Railway Preservation News
https://www.rypn.org/forums/

Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19049		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Tim Davis [ Fri Nov 18, 2005 5:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
I've been following the restoration of Lisbon trolley (or tram, as they would say) #730 by the Merseyside Tramway Preservation Society in Birkenhead, England (across the river from Liverpool) via their website.[http://www.mtps.co.uk/news/LISBON.html] - Note: the newest pictures are at the top of this page.Beside re-gauging the truck to standard gauge, they removed the right-side door on each end (passengers enter at the rear of the car as it travels on the left-side of the street) and they gave the car "bumpers" (for want of a better word) like the ones used on the other trolleys in their collection (All double-deckers. Very Nice!).While it's good to see a trolley being restored (the car looks great!) and I understand why they changed the car the way they did, for aesthetic reasons, I would have preferred a more authentic restoration. Am I making to much of this?BTW: Check out the restoration they did with Wallasey car #78. They did a wonderful job with this car. Their homepage: [http://www.mtps.co.uk/index.html]
Author:  Tom Cox [ Fri Nov 18, 2005 7:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
Here's another question. The Age of Steam museum in Dallas Texas obtained an F-7 A unit which was ex-Canadian National, but the member who raised the money also raised the money to have it painted in ATSF war bonnet colors. It is now displayed as an ATSF unit, although the materials make it clear that it was a Canadian National unit and not ATSF and is just displayed as an ATSF engine. Comments??????????Tom CoxI am a member of the museum and don't really have any problem
Author:  Stephen Hussar [ Fri Nov 18, 2005 7:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
One object "standing in" for another, which for whatever reason is in short supply or no longer with us, is not unheard of. This is probably most often done in aircraft preservation. One that comes to mind is the Collings Foundation's B-25. It has been repainted several times to represent different lost aircraft. As far as the Lisbon trolley is concerned, one would hope there are other intact examples around.ImageSame airplaneImage
Author:  Stephen Hussar [ Fri Nov 18, 2005 10:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
Off topic, but more on the Collings Foundation and an explanation of switching paint schemes on their B-24.http://collingsfoundation.org/tour_b-24j.htm
Author:  Onder [ Sat Nov 19, 2005 12:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
I understand why this occurs. Paint is just paint. Reworkingone unit into another is something else. I understand thebrits are recreating a steam locomotive from the bonesof another. I suppose since the donor engine isnot rare it can be accepted. I tend to prefer originals not recreations. It isa great loss in my opinion to hear that the FlyingYankee will not have its original prime mover.Yes, Im aware of the reasons of practicality, butit loses much of the reason that we save old trains.After all the sounds and senses of the originalengine are a big part of the 'experience'. Sort of like going to see a steamer with noslteam whistle. Or worse, dare I sayThomas the Tank Engine with a internalcombustion engine with in.
Author:  Stephen S. Syfrett [ Sat Nov 19, 2005 1:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
Sometimes creating a "standin" is more a matter of practicality than anything. This was a thread of discussion a couple of years ago, back when Thronateeska Heritage Center was working on a Southern Ry bay window caboose. We had X401, but it had been gutted and additional window openings cut in the sides long before I became involved. It was finally decided to do a "standin" for Georgia Northern X153, an older model Southern baywindow caboose acquired by the Georgia Northern in the 1950's. It is not an exact match for the original X153, but for our purposes, it cost much less to do the Georgia Northern standin than to try to do a complete restoration of the X401, especially when every small town in Georgia seems to have one of these bay window cabs in some state of decomposition as a tribute the the local railroad heritage. (Never mind that the Southern never operated on that ACL or SAL track it sits near!) Now if only I could find an intact Southern bay window cab to bring in.
Author:  Ted Miles [ Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
I have to say that I am against making fake artifacts. In these days of computer photography and animation, model making and museums that trade artifacts. It should not be necessary or needed.History should be the written aqnd photographic record of that special part of human endevor. Be it ship, railroads or airplanes they deserve their story to be told as fully as we can do it. Ted Miles
Author:  PCook [ Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
The question of practical vs. authentic restoration has been an ongoing challenge for nearly all preserved museum warships, since elderly ships systems are often impractical to maintain and operate today. Some of these organizations have done a very nice job of hiding the modifications that were needed to provide modern services and use recently manufactured support equipment. The next time you are on the USS MASSACHUSETTS, look for the power transformers and modern commercial air conditioning units that are hidden in various places on the ship, including a few that are inside the tubs of some of the 40mm director stands, where they are above visitors normal viewing range.
