I can't explain the MRHF reporting marks except to say Art bought and scrapped some railroad equipment and evidently used some of the cars occasionally with "borrowed" reporting marks before scrapping them. Supposedly, he had a friendly relationship with the MRHF folks, but I have no idea why the reporting marks didn't end in X. The 1971 move may have been from Erie to or from Circleville, Ohio (original location of Sturm & Dillard), or it may have been to Orrville. Judging by the color, the gondola looks like a NYC (system) or PRR USRA mill gondola car, and it was probably scrapped. Incidentally, I have found much of this info with a great deal of help from an individual who uses the screen name "gmpullman".

Tom

Tom -

I agree that the gondola is interesting. The MRHF reporting marks look "NYC-ish" to me, and perhaps the stencil used for the car was from the New York Central. There are a couple of other interesting aspects. The number 401 doesn't appear altered but it appears to be only the first part of the original road number. In other words, 401x or 401xx or even 401xxx. The car has 13 "panels". The fifth and seventh panels from the left appear to have new paint, probably covering some original lettering or a herald, or both. Maybe the original owner of the car might be determined that way. Finally, when I searched for Midwest Railroad Historical Foundation (MRHF) in the computer, it brought up Midwest Railway Preservation Society. These guys state on their website that they own over 20 pieces of railroad equipment, the most famous being GTW 2-8-2 #4070. They don't actually state what these 20 pieces are, but apparently there is a FGE wood ice bunker refrigerator (number unknown), B&O M26 class box car #276933, a single dome Gulf Oil tank car and two cabooses. An open hopper car of some type appears in a photo. Might MRHF gon #401 ended up with MRPS? Maybe someone from that organization can tell us one way or the other.

Les

Info on MRHF's rolling stock is pretty sparse on their web site (aside from the obvious 4070). I'm not in Ohio. I've tried to ask Ohio sources & have come up with little info. Maybe somebody with closer ties to MRHF can say.

Tom

The topic is on DT&I 105, not on NYC Gondolas people XD. Anyways, the three surviving DT&I engines are #7, #45, and #105. Another switcher, God is he making a steam building shop? I don't see the need for three switchers...

Steamguy:

I have to disagree with just about everything you say. It's hard to believe there can be so much objectionable in only slightly more than two lines.

First, the gondola is relevant because it represented an important and interesting historical freight car type that was used in the transport of no. 105. USRA mill gondolas were bought and used by W&LE (later NKP), B&O, PRR, NYC and subsidiaries, Reading, and possibly others. Erie had slightly longer variants. Of the thousands built, I personally know of only two preserved examples, one B&O and one Reading. If it had been determined that this car exists, it would have been appropriate to create a separate thread devoted to it. Since it apparently does not, that part of the story seems to be a dead end. So it was a relevant question. Was it also wrong to mention the '56 Caddy in the photo? Only a cold-hearted person would think so, IMO.

Second, I stand by my claim that the four surviving DT&I steam engines are 7, 45, 16 (now displayed as Toledo-Detroit), and 311 (now displayed as SAL 544). Number 107 was built by Baldwin for Sturm & Dillard, which was a Circleville, Ohio firm that was involved in railroad construction, and was purchased from S&D by Art Davis. Davis had a love of the DT&I, probably because DT&I crews gave him cab rides when he was a child. He was known to put DT&I or B&O (another favorite) logos on equipment that had no actual connection to those roads. The tender was probably original to the engine because it is doubtful that DT&I had any tenders at all to sell when Davis bought the engine. In actual fact, DT&I first no. 105 and second 105 were both 2-8-0's, both scrapped long ago.

Third, you don't have to see the need for Mr. Jacobson to buy another steam switcher. It's his project, not yours. Frankly, if I were in his place I might have different priorities. But he is free to decide for himself where to spend his money, and he is also limited by what is actually available for purchase, and practical to obtain. So it's not your place, or mine, to tell him what to do. He might be willing to accept suggestions (I don't know), but he probably won't be too happy to hear complaints about a project that is, after all, his and not ours.

Tom

You can only buy what is available. JJ has done an admirable job of equipping himself to be ready to purchase what is available when it comes available. How many of our organizations can say the same?

Switchers, and other small 6 coupled locomotives are in fact the perfect size for most smaller tourist and museum operations. That nice decapod from Mid Continent is a nice crossover to run on shortlines and branchlines, the Gainesville Midland ran them up with over 50 MPF regularly in service on light rail. It makes a lot of sense to invest in smaller locomotives which do not require mainline opportunities to get out and run since those opportunities are very few in comparison....... and adequate locomotives are either ready to go or in preparation for filling them already.

dave

Tom -

I believe that the Southern Michigan has a New York Central drop end mill gondola. I agree that there doesn't appear to be many of these cars preserved.


Les

The #105, being only an hour drive from the AoS Roundhouse, was an easy decision....we had seen this engine many times when visiting Art. He supplied a fair amount of railroad and steam related items for the Ohio Central RR over the years that Jerry owned it. We also had the privilege to see the #105 under steam on several occasions in years past. Art was good enough to extend us invitations to join him for some weekends of fun.

Now lets figure out what tender is behind the #105 now....notice its not the one loaded on the gondola in the 1971 photo.....any idea's ?

In all our conversations with Art he never mentioned the tender exchange.

TJ Sposato

When was the 105 last under steam and anyone have photo links?

I'm going to go out on a limb now. Here's a possible scenario, but I'm open to hearing other ideas:

The C'ville 2-2-70 lettering was put on a leased gon, or a still-serviceable "scrap" gon at Circleville when the engine was moved from Sturm & Dillard at Circleville to Erie. The same gon was used, with the same lettering, in 1971 when the engine was moved from Erie to Orrville with the original slope back tender. A second-hand square tender was obtained to replace the deteriorated slope back tender. This square tender could have come from the DT&I (possibly a Russian Decapod tender previously used in MOW service), or it may have come from another source and had the DT&I emblem added by the owner.

This scenario seems to fit the time line, circumstances, and equipment descriptions we know, but it probably isn't the only explanation. Tim Sposato probably has access to more information than I have, so I would gladly defer to him. Maybe the tender trucks have cast-in lettering that could help with the I.D., but even that might not be definitive. It might be helpful to check dimensions of 105's tender against the dimensions of a Russian decapod tender or some other tender.

An interesting mystery. Hopefully it can be solved.

Tom

I met Art Davis in 2004 when I was doing some work on some cars that were stored at his site in Orrville. In talking with him then, he indicated that the tender with the 105 was not original and that he had given the original slope back tender to a museum (which still had it at that time) and then acquired the tender now behind #105. I can't remember which museum got the tender, just that Art said the had a use for it at the time and had never done anything with it so he had half a mind to take it back.

Jason Midyette

Good idea's Tom, the trucks are marked DT&I, I'm not much of an authority on DT&I locomotives, figured you and others on this board might know what class of locomotive it may have came from. If I can get a specification sheet of their tenders, we should be able to I.D. it. As you said, maybe MofW service saved this nice tank.

Appreciate the information as well from Jason....now if we can see if the tender still exists. Wonder which museum may have gotten it...?
Thanks for all the input.
TJ Sposato

While I am certainly glad to see ANY steam locomotive rescued to be preserved, I can't help but wonder what the long-term goal of AofS really is? They have a magnificent facility with a really great collection of steam power, but what are they actually working toward?

Long term goal is to educate and keep a dieing trade alive for future generations,think of it as a railroad college

I believe per Henry Ford's preference, DT&I tenders received two (somewhat redundant) rear ladders.