.

OK, I'll be the skunk at the picnic:

What's that going to cost, and who's going to pay for it?

What is going to be on that "new siding" to demonstrate regional railroading? A customer? A faux customer? Should they load or unload cars? What kind of cars and loads?

What's the point? Don't the many existing regionals do a pretty good job of "demonstrating" regional railroading pretty much daily by their very nature?

Will this involve a ton of expensive legalities, as they transition? Will it bring on a bunch of expensive regulations they don't have to worry about now?

They can store about 450 cars now. BUT only in the winter, when their main line isn't otherwise being used for their trains.

I can think now of 3 or 4 railroad museums who make money storing cars, WHEN IT DOESN'T INTERFERE with their real mission.

Storing cars pays well. Ask Ed Ellis.

That all makes sense. To further explain my questions the reason to extend the line would be to offer the chance for passengers to get a better experience. The siding could be a place to show a transfer (loading of certain freight cars) but as static displays to offer more of a interactive and educational trip. I know the reason why this hasn't happened is that 1 dirty word cost. If the IRM plans to install the turntable at the end of the line they should consider these possibilities before cementing it at the current end of the line. The regional line demonstration could also be done on the siding like showing a transfer from narrow gauge to standard gauge rolling stock. Steam era regional demonstrations are sorely lacking IMHO. After all many rail lines in those days were much smaller and more creative. After all its those lines that built the national lines we know today. That is a story worth showing and telling as well as fits the IRM mission I do believe.

As others have said (and hopefully I can put this matter to bed), we do not have millions of dollars to throw around. What you suggest would cost even hundreds of millions, especially considering that I don't think we have one piece of narrow gauge equipment on the property. There simply isn't a point to any of it, especially since from a preservationist perspective, I like to think that we already do a fine job of providing a realistic experience akin to that of the golden age of railroading. Our depot dates from the 1850s. Our signals come from the North Shore, B&O, and more. Our catenary bridges are from the CSS&SB. We have a working tower, with an authentic (working) switchboard. Even our trainmen on the Zephyr wear the original Q uniforms from the 50s. We at the museum will always try our best, faithful to the railroad ways of old, but also to our bank accounts.

I would ask that beggars not be choosers. Too often on this site and other sites do people say that IRM should do this, or do that, etc. The fact of the matter is that armchair railroading does not work. We are all volunteers, with limited time and budget. I, for example, travel from Kansas City twice monthly to be there. If someone thinks that something should be changed, I would caution against just typing up an idea up and firing it off into a message board. That gets nothing done. What does get things done? Time, money, and a whole hell of a lot of blood, sweat, and tears.

FWIW, the turntable, once the nearly $600K for it is raised, is going where the current steam leads are, between barns 8 and 9.

No, no, He means the OTHER turntable... the one from Harvard. After all, if one turntable is good, two is better.

Just to add fuel to this discussion, I'll state my opinion... IRM's mainline is already too long.

Thanks for the answers. It sounds like the Frisco whistle that it had on it back in the '70 when I saw it running. I didn't know 1630 couldn't get around the wye. Sounds like I need to head up that way, its been years. IRM is awesome. My first visit was on steam weekend and it was amazing.

I will try to answer a few different questions I saw in follow-up posts:
1. 1630 ran backwards pulling the coal train because the wye is too tight and hard on the engine. I have helped wye it twice, and we dragged it through while greasing the rails. We also rebuild the rear axle hub liners, boxes, etc. a few years ago and lost some side play which would make it even worse. The original Baldwin specs indicate a maximum turn radius for a Russian Decapod of ~ 16.5 deg, and the east side of the wye is tighter than that at IRM.
2. We have a bit of a rolling profile on the IRM mainline, you can feel it while running a train, but I believe everything is under 0.5%, and the grades are shorter than the coal train was so I don't think that had a big effect on the train.
3. I have photos of 1630 back on the Frisco with a Frisco 3 chime, so the current whistle is correct for the engine. I don't know if the current whistle is original to 1630, or a different Frisco 3 chime. I have seem photos of other Russian decapods on the Frisco with 6 chimes, so it was not consistent through-out the class.

J Maxwell

Concerning the amount of throttle pulling the coal train, I talked to Brian, and at one point he had the throttle all the way out and slowly notched it up to about 50% of full cut-off which seemed to work well accelerating the string.

J Maxwell

It is my understanding that the I(llinois)RM cannot easily extend its main in either direction. To the West is the town of Union. I believe that there are several buildings on what was the old ROW. To the East is a different problem, though.

There are long-standing dreams about extending the main to the East of the existing end-of-track. The problem is this would reportedly require creation of a significant length of trestle and/or bridge, to cross a waterway and swampy area. Rumor has it that there are some non-trivial regulatory issues involved.

An IRM main-line extension to the East has at least one interesting side-benefit: access to the next major town to the East. There has been pie-in-the-sky daydreaming of parking in that town, taking the IRM interurban or standard-equipment train to the Museum campus, spending the day, then returning via IRM train. General consensus is that this would be a "good thing": providing a museum presence in a significantly larger, providing easier road access to the nearby Interstate tollway than available at Union, ...

It seems that the difficulty of "bridging that stream" outweighs the benefits.

