I will leave specifics to another day.

What it boils down to is:
my opinion is that Steamtown N.H.S. is supposed to be glorifying the great days of steam.
How does a diesel powered excursion train do that?
When Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public show up to ride the excursion at the "national park" of steam, and they see diesels coupled onto the front of (or instead of) the steam locomotive, they don't know or care about tractive effort, or slippery rails, or mountain grades. They just learned that the "old steam engine" can't handle the job, the new-fangled diesel had to come to the rescue!

If the engine that is in service can't handle the train over the territory, a steam-era solution should be used:
get a second engine (steam!) or a bigger engine.
The fact that neither is available is the sad part, with several big engines in the collection that could be running, but continue to sit and rust.
Just what is the "mission" of the steam operation at Steamtown?
(I'm not talking about the lite-engine tooling up and down the yard)
If the mission is to recreate a passenger train from the "golden era" (whatever that is) that's not happening either. Where's the baggage, RPO, and dining car(s)...?
If the mission is to just put on a good steam engine excursion for the benefit and enjoyment of the people, the folks in Scranton have a long way to go.

May I make a positive suggestion:
How about a symposium on "what it takes to put on a quality steam excursion"
Mr. Rowland could be the featured speaker.

You've made some good points Steve WOOLY

> I will leave specifics to another day.

> What it boils down to is:
> my opinion is that Steamtown N.H.S. is
> supposed to be glorifying the great days of
> steam.
> How does a diesel powered excursion train do
> that?
> When Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public show up
> to ride the excursion at the "national
> park" of steam, and they see diesels
> coupled onto the front of (or instead of)
> the steam locomotive, they don't know or
> care about tractive effort, or slippery
> rails, or mountain grades. They just learned
> that the "old steam engine" can't
> handle the job, the new-fangled diesel had
> to come to the rescue!

> If the engine that is in service can't
> handle the train over the territory, a
> steam-era solution should be used:
> get a second engine (steam!) or a bigger
> engine.
> The fact that neither is available is the
> sad part, with several big engines in the
> collection that could be running, but
> continue to sit and rust.
> Just what is the "mission" of the
> steam operation at Steamtown?
> (I'm not talking about the lite-engine
> tooling up and down the yard)
> If the mission is to recreate a passenger
> train from the "golden era"
> (whatever that is) that's not happening
> either. Where's the baggage, RPO, and dining
> car(s)...?
> If the mission is to just put on a good
> steam engine excursion for the benefit and
> enjoyment of the people, the folks in
> Scranton have a long way to go.

> May I make a positive suggestion:
> How about a symposium on "what it takes
> to put on a quality steam excursion"
> Mr. Rowland could be the featured speaker.


wooly421@charter.net

Amen Superheater, would be nice to hear the sound of a steam engine roaring through Port Clinton again!!



midh91@hotmail.com

> Steve, I'd like to continue offline, if you are willing.

superheater62@yahoo.com

"Has the NPS ever done what has been proposed
above? Have any NPS sites ever been closed and/or completely turned over to a private
entity? Have any NPS sites ever closed due to lack of attendance?"

The NPS has never closed a site or tuned one over to a private entity, nor have they closed one due to lack of attendance. If they did quite a few would be closed now. They have transferred properties to other government agencies but this has not been done since the early 1950Â’s. They would get too much flack from congress if they tried to close anything.

mongolike@yahoo.com