Folks,there are a lot of preserved Diesel locomovies out theere these days. Would some of you comment about this question?Should museums paint a Diesel Locomotive as Amtrak, Metro North, or MARTA, CALTRAIN, Conrail or any of the other government owned and operated rail lines?Or should the museum have it as Long Island RR, C&NW, New Haven or any of the other Class 1 historic lines that had them.I know that there is an Amtrak Historical Society and perhaps one for the Conrail? Do visitors have as musch interest in commercial lines as government ones?Ted Miles

Is there any reason or motivation NOT to? After all, who owned/bought said equipment? is something the government involved with somehow not worthy of our attention or preservation?The only requirement that I know of is the acquisition of military-surplus rail equipment usually stipulates a requirement that all military markings be removed unless the item is being specifically preserved as a military item by a military-history organization. (I'm not sure of the specific requirements, but I've seen them imposed on, for example, ex-military locos at Hagerstown, Rockton, and elsewhere.

I'm not sure where this idea came from. When we were pursuing our Air Force locomotives from Shaw AFB, we looked into the "requirement" that the military markings be removed. Nobody could find any such regulation, and we made sure the donation agreement didn't have it. As a result, the Shaw engines have retained their Air Force lettering. A couple folks swore that there was such a regulation, but were unable to produce a citation when challenged.If you think about it, such a requirement doesn't make sense. Individuals can restore military highway vehicles and aircraft to their miliatry markings, so why not railroad equipment? The only thing I've been able to find on this is that you can't drive a restored Army Jeep or something without a license plate on it. Spencer has their Davenport still lettered for the US Navy, and their Army GE 45-tonner is still lettered Army.Our SW8s were acquired before we realized we wouldn't get into trouble if we didn't repaint them. One, the 2028, has been relettered "SC RR Museum." I didn't like this when it was done and still don't, but got overruled. These units didn't come from a South Carolina base anyway, we got 'em from Fort Stewart, so they're more utilitarian pieces than part of the historic collection. Frankly I'd like to put one in a Tux.As far as painting stuff for Amtrak... I wouldn't mind having a gutted E in the "bloody nose" scheme to head up our static display passenger train. And an F40 in anything other than Platinum Mist just looks weird! And yes, I know MBTA, VIA, and others have F40s -- and they look weird.

I think that should be up to whomever pays the bill. If an entity purchases a locomotive, that entity should be able to paint it whatever scheme they desire. If the locomotive is donated, then the donor organization should have a say in what it becomes.Having said that, I know of one case where a locomotive from road "A" was painted the color scheme of road "B" because road "A" did not serve the area in which the locomotive was displayed.I also know of instances where locomotives were deassessed because they were not historically accurate as displayed.

The requirement, or lack thereof, that military surplus equipment lose their military markings is probably lost somewhere in the same bureaucratic haze of hopelessly uneven and inconsistent enforcement as alcohol-label restrictions. As an example of the latter, the state of Connecticut rejected the label for Seriously Bad Elf Beer from Ridgeway Brewery of England because the label depicted an elf aiming a slingshot in the sky at a barely discernible sleigh being pulled through the sky by what appear to be reindeer. Connecticut officials stated that "the image of Santa Claus cannot be used to sell beer, as it might attract the interest of children and be seen as marketing the beer to children". Never mind that 1) the beer was a $6-a-bottle super-premium import and that 2) Connecticut had approved a label last year for a similar winter beer from the same brewery, "Santa's Butt," which portrayed, yes, a rear view of a jolly bearded fellow's posterior!In the case of Army equipment, I have dealt with military-equipment collectors in my day. They tell me that the reason for the strip-the-military-markings requirement is twofold: 1) it keeps shabby old equipment in public view from reflecting badly upon the military, and 2) it keeps any militia-wannabes from passing themselves off as military forces (think, just as a conjured but possible example, of some Arizona border-patrol Minutemen driving along the border with Mexico or Canada in a Jeep or Army truck with a machine-gun mount). This hardly extends only to the military; I've seen similar restrictions applied to used fire equipment (a pumper used for filling swimming pools or farm reservoirs) and Post Office vehicles. I won't even touch the topic of military aircraft......The military can indeed get testy about this. A chap of my acquaintance managed to procure one of the original prototype HUMVEE vehicles from the manufacturer who built it (I think it was Rockwell International) as an artifact, in full cammo complete with almost all of the radio gear. The Army tried like heck to block the sale and claim almost all the gear under claims of protecting classified information; the purchaser was quick to point out the changes between the prototype and the production vehicles and the fact that the military never actually owned the prototype. It still took them a while to hammer out a compromise that stopped running up legal bills. The civilian owner has supposedly pledged the vehicle to some military museum after he gets done playing with it on ham radio field days and swap meets.I think there must exist somewhere a caveat in the military-surplus conditions that requires removal of military markings for commercial reuse of equipment that may still exist in military service, but waives the requirement for historic preservation or if the military no longer uses said classification of equipment (for example, a Sherman tank, International pickup truck, or steam locomotive). Unfortunately for the preservationists, I think the military STILL has both some SW8s and rebuilt RS4TCs floating around, so...........Or maybe the Army cares and the Air Force doesn't. <:-)Now, what's this perceived bias against Conrail, Amtrak, etc.?

Shaw still has RS4TC #1275 as a backup for the two 80-tonners that replaced the 1249 and 1276. I think we got the two engines because the 1249 had a toasted main genny (now repaired) and the 1276 has a problem with the throttle positions above Run 4 not working plus a flaky motor. To date, nobody has made an issue of the two Air Force engines still being lettered US Air Force.

Shaw still has RS4TC #1275 as a backup for the two 80-tonners that replaced the 1249 and 1276. I think we got the two engines because the 1249 had a toasted main genny (now repaired) and the 1276 has a problem with the throttle positions above Run 4 not working plus a flaky motor. To date, nobody has made an issue of the two Air Force engines still being lettered US Air Force.

Boy - is this simple for me:Paint your equipment which best assists you in telling your story - if that is local railroad history, and, your local railroad had a locomotive like that one, then paint it that one. Start your talk "This locomotive is exactly like the one that worked the local depot switching job back in ...."

What about the argument that you're "faking history" when you do this?For example, Spencer had me fooled with their Norfolk Southern Baldwin for years. Somebody (from outside of the Spencer museum) finally undeceived me and told me it was actually a Peabody Coal unit and that the old NS didn't have any six-axle Baldwins.Not really arguing, just playing devil's advocate...

I think you're confusing Baldwins at NCTM, Matt.Norfolk Southern-original DID have some big-footed Baldwins, seventeen AS-416 A1A-A1A's built in the early 1950s. I *think* the story is that NS's survivors migrated to Peabody Coal, and from there the 1616 ended up at NCTM.Now, the one that WAS a "phony" was the former WM Baldwin VO1000 that NCTM had done up as a Seaboard switcher; it was de-accessioned to the Hagerstown Roundhouse Museum. There are still at least three Seaboard RS-12's sitting in an upper Midwest dead line; I've been haggling to get these distributed to NCTM, SCRRM, Savannah, and/or Florida for years with no luck.

matt,My question that I hoped to be discussed was about paint schemes of private verses government owned Diesels. Or even steam engines if there are any.I would rather see the Chicago & Northeastern on the side of a locomotive than say Maryland Regional Transit myself.What do you folks think?