The photos shows that the jacketing and asbestos has been removed. I seem to remember that all asbestos was removed from locomotives there a while ago. I am still completely dumbfounded at the projected cost of her cosmetic restoration. I bet if they shopped around they might find an organization nearby that could do it for a lot less.

I repeat: "By a government agency."

When government imposes a bewildering variety of mandates upon potential contractors, involving everything from proper environmental protection and safety rules to such "political correctness" as "living wages" and hiring quotas for minority/women-owned businesses, costs quickly skyrocket.

True story: I watched a contractor hire a temp agency to send out guys to paint hydrants around an Army base. They were paid $22.06 an hour after the temp agency got their cut. Literally nothing more than a paintbrush and a can of paint, no special prep or details.

There may be stipulations about having state employees doing the work before contracted agencies could be called in. It may turnout that the cosmetic work will entail far more than merely painting the locomotive. One can hope that the restoration is significantly more than we envision. She may wind up looking as nice as the G5s in the Museum window, and be far cleaner inside and out.

I can't believe we are seeing an argument in here about leaving an E6s outdoors, versus a GP30.

OK, I'll mention it: why not use the funding to erect a pole barn to get them both under cover, instead of for paint?

dave

With all due respect Mr. Glueck, the argument is about taking a previously-restored, looking like it just walked off of LaGrange's floor, GP30 and shoving it outside on some deadline. It's about taking the only Conrail piece inside and letting it rust outside because it's "simply Conrail". We talk about gov't waste. Wouldn't it be a waste of the money used to ship and paint that engine to just let it rot outside? Especially an engine that has a cab nice enough to use for visitor interperetation?

If the museum is 100% out of room, then yes, building more space should be first priority. And yes, the E6s, when restored should not be left out in the elements. And in the same respect, neither should the GP30. Just because it was built in the 1960s (still 20+ years before I was born...) doesn't make it junk.

Ps. and thank you Dave for pointing out the elephant in the room... space is what is needed.

I, we didn't take it personally. It's just that it was apparent that at the time, they had no interest in doing anything with this locomotive. They have since that time taken all of the asbestos off and did a cosmetic restoration. But all equipment at this and other museums around the world suffer from the same affliction. Lack of space and funding. As I have said before, we in the preservation industry try to save everything. But lack of funding and space mean that something has to relegated to the outdoors, or the scrappers torch. And while they do have to live outdorrs, didn't they work outside? So with a little maintenance, they again can live outdoors very well. But as someone stated earlier, you must seal up any openings the best you can to keep rain and snow out of the internals. But you cannot seal it so tight that it doesn't get ventilation to help keep it dry, a problem many old car owners don't take into consideration when they park the old car in the yard, on dirt, and cover with a car cover expecting it be just like a climate controlled, dry garage.

The toughest concept for any preservation society to comprehend, is that we cannot save them all, try as we like. So we do what we can, and feel bad when the rest fall to the torch.

But I do applaud the suggestion that they might consider some outdoor cover. Maybe a length of lean-tos along the back of the building. At least the would keep some of the outdoor equipment out of the direct rain and snow.

Later!
Mr. Ed

Tom, I appreciate your point completely. Your point is well taken, and I am not trying to give short shrift to Conrail, inheritor of the PRR/NYC/et al. The E6s is another passionate subject, not unlike all the remaining Pennsy locomotives, including those dispersed elsewhere. Yes, space for shelter is the real issue here. Leaving the PRR collection outdoors, whether it be the E6 or "Rivets", is deplorable. Defacing the GP30 to preserve another exhibit is no better, with the exception that the E6 is irreplaceable.
The best case in point is the Berkshire, whose smokebox is corroded through. In my opinion, the Berk is a locomotive that might well be traded to another museum which can care and advocate for it far better.

And don't worry about respect, nobody else gives it to me either.

> I bet if they shopped around they might find an
> organization nearby that could do it for a lot less.

You've got to be kidding me! How far would they have to go to find a top notch presveration facility that could do quality restoration work. Those places are hard to find, and there are only a few of them around that take on contract work... Shipping costs alone would be enormous. It's not like they could just walk across the street and find a pla...

Oh, wait a second... ;)

Ask the Strasburg shop administration about their current shop schedule and their three-tiered pricing level for contract work (loosely translated as "we need it yesterday [UP 844 safety valve replacement, for example]," "we need it as soon as reasonably possible," and "we'd like it done when you can get to it"). Remember also that they have their own locos to work on.

I think CP 972 that's sitting out back of their shops was a "victim" of the latter approach. That, and/or payment issues.

On the other hand, it WOULD be VERY illuminating to hear if the "no-brainer" approach of switching it "across the street" was ever seriously entertained--and if not, why not.

Sure, locomotives were designed to live outside, but they were also meant to be replaced every 20-30 years.

I know some had kicked around the idea of recreating the Northumberland roudhouse scene in the museum yard: building a replica roundhouse and stashing the collection in there. Unfortunately the whole turntable configuration seems to take a lot more space, than say, a regular ladder and yard track configuration.

Don't worry, I have get no respect either. If I deserved some the railroad would have issued it to me.

One of the problems is that most museums are not sitting around with empty space waiting for more items to display. They already have everything they can handle and there is a never ending stream of new items to display. One day it will be important to display one of the SD60s built from kits in Altoona, a double stack car, or the latest piece of rolling stock that had been turned into a chicken coop 60 years ago and uncovered last week. Where is it going to go? There is just not enough room.

Show me a rail museum with nothing sitting in disgrace outside and empty space inside just waiting for the latest find. More space needs to be found, even if it means having a museum system that consists of several locations, equipment loans, and indoor back-lot storage. The bottom line is there needs to be more indoor space.

How is this to be done? A major push for funding throughout the museum sector to build more space, stop taking on new equipment, find places with space to farm out equipment, work to form partnerships with community organizations and non rail museums, thinking outside the box, and not doing the same old same old.

Here are some easy questions. Does your local rail museum have a building fund? Property fund? If they were given a truckload of money do they even have a plan as to where the building will go? There are many more questions than answers and the real questions have little to do with GP30s and 4-4-2.

We do! Give us truckload of money and we will have buildings up in no time. See, we have a turntable pit in the ground and room for a few engine houses. And in some track locations, we can make the engine house two or three cars long.

But there is indoor space out there and much of it is on a siding or live rail. These are all of the empty warehouses scattered throuhout the country and the thousands in the northeast alone. But we all know that a musem in a country setting draws more crowds than one downtown. Or do we?

Later!
Mr. Ed

Guys,

Let's use the correct words to describe what is going on.

The money is being used to conserve that locomotive not restore it. When you restore an artifact you add or substract elements of an artifact to return it to the appearence it had a given time in its history. hopefully that work is done with proper documentation to support the work you are doing!

Lead and asbestos abatment is conservation; not restoration.

Also, remember that the RR Museum of Pennsylvania is a government run museum. Most likely they will bring in a liscensed abatment contractor and then pay their people to supervise the work.

The museum is a historical and interupretive organization; they leave the operation of trains to the folks across the street at the Strasburg Railroad who do it very well; I'll leave it to you to decide about the corny jokes and story of the ghost train echo.

I just hope that the roundhouse that the Friends of the Museum has been trying to build for many years happens some day. I did hear that some land may be available to purchase; this is a good starting place.

Ted Miles

Update from the PRRT&HS e-newsletter:

OK, I'll mention it: why not use the funding to erect a pole barn to get them both under cover, instead of for paint?

dave



There's some special words that define using funds raised for one purpose to do another.

"fraud", and "misappropriation of assets" come immediately to mind.