Welcome to the new K4 consolidated thread. This is a single thread for discussion of the issues concerning the K4 1361 project raised in other recent threads (now locked). Readers are encouraged to read the other threads before posting to this one so as not to repeat information which is already on the board.

Let me speak very plainly now. This forum exists to host polite, productive, constructive conversations which advance the cause of railway preservation. The all-volunteer staff and the all-volunteer Board of RyPN do not invest their private time in hosting this forum for it to become a venue for flame wars--period.

So, please feel free to discuss the K4 issues. But all posters should also understand that this thread is under the strictest scrutiny by the moderators, and any post that includes accusations of dishonesty, bad motive, personal or corporate malfeasance, potentially actionable allegations, or which is simply generally mean-spirited, will be immediately deleted. In short, TAKE IT OFFLINE OR TAKE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE. RYPN DOES NOT EXIST TO HOST THAT KIND OF EXCHANGE.

This is in accord with our written Guidelines, which state that "Defining what constitutes uncourteous, uncivil, or unconstructive speech, and deciding when continued discussion of a subject is no longer constructive, shall be within the sole discretion of the moderators."

If, after a couple days, it becomes clear that it is impossible to discuss this issue in terms that the management of RyPN considers to be constructive, we will lock this thread too, and ban the topic indefinately.

Please, if you have any respect for the effort your hosts put into creating and maintaining this site, speak kindly and without contentiousness on this topic, or speak elsewhere.

We hope no individuals will take offense at this request; we recognize that many people with an interest in this topic have nothing but good intentions and honest curiosity. But we ask that everyone, without exception, follow the above guidelines going forward, effective now.

Erik Ledbetter
Associate Editor, RyPN
RyPN Board Member

Couldn't have made it clearer, Erik --- hopefully ALL will listen. RYPN does not need the hassle and ruffled feathers that this has caused on other boards. I think remembering "The Golden Rule" most definitely applies here. PLEASE PLAY NICE.

TJ Gaffney

The saga of the K4 should not be news to any of us who have been in railway preservation for a long time. Close to home, the restoration of our late Johnstown car began with a motor failure, and grew over a number of years to become a major project. Delays increased as we disassembled parts and found more structural and mechanical issues, and we were delayed again as we worked to put the car together again. Then the ISTEA money was slow to arrive and put us in a bind with payment to our contractors. All the while our local membership kept asking "when" and the leadership team (including me) kept proposing new dates.

How long has NKP 765 been down? Look at the grief that folks express over Ohio Central's progress on LS&I 33. And Ed Blossom and others have spent a lot of time and other people's money on the Liberty Bell Jewett, now in Scranton and still not an operating car.

The K4 is just a big visible target for the many issues facing any large scale restoration project. I recall someone saying "let he who is without sin cast the first stone..."

Wesley

Good points, E. I am not chiming in with any of my K-4 thoughts here or eslewhere, because... honestly, I have nothing to add.

I would suggest that this is a good time for us to avoid "eating our own." Everyone involved in the project is a member of the rail preservation community, adn all parties named in this debate have a common desire: seeing #1361 operate.

I have seen the threads on other boards. Ugh.

Rob

I think what most of us are looking for is an accounting of the resources being put into the 1361 for some of these reasons;
This project has taken 5-6 years longer than expected
has taken LOTS more money than first projected

And why do we want to know? At least my concerns are these;

Since this project has largley funded by grant money from Pennsylviana,and because of the reasons stated, what has this done to any further possible government funding for any further projects we would like to see done? Now most of us railfans know,or anyone that has restored an old house,car,etc, know that once you tear into a project, you ALWAYS find more problems. Especially something that was wore out when retired, and largely neglected for 30 years. And that means more time and money. But the cockeyed way our government works at times, some polotican will just see the delays and over budget as a reason not to help in the future. Altough the govenment is guilty of doing the same thing.

As as far as doing just what needs done to get it running, picture any steam engine having a major breakdown while out on already unfriendly to steam class 1. If it's just a breakdown, the RR will say, "see, that's whay we don't want those old things on our tracks", But what if there is a major boiler problem, and people are injuried or killed/ What do you think the Feds will do then? Maybe no steam at all? That's why Steve Lee, Jerry Jacobson,FWRHS, and the others don't do a quickie "just to get it running"
I sure don't have the answers,but there are those that do. Every steam engine out there needs public money to run, plus all the other hurdels to get over just to get out. But we shouldn't blindly throw money away.

