| Railway Preservation News https://www.rypn.org/forums/ |
|
| Hickory Creek to Montreal https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18637 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | bobyar2001 [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 8:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Hickory Creek to Montreal |
Ran across this upcoming trip aboard the former NYC Hickory Creek observation car. Once part of the 20th Century Limited, it was christened by Dwight Eisenhower in 1948 for its maiden run.If this is the same car I saw at the Black River & Western in 1999, it is an amazing transformation, as it was in horrible shape then. The trip runs along the Hudson River and Lake Champlain, one of the best scenic rides anywhere.http://www.railandcruisetravel.com/MTRweekender.htm |
|
| Author: | scrmcurator [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 8:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hickory Creek to Montreal |
Interesting tidbit - as the Hickory Creek was heading north, the Mountain View, tail car from the Broadway, was headed south. The two passed each other on the Corridor. The fans aboard each stared at one anothers' cars in shock. It was one of those poetic coincidences that the two cars should be moving in opposite directions on the same piece of railroad on the same day.The Mountain View is currently behind Williams Brice Stadium in Columbia, SC. After the last home game for the Gamecocks, it will be coming to The SC RR Museum. We expect to use it as a first-class car for the Santa Trains immediately after Thanksgiving. |
|
| Author: | robertjohndavis [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 9:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hickory Creek to Montreal |
You are right, Bob. It is a heck of a change from back then. I still don't understand how this fits in as part of the New Jersey museum collection... it used a lot of funds that might have gone to a relic with NJ ties, but it is a beauty. |
|
| Author: | steamtown observer [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hickory Creek to Montreal |
robertjohndavis wrote: You are right, Bob. It is a heck of a change from back then. I still don't understand how this fits in as part of the New Jersey museum collection... it used a lot of funds that might have gone to a relic with NJ ties, but it is a beauty. Now that Phillipsburg has voted to develop the land where the museum was supposed to go for residential purposes, it appears that URHS and the Friends group is attempting to relocate to a piece of farmland somewhere along the NS (ex-Lackawanna) line between Phillipsburg and Hackettstown. Guys, at some point you should throw in the towel.
|
|
| Author: | Joshua K. Blay [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hickory Creek to Montreal |
Wasn't the interior configuration significiantly changed on the HC?Joshua |
|
| Author: | SZuiderveen [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 12:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hickory Creek to Montreal |
Quote: Wasn't the interior configuration significiantly changed on the HC? When it was received from RB,and B&B; it was basically gutted inside. It has been recreated from photographs, particulaly in the lounge area, to reproduce the vintage 20th Century appearance. While the bedrooms and the buffet are approximately correct, and use vintage appearing materials, they are not exact reproductions.Steve Zuiderveen
|
|
| Author: | rev66vette [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 2:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hickory Creek to Montreal |
Are you serious about your remark " throwing in the towel"? I find this a curious remark on a forum such as this dedicated to railway history and preservation. Shouldn't we be encouraging ALL aspects of restoration and collecting, whether we agree with them or not. I may not agree with some of the things regarding the group in question, but I certainly couldn't fault them for their years of trying. And after many years, they're thinking has obviously changed, which could be argued as good or bad. And it seems like the piece in question is actually getting them some revenue besides. I know they have tried to get many area groups actively interested in acquiring or administering to pieces relative to many area railroad groups. This hasn't worked out either. Everyone seems to be busy with their own things. That's why we can continually make statements such as " wouldn't it be nice if someone" or " I wish someone would start so and so", and "Why didn't anyone save this or that". The fact of the matter is that all the "doers" in this hobby, avocation, or whatever you want to call it, are already busy doing their own things . The last thing they want is someone else telling them to assume yet another project. I just think that we should temper our criticism when it comes to topics like this. I think the Hickory Creek is an excellent restoration, and proud that it came from a group in our area. |
|
| Author: | Tom Cornillie [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 2:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hickory Creek to Montreal |
In terms of throwing in the towel - the amount of decay may very well force them to scrap much of their equipment in the future if nothing is done to stabilize it. As I have suggested before on this forum - Building pole barns to bring the most vulnerable pieces indoors would go far in buying this group time before a permanent site can be located, funded, and ultimately constructed. Many may consider the Hickory Creek to be a fine restoration, however it is important to remember that much of the collection could have been brought under cover for what it cost renovate this car. Tom Cornillie |