Author:  Stephen S. Syfrett [ Sun Nov 20, 2005 3:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
In general, I agree with Ted. However, in Thronateeska's case, the original Georgia Northern X153 was long gone, and, as I mentioned, there are numerous Southern bay window cabs around, some restored, some not and many painted with the town name on it. Given the similarities of the X401 to the X153, why not do a standin? The identity of the X401 was intentionally maintained on the center sill, and when we get our display panels made the identity of the car will be included (as it is on the web site). We are not trying to hide anything or mislead people into believing we have the original X153. We are simply trying to interpret the Georgia Northern in the best way we can, using what was already in the museum collection, with the least amount of cost.It is sort of like the boxcar situation we have. Three cars of the same class from the ACL. I have been planning on doing 3 different ACL paint schemes known to have been used on these cars, but I have also considered doing one as a West India Fruit & Steamship Company car, which was of the exact design and ultimately purchased by the ACL. I know of no WIF cars preserved anywhere. Would it be wrong to do this for interpretive reasons, as well as for a bit of variety in what must be maintained as a small collection of railroad equipment artifacts?If I had it my way, I would do one of these AC&F cars as a replica of a BAR "State of Maine Products" car in the red, white, blue and black scheme. These cars were seen down here in south Georgia. Does anyone know of one of these 40-foot cars being preserved in this paint scheme anywhere? Or even one of the later 50-foot versions?I think there must be flexibility, as long as the rationale is sound. I would not propose doing like the model train companies and paint, for example, Seaboard Air Line on a car type the SAL never owned.
Author:  evicknair [ Sun Nov 20, 2005 3:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
To me it comes down to purpose and intent. In general, I'm with Ted and vastly prefer the real deal. I think visitors respond to that as well. When they know something is authentic, that has gravity to it.However, there are times when I can see exceptions. In restoring Portola's California Zephyr equipment, for instance, we want to have the ability to run a replica train on the mainline. Since no WP B-units survive, we will need to acquire other B-units and repaint them to match our surviving A-unit. Since the intent is to recreate the authentice experience of the train, we're forced to fudge a bit on the actual artifact. However, I will never agree with doing a "replica" and then labelling is as anything but. To be honest, it should always be noted clearly when this is done.Eugene
Author:  Randy Hees [ Sun Nov 20, 2005 8:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
I guess I am going to take an opposing view point.In an operating museum, you are offering a something other than artifacts, you are offering an experience. Within that context, the experience may be more significant than the object.Staying within the genre of street railroads, we have a number of street operations some clearly museums (Ft Collins), some of which might best be described as heritage streetcars (Old Pueblo in Tucson, The F line in San Francisco, Tampa’s Yabor City line) and some are hybrids (McKinney Ave near Dallas).As a group they operate in city streets. Some even provide transportation services to the community. In many cases the cars they operate are less important than the experience they provide. Several of the lines use either foreign or replica cars. Many use PCC’s which never ran on the preserved line.There is a magic to riding an electric car operating in city streets. With apologies to Ted and the group at Rio Vista, this is different than riding a car on a country line. (I learned much of what I know about restoration at Rio Vista, and there restoration of the original Sacramento Northern interurban line is wonderful)While I am not personally familiar with the group in Liverpool which started this discussion, from their website, it appears that they have done wonderful work preserving local trams, and it also appears that the Lisbon car restoration is not so much a false restoration as much as a restoration to an earlier scheme and a gauge change. These people are not just using PCC trucks under chicken house bodies. They are primarily collecting and accurately restoring local cars for use on a local line like some of our heritage lines. The Lisbon car, while slightly off target, is a good restoration of a early car, to be operated on city streets with local cars.I can imagine riding the line in one of their double deck trams, meeting an opposing car. The image is magical.
Author:  Erich Russ [ Mon Nov 21, 2005 8:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
The five streetcars in Seattle came from Australia and have had their drop center doors removed during a complete rebuilding. I rode this short route a couple of years ago and it was enjoyable.It's an operation rather than a museum, but they found a way to utilize 1928 cars and make them fully accessible.http://transit.metrokc.gov/tops/bus/waterfront_streetcar.htmlhttp://world.nycsubway.org/us/seattle/streetcar.htmlhttp://www.railpage.org.au/tram/usa.htmlSince they are imports, I suppose I am less concerned with authenticity. (Sorry Aussies!) To me the only thing that detracted from the operation was the use of safety strobe lights.Erich
Author:  Chris Salmonson [ Mon Nov 21, 2005 8:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
I rode those trolleys! It's amazing that they operate so often dispite their age.
Author:  wesp [ Mon Nov 21, 2005 8:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
I am not much for creating "stand-ins" to fill gaps in a collection. It either is or it isn't. Sure we could take the McGuire sweeper we just got from Iowa and rebuild it to look like the 1899 McQuire we lost in the fire. But what's the point in doing that? Better to leave the McGuire as-is to tell more of the McGuire sweeper story.Wesley
Author:  NewHaven0401 [ Thu Nov 24, 2005 12:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Practical vs. Authentic Restoration
"Voting with the checkbook" can hardly be considered to be acceptble museum protocol ????
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/