I applaud the moderators insistance on civility and totally support that. I also think Mr. Lewindowski makes a very important and valid point. Seems to me that since the 1plus million that's been spent to date is public money that those who have overseen those expenditures should be willing to make those figures available to all who are interested.If in fact an audit was done recently as many have said is the case, why not release it?? After all there's no trade secrets here to protect. An answer on this from Mr. Cessna would be appropriate and appreciated. If an audit was not performed,it would certainly seem appropriate to do so now!
To set the record straight in answer to Mr. Cessnas comment that our proposal contained a "hefty" fee for my time-I did include money for my very limited time getting the group organized and to assist in writing what would have been the final report( most folks would agree that 40 years experience in this field has value) but made it clear to all concerned that I was not a steam mechanic, would not be in the group that went to Scranton and would only act as the expediter. It still astounds me that they'd hire an outfit with absolutly zero experience with mainline steam to advise them when they had the chance to use 4 of the most credentialed professionals in the land! That's water under the bridge.
The challenge now is where does it go from here? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over&over and expecting different results.
IMHO with a change in project mgt. and a change in the shop there's hope.
Short of that-please see the definition of insanity!
One mans opinion-Ross Rowland

Here are some general notes on how to investigate how government money is spent.

If you are interested in finding out how public money was spent, I suggest - first, identifying the government agencies that participated in the supporting the grant and contacting them to see what information they have compiled on its use. If they are not cooperative, then you can file a Freedom of Information Act request to see those documents.

Also, it is helpful when organizations and individuals make available original documents and proposals. The Stuhr Museum of the Prairie Pioneer did this when they began evaluating their railroad collection.

Tom Cornillie

What is the intended run for the K4?
How about a crazy idea of NS putting back the 4th track around the curve and through old Galitzin tunnel for exclusive use of the Altoona RR Museum. Call me crazy, but I like to think out of the box.
BTW, I would be the first one to swing a spike maul.
Scott

Sir, speaking as a professional auditor and formerly a government auditor who's actually (briefly, too be fair) pounded the metal that will be the K-4 when its done , I can tell you that you would not be happy with the outcome of such an audit. A government performance audit is an attempt to see whether or not certain standards have been met, IN ACCORDANCE with OBJECTIVE standards. What objective criteria would you like to apply when this restoration like all others, is unique?

Show me another restoration where there is going to be such a wholesale fabrication of new parts- as I'm writing this, new eccentric rods are being fashioned, and previously, the smokebox has been replaced, the tender is having major repairs performed, the difficulties with the firebox are well-known, a new backhead was fashioned, etc. etc. etc.

It is not a lynch mob or an attempt to arrive at predetermined conclusions or an exercise in finger pointing, armchair management. It is not a fishing expedition for suspicious minds or the disappointed.

I suggest you read the GAO "yellow book".

I think I'm beginning to understand why this is such a maligned interest.

co614, please see my PM to you.

Erik Ledbetter
RyPN Associate Editor

The thing that I feel it is imperative to continually reassert is, the K4 is a very special, very unique locomotive. Not the sole survivor of her species, but darn close to it. At present 1361 is the only representative that will run again. And face it, the K4 is one of the locomotives that everyone wants to see run. There are a few steam locos that could be passed over and people would say "the pictures are enough", but not so with a Pennsy Pacific. Second, an operative high-pressure boiler better be in the best of shape. Like the space shuttle disasters, a catastrophic failure with a historic locomtive will bring the program to an indefinite halt. The K4 better be in the best condition it can be restored to before anyone places it on the head of apassenger train. This particular locomotive was nearly worn out when she last steamed in 1957. Depending on who you listen to, she was in nearly that same condition when she went into the shop for major overhaul. Third, many people thought Steamtown shops would be the ideal restoration facility. Perhaps they were right, perhaps not. Were others considered? How seriously? How do you rebuild a locomotive from the ground up when the steam shop infrastructure has been gone for 40 years? This isn't like sending her to the Altoona Shops in 1950.
Lastly, we will eventually get a "new" K4s at the end of this overhaul. I really hope everyone can keep their eye on the ball. Some things are priceless - meaning that no matter how much is spent on it, the cost is worthwhile. That is how I feel about an operative Pennsylvania Railroad K4s.

NS is busy enough through Altoona to put the 4th track back in and use it non-stop themselves. Those of you hoping for brush fires at Horseshoe Curve started by 1361 can stop holding your breath. All of our very early discussions about where to run her have centered around local short-line operators.

With all due respect, that's potentially part of the overall "problem".