|
| Author: | steamtown observer [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 3:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hickory Creek to Montreal |
Quote: Are you serious about your remark " throwing in the towel"? I am very serious. The topic of a New Jersey Transportation Museum, URHS and their "friends" groups has come up often over the years on this site. The policy of painting equipment based on the interests of the leadership instead of historical accuracy was an early black mark.Rob points out:Quote: You are right, Bob. It is a heck of a change from back then. I still don't understand how this fits in as part of the New Jersey museum collection... it used a lot of funds that might have gone to a relic with NJ ties, but it is a beauty. The URHS website boasts that $650,000 in funds were used to "restore" the Hickory Creek. As Rob says, what authentic NJ objects have been allowed to rot while this money was spent? The car NEVER ran in the state of New Jersey. Yet they call it the cornerstone of the planned state museum. Stuff like this makes all of us trying to make railroad preservation a serious profession/study look really bad.New Jersey has a bad reputation in general (just look at the last govenor). These guys have played NJ politics and done it badly. The presentation (more like an angry rant) they made last month to the Phillipsburg City Council has ended any chance of compromise on the land issue. Now they propose to move east on land that has serious potential for industrial development - and rail use. The ultimate irony - a rail historical group may prevent the railroad from carrying more freight!I believe that whatever serious effort there was when this museum effort began 20+ years ago it has decayed into an embarassing mess. The fact that the whole effort now is about a non-related NYC car has been restored (at taxpayers expense) so a select few wealthy individuals can travel around on weekend getaways (not even in NJ!) proves this.I believe that the railroad groups that make up the URHS should be embarassed to be associated with it and should pull the plug. The handfull of items that have historical values should be donated to existing institutions where they will get the care and restoration they have been denied these last 20 years.
|
|
| Author: | ctjacks [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hickory Creek to Montreal |
While I have found the discussion on the proposed Phillipsburg museum to be interesting...to bring the topic back to the Hickory Creek:The Ringling Bros. cars typically are gutted, including the rest rooms, hallways, etc., and the interior they get is similar to a modern rec-room in someone's basement. Not bad work, but nothing like an original railroad interior. The Hickory Creek got this treatment as well, so its original interior was basically gone.Chris. |
|
| Author: | Alexander D. Mitchell IV [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Separate But Equal Arguments: |
Quoting a two-page photo article in the October Railpace:"Of the $650,000 spent to completely restore the Hickory Creek, $617,000 was provided by the Federal Government through an Intermodal Surface Transportation Enhancement grant; $6200 was obtained by individual monetary donations . . ."I'm going to ask a point-blank question: Can we assume that an ISTEA grant would not have been applicable towards pole sheds or a similar shelter for any collection at Phillipsburg or elsewhere?Second, does that fact that I can ask this question plainly point out that the entire use of the ISTEA/TEA-21/SAFETEA program is leaving our vocation wide open for charges of pork-barrel spending and government waste? I'm sorry, but I investigated the $200-million "bridges-to-nowhere" in Alaska to islands with little or no population (yes, the reason that they want the bridges--which the "pork" articles don't tell you--is that the islands are homes to major airports that would serve as economic gateways if they weren't connected to the mainland by a precarious ferry..... I'm not defending the bridges, but I'm just showing you the other side of the coin). I have an easier time justifying the expenditure of $200 million on an Alaskan bridge than I do making a case to the general public why their dollars should have been spent on the Hickory Creek.And for all the tax money spent on the restoration of the Hickory Creek, anyone care to wager what the odds are of my ever getting a chance to ride the damned thing cheap? Ha ha ha ha ha....... |
|
| Author: | rev66vette [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 5:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hickory Creek to Montreal |
Well, your opinion has been documented on several occasions with regard to this subject of "politics" as well as your animosity to the group in question. However, I totally agree with you on the state of New Jersey politics, especially when it comes to Mr Perucci who is the proponent to build in Phillipsburg on the property originally desired for the museum. His partner is none other than Jim Florio, our ex-Governor who literally taxed the death out of New Jersey residents. This same "team", for lack of a better word, is the force behind the development of the Bethlehem Steel property for casino gambling. They are also the law firm for the Delaware Bridge Toll Commission. This should give our friends in Pennsylvania a good dose of New Jersey medicine also. The people there are "all-for" this venture as evidenced in the papers last week. I wish everyone the best in these endeavors. Again, with regard to restoration, it is in a state of flux due to many variables out of control. Someone mentioned Pole barns. They