Hello all,

I posted this idea in response to the thread on Winslow Jct. Passenger cars, along with some specifics on this group of cars. However, it also occured to me that the same strategy could be employed by those interested in preserving EL and other equipment presently stored outside in North Jersey - so I am posting an amended version again as a new thread (and because you may not have seen my post if you don't use the flat view).

I do not think that this equipment is suffering from outright neglect. In Eastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey there have been/are several preservation efforts whereby one individual purchases a piece of equipment and then hopes to attract volunteer labor to help restore it. Obviously, such efforts are limited by the abilities and continued devotion of volunteers as well as the lack of even rudimentary repair facilities. I think that this is also an accurate statement for the groups comprising the URHS. It seems that for many of these cars, work is progressing - albeit VERY slowly. However, this pace of work does bode well for passenger cars.

However, these cars are important – and should not be allowed to rust into the ground for a lack of organization.

As a solution, I suggest that the private owner(s), (the railroad specifc and/or regional groups - depending on the cars involved) and other interested individuals meet to