On the subject of turntable location:


While previous discussions have suggested placing a turntable in the open-field area "between barns 8 and 9", that turns out to be a problematic location in at least a couple of ways. If you can get past the issue of drainage (nearby creek, frequent flooding in that part of the property, etc.), you must consider that a 130' turntable takes up a LOT of room, and that a suitable roundhouse would also take up a bunch of room. There are many model-railroaders who have encountered this problem, including me! Consider:

. The center of the turntable cannot be closer than about 75 feet from any of the trackwork and other features which must be kept in that area. That includes the "new cutoff" track, the trolley loop track to the East and South, and the access road to the West.
. The wall of the roundhouse cannot be particularly close to the pit wall, else the posts which hold up that wall are in the foul of the radial tracks.
. If you plan to put your largest steamers into the roundhouse, you need at least a few enclosed radial tracks which are longer than those large steamers, plus a little bit. Those are some LONG radial tracks!
. How many tracks in the roundhouse? At what angle? The larger the angle between adjacent radial tracks, the closer the wall can be to the turntable pit, but reducing the total number of tracks in a given space. The smaller the angle, the further the wall must be from the turntable pit.
. Do you want such a small radial-track angle that you need to use frogs between the pit wall and the roundhouse wall?
. What building code "set-backs" are required?

Given the above, I expect that the possible roundhouse capacity would be hideously restricted by that particular location. I would guess that at least one of the key decision-makers would strongly argue against that location solely because of limited roundhouse capacity. (Assuming that it is possible to get past the drainage issues there!)

I'm sure that "the powers that be" are giving consideration to a wide variety of options for the "new" turntable, and ways in which a roundhouse+turntable could fit into some of the other plans for the property, such as the "Main Street" development. Time will tell.

On the subject of freight car storage-for-hire:


Why? Car owners need to keep the "not currently needed" cars somewhere. The museum had the available track space and liked the idea of revenue during the off-season.

What's IRM's role in the movement? For each of the strings of cars, UP delivers the cars to the "interchange track". IRM then moves the cars from there to the appropriate "storage location(s)" using IRM power. At the end of the storage term, IRM then used its own power to move each of the string of cars back to the "interchange track" for pick-up by UP. The "powers that be" thought it would be "cool" to have a steamer haul one of the strings, and the scheduling just happened to make that possible. SLSF 1630 was in "regular" passenger service on a day when a string of cars were to be moved to the interchange track.

I have not heard anything on how the set-outs and pick-ups were coordinated between UP and IRM.

Regards,
Bob Milhaupt
Occasional volunteer,
I(llinois)RM Steam Department

There is an impressive concrete bridge west of Union on the former Elgin and Belvedere Interurban right of way (which IRM owns about seven miles of), which would be neat to operate on, though I am sure impractical. I have no idea who owns the right of way there:

http://bridgehunter.com/il/boone/bh48923/

Expanding track is a good way to motivate volunteers, if you can afford it.

That bridge should be a historic landmark onto itself. IIRC it is one of the first, if not THE first, examples of a concrete arch bridge built using reusable self supporting steel forms. Prior to that, a wooden bridge structure needed to be built to support the concrete until it cured.

I know it's been a long time dream that IRM should run to Huntley, but why? IRM has been spending a good piece if change buying land trying to insulate itself from suburban development. Huntley is nothing if not suburban development at it's worst, with row upon row of McMansions marching ever westward. There is hardly any of the old town recognizable anymore. Why spend big bucks on a bridge to get to someplace that will only antagonize the natives, the very people who will try to shut you down? Doesn't make any sense to me.

Wow, and that's only 4.5 miles. According to your method of thinking, East Troy's mainline must be ridiculously way too long then!

IRM should be jealous of East Troy's length, IRM could potentially extend further east, just stuck a bridging end.

It all depends what East Troy is, or wants to be. As near as I can tell, they think they are the electric version of a tourist railroad.

The Illinois Railway Museum is, on the other hand, a MUSEUM, which operates a demonstration railroad, the purpose of which is to allow the visitors to experience a brief ride on the equipment; hopefully several pieces of the equipment during the course of the day.

The problem with treating IRM's railroad as a ride is best expressed by what they say in Alaska, "Unless you're the lead dog, the scenery never changes." If you look at the youtube video of the coal gon move taken from the roof of the tender doghouse and watch the scenery, you'll see: a field, a hedgerow, another field, another hedgerow, another field, a hedgerow with a swamp by it, another field...

If IRM spends big bucks to bridge the Kishwaukee, all they'll gain is a few more fields and hedgerows before they are squarely in suburbia, in the midst of the kind of people who put the Kettle Moraine Ry. out of business. Much better they spend the money to install the short Harvard turntable down there; they could unload the passengers to watch the engine being turned; give them something to do.

In reality, it would have been better if they would have done that right at Seeman road (the first public access east of the museum campus) Instead of putting the passing siding there. All that siding does is ensure the passengers are trapped in a car full of screaming kids and crying babies for five minutes, ten minutes, however long it takes for the meet to show up. And I might add, a passenger train sitting in a siding in the cornfields is hardly historically a common event.

The other problem is the effect the longer ride has had on the station area of the museum campus. Back in the days I was active and the track only went a mile east of the depot, there was ALWAYS something moving, either in the station area, or zipping by on the mainline, which is a non-typical result of the station area being designed to display the trains, not copy common railroad practice. Compared to IRM, other rail museums and tourist railroads were deadsville between trains. IRM was always about trains arriving and departing, because that's what they did. Now, the depot area is often deadsville.

Thank goodness for the streetcar line, which at least keeps SOMETHING is moving.

IRM's mission statement as posted on Guidestar is:

The primary mission of the Illinois Railway Museum shall be to educate the public as to our nation's railroad and railway history, by collecting, preserving, and restoring rolling stock, artifacts, structures, and related transportation equipment for display to the public, exhibiting the operation of restored rolling stock and equipment on a demonstration rail line, and collecting, preserving, and maintaining a reference library of publications, drawings, technical information.