aren't an answer. In New Jersey, they are a thing of the past, and many towns will no longer allow them for anything other than agricultural use. If your theory of the lack of ammunition by these museum people is correct, I seriously doubt that they will have the power to stop a class one operation from developing industrial land. Like I said in my earlier post, this accomplishment, was done by a group of "doers" whether we like it or not. They ostensibly did all the things necessary to accomplish this objective. I would think that it took considerable time and effort, something that a lot of people won't give up their keyboard time for. I too, wish for the time that things would go a different way, that Doyle would paint his PA in warbonnet colors, or Steamtown would have an American built locomotive on the main-line and I can't wait to ride authentic E-L cars through the Delaware water-gap. But we have to take what's available to us, and the menu is getting smaller every day. Finally, I don't think we will ever see a museum in New Jersey, and I certainly hope it isn't from the proponents throwing in the towel. I apologize to the moderators in advance as this is probably a little off-topic. |
|
| Author: | superheater [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 5:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Separate But Equal Arguments: Good Point |
Second, does that fact that I can ask this question plainly point out that the entire use of the ISTEA/TEA-21/SAFETEA program is leaving our vocation wide open for charges of pork-barrel spending and government waste? I think this is a point that is well worth considering. Restoring old equipment (with less and less potential to operate/demonstrate/interpret/exhibit in a historic manner) does open up the community to the charge that that recipient organization is merely a mirage for a private fantasy masquerading as a public purpose. This is where I get uncomfortable with preservation ethics that focus exclusively on the object- if its not used to engender an appreciation among the young, that relic will become refuse. It all comes down to demographics.. those who remember the halcyon days of the railroads are beginning to pass on and will be completely gone in a few decades, those who received first-hand testimony of the last witnessing generation (me) are now getting grey and it seems (with some exceptions who post here) that many under 35 don't have any time or interest in the past. |
|
| Author: | rev66vette [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 5:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Separate But Equal Arguments: Good Point |
Answer to your point-blank question: Yes, it probably could have been used otherwise. However, again, the Pole-shed situation is not as clean-cut as it would seem. The equipment in question will probably never get to Phillipsburg. It's scattered at various locations throughout the state. Once again, these style structures are not encouraged in many communities throughout New Jersey, and I have first hand knowledge of this fact after trying for years to get one for restoration purposes. Your assessment of the whole ISTEA grant process is pretty accurate. I had the books once that listed all the grants and I was literally taken back by what I saw. These grants, although somewhat accurately termed as Pure-pork" have become literal political footballs throughout the country. The damage has been done, I'm sad to say. The justification seems to get harder as the program gets older, but the money keeps coming. And there's much red-tape along the way. I've heard stories that some groups have shied away from applying because they require an inspection of ones "books". Whether this is a "private fantasy" is a good point too. But whether or not, this organization in question does have a board, and chose through it's planning to undertake this project. If there were major objectors among the participants or not, I don't know. But they pushed it through and restored the car. The interesting thing I think, is what will happen to this car should the entire museum effort fail??? |
|
| Author: | Alexander D. Mitchell IV [ Fri Sep 30, 2005 7:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Separate But Equal Arguments: Good Point |
Quote: The interesting thing I think, is what will happen to this car should the entire museum effort fail??? I have an interesting idea for approaching that situation:Federal rules regarding commuter rail equipment in which Federal money has been spent towards acquisition or rehabilitation require that said equipment be made available to other agencies, apparently for a token transfer fee of $1. (I'm sure our two resident experts will jump in with the specifics.) Metra's ex-C&NW bilevels were thus made available to VRE and MARC (I think; I understand some came from a private broker) on those terms; I believe that similar policies transferred VRE's ex-MBTA "Boise Budds" to Connecticut DOT. I say if NJMOT self-implodes, the Hickory Creek should be made available to the RR Museum of Pa. (a good home lacking some NYC representation) or a similar "qualified" rail museum in NYC territory (Elkhart if it doesn't self-destruct, Lake Shore in North East, Pa., Mad River & NKP in Bellevue, Ohio, etc.) for $1.00.The other option would be for the car to be acquired by a separate organization for a similar sum as part of a trade--for example, just to make up a hypothetical but implausible example, acquired by Altoona to trade to a certain owner of a PRR business car for his car........ If anybody ever attempts to profit from the now-increased value of the Hickory Creek now, heads should most definitely roll.
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|