugh Odom

> The dramatic efforts you hear going into
> retriving and saving warbirds is taking
> place because all of the remaining examples
> are in private hands or museums; with few if
> any rotting on display in a park somewhere.

> -James Hefner
> Hebrews 10:20a


The Ulimate Steam Page
whodom2001@yahoo.com

Hugh,

I believe that is because one of the founders of the Smithsonian is Professor Langley. He was a counterpart of the Wright Bros., and an early avaiation pioneer. One or two of his aircraft are in the Air & Space Museum. The unmanned prototypes was steam powered, and one flew briefly down the Potomac River.

(Signage on his planes claimed that he made the first manned flight, a situation that caused the Wright Bros. to send the Wright Flyer to Great Britain for display until World War II.)

The Smithsonian definitely favors aircraft over all other forms of transportation, they don't have an extensive automobile collection either; to the best of my knowledge.

-James Hefner
Hebrews 10:20a

> James,

> Those are some very interesting and telling
> statistics.

> Along this line, I've often wondered why the
> Smithsonian saved hundreds of aircraft from
> certain scrapping but only a very few steam
> locomotives. It's a real pity there isn't a
> "Silver Hill" containing examples
> of some of the "extinct" classes
> of steam locomotives.

> Does anyone know why the Smithsonian didn't
> save more steam? Were there any efforts by
> them to do so?

> Regards,
> Hugh Odom


Surviving World Steam Project
james@survivingworldsteam.com

> The Smithsonian definitely favors aircraft
> over all other forms of transportation, they
> don't have an extensive automobile
> collection either; to the best of my
> knowledge.

Woah, woah, it's not like there is some sort of National City Lines anti-rail pro-air conspiracy in the highest ranks of the Smithsonian.

There are two, two-word answers to the question of why the Smithsonian has such a broad and high-quality aircraft collection: one is "Paul Garber" and the other is "Air Force."

First, Paul Garber. Until at least the 1960s, Smithsonian collecting was governed largely by the research interests of individual curators and administrators. Paul was hired as a conservator in the 1920s and he was a passionate enthusiast for aviation. He had the coruage to ask, beg and wheedle for a lot of early aircraft when they were avialable, and he eventually had enough bureaucratic pull to find places to squirrel them away. He is to aviation what the St. Louis folks were to steam engines--right man, right time, right enthusiam, right bureaucratic position.

Sencond, the Air Force. The Washington area is home to the Pentagon as well as the Smithsonian, and it's also home to an enormous number of generals and retired generals. After WWII the newly-independent Air Force, having escaped from the US Army, was perhaps the most public-relations conscious of all the services. Hap Arnold, the Air Force Chief of Staff and architect of the strategic bombing of Japan, wanted the Air Force's role in WWII and (what he saw to be) it linchpin role in future defence to be spread and memorialized. A whole army of retired Air Force officers slotted into leadership positions with defense contractors wanted the same thing, and were in a position to lobby for it. A Smithsonian Air Museum was an obvious answer to this need.

As one biographer of Garber writes "At the end of the war, General Hap Arnold and Senator Jennings Randolph had an idea that there should be an Air Museum. Arnold gave orders to preserve one each of all significant aircraft of World War II. Garber recalls, "I knew Jennings Randolph, so I helped a little bit in the wording of the public law that established this Museum. That was Public Law number 722 of the 79th Congress, signed by President Truman on August 12th, 1946."

Garber became Curator, Head Curator and then Senior Historian."

So there you have it. A dedicated, increadibly passionate curator, who aligned his interests with a vast and rising force in Washington policics and buearucratic life. USAF guys have been major drivers of the museum ever since, supplying a lot of its directors, and a great deal of the push that led to construction of the museum on the mall in time for the bicentennial in 1976. Garber himself lived until 1992, encouraging and inspiring everyone around him. I knew him a little, and I was only born in 1967!

So, its not that the Smithsonian had anything against trains, it's just that trains were common and ubiquitous and no less but no more improtant than farm tractors or stationary steam engines or atom smashers or medical devices or anything else the (as it was then known) museum of History and Technology collected. The rail collection did not have a single passionate advocate like Garber (at least until Jack White came, and he did secure some very nice stuff). Most of all, there was no "United States Railway Force" headquartered across the Potomac River and no vast retired corps of well-off retired railway preseidents working for huge railway equipment contractors, hanging around the Mall, and conspiring to do splahsy things to raise the profile of the "USRF".

eledbetter@rypn.org

One parting observation: the new "America on the Move" exhibit at NMAH is only trains and cars, and it is the single largest and most expensive exhibit NMAH has ever mounted.

Obvious we here on this board will think that's as it should be, but one could argue that this is actually a lot of attention and space and money given to ground transportation in a museum whose charter covers all of American history, including such bagatelles as the Revolution, Civil War, suffrage movement, industrial revolution, immigration, civil rights movement, and so on and so on.

eledbetter@rypn.org

> Woah, woah, it's not like there is some sort
> of National City Lines anti-rail pro-air
> conspiracy in the highest ranks of the
> Smithsonian.

Eric,

I did not mean to imply such. I thought that Paul Garber was another reason for the Smithsonian's extensive aircraft collection, but I did not know the history. No wonder they named the restoration facility after him!

I subscribed to Air & Space Magazine since day one, and for many years afterwards. I have also visited the Air & Space Smithsonian as well. Aircraft are an area of interest to me as well; and I figured there were directors with an interest in aerospace that lead to such a great collection.

The Smithsonian is mind-boggling in it's scope; and like most museums only a fraction of their collection is viewable by the public at any time.

-James Hefner
Hebrews 10:20a


Surviving World Steam Project
james@survivingworldsteam.com

One other point about the Smithsonian's air collection-I forget the gent's name, but a very wealthy individual (Hungarian descent?) recently paid for a HUGE display building out by Dulles Airport, I believe. Too bad there aren't any such well-heeled individuals who have a similar passion for railroads.

I forget the gent's name, but a
> very wealthy individual (Hungarian descent?)
> recently paid for a HUGE display building
> out by Dulles Airport, I believe.

Steven F. Udvar Hazy; yes, a Hungarian immigarnt who made a fortune in the aircarft parts and components industry. The NASM Dulles Annex is named in his honor; it opens to the public in just a few days.



eledbetter@rypn.org

Both Erik's and John's points well taken, a couple of other points should be noted. One is that many of the individual aircraft displayed have played a significant role in world history, two examples being the Enola Gay and the 367-80. Can any of us think of two individual steam locomotives that have had a comparible impact on world history? Probably not. Also bear in mind that many of the aircraft were set aside for preservation by their previous owners (mostly corporations). Boeing donated the 367-80 and was heavily involved in the restoration of both the -80 and the 307 (twice!).

Part of all this comes down to public relations and the recognition of stewardship responsibilities. Boeing realizes that assisting the restoration of the 367-80 and the 307 did two things: first, it provided them good public relations and second, it assured preservation of two significant Boeing aircraft that changed aviation and world history. They have not released any financial figures as to restoration costs that I know of, but they were definately in the millions of dollars, counting both actual financial costs and value of donated labor (sorry guys, but only certified A&Ps could do some of the work). I'm certain that similar donations or presentations from EMD or GE's locomotive division would be welcome, if they gave any consideration to restoring a historically significant locomotive design and presenting it to the Smithsonian. Their restoration would only cost them a fraction of what it cost Boeing to restore two museum piece aircraft to flying condition. A lot of this comes right down to corporate culture folks. Then perhaps if the Smithsonian a large collection in need of a display site, then maybe a big donor would come forward. That's what happened in this case!

awalker2002@comcast.net