1361 is a MAIN LINE locomotive, NOT suited to "short line" operation. There are two short lines in the area potentially suitable to 1361 operation--the Nittany & Bald Eagle (a former heavy-duty PRR secondary main, now restored for unit train operation) and the Everett RR (Hollidaysburg-Roaring Spring). Both of these lines are about as remote as the EBT, relatively speaking, and the Everett RR, although scenic, is not a high-speed line. It's also not attractive to have a main line steamer without true main line speeds--even Norfolk Southern's later-day 40-mph speed restriction tempered the excursion experience considerably. And a K4s, although a six-coupled loco, is just unsuitable for an operation like the Strasburg, WK&S, Arcade & Attica, Middletown & Hummelstown, etc. (Conversely, we don't have to run 1361 at 90 mph, but even 30-40 is an improvement over most of the speeds I've ridden behind 1361 so far).

It has been suggested many times that 1361 should spend a year operating on the Steamtown runs at Scranton. This would 1) give the loco a good workout, 2) give Steamtown an attractive, revenue-raising "guest star" (and hopefully instigate a "guest loco" program), and 3) let 1361 operate on at least one good high-speed main line with a nice grade. Another attractive proposition, of course, is NJ Transit's ex-NY&LB line to Bay Head--1361's final PRR stomping ground, flat enough to let 1361 handle enough cars to be worth paying. Heck, even the Bel-Del operation out of Phillipsburg, NJ would be good. Or even the Western Maryland Scenic RR (save the pitchforks, Wild Mary fans).

Instead, the focus seems to be entirely on returning the loco to Altoona ASAP, simply to stuff it back into a roundhouse stall. Instead of serving as a "roving ambassador" for Altoona and the Museum, it instead becomes "all dressed up with nowhere to go". Occasional runs on the NBER, etc. only have so many customers--heck, I've ridden everywhere 1361 has since 1985, save for the main line between public runs.

I know, I know. There are no doubt a myriad of logistical or bureaucratic nightmares wrapped around every alternative I have just proposed. I don't even want to think what would happen to my head were I to suggest to NJT a steam operation again, what with their reported experiences with 614 on the Port Jervis trips, or if I were to suggest that 1361 might be better served staying in New Jersey. But the fact remains that, in my opinion (an opinion that severely tempers my current support for the 1361 project), the custodians of 1361 have been pursuing a self-interested goal with blinders on--a goal that was debatable before the delays occurred, and one even more in question given the current status.

In a side note, I seem to recall that one group of former/current 1361 volunteers attempted several years ago to set up a non-profit corporation that would have leased and repaired/restored 1361 for operation. I recall that said group seemed, from the descriptions I got from the principals, to have attempted to set up a business model that was pretty much identical to the Northstar/261 group which formed to lease and operate Milwaukee 261.

My trip behind 261 at Steamtown in 1996 was infinitely more spectacular and memorable than all of the several trips I rode behind 1361 combined.

Unfortunately, I got a bit too involved with one of those discussions, and the thread spiralled out of control. I will say this though: if a trip were to operate at Steamtown, sign me up! How cool would it be to see her flying through Tobyhanna at 70 per?

Mr. Mitchell,

First, we have not publicly discussed at any length what we plan to do with the locomotive so I am curious how you have come to form any opinion on what we will or will not consider doing with the locomotive. We plan to run the locomotive as often as is practical. Maybe you didn't have the chance to read the article I posted from the Altoona Mirror dealing with exactly this subject.

As far as the NBER, that is as close to a mainline operation as you can get. It is all welded rail and we can run at 40 mph. Regarding leaving the locomotive in Steamtown, not likely. Why would I want to do that? I'm not aware that the NPS could afford to pay us enough to leave it there.

We do plan to use the loco as an "ambassador" for Altoona, but that comes with a price to the people who want the locomotive running in their backyard and we all know that Steamtown and many others most likely cannot afford it. I'm not in the business of losing money simply in order to run steam excursions. Read Andy Muller's thoughts on that in the article from the Altoona Mirror.

This cannot and will not turn into "who's turn is it to joy-ride behind the K4" this week. We will entertain running the locomotive anywhere someone is willing to pay for it to go. Doing anything to the contrary would be fiscally irresponsible on my part.

You have absolutely no basis for your statement that our goals are "self-interested." In many respects, however, we have to be self-interested in order to protect the integrity of the organization first and provide the best recreational opportunity that makes sense second. That's called running a business.

I hope you and others interested in the preservation of this equipment will find a way yo lend your talents and resources to do so. I can only make the opportunity available. You will have to decide whether or not to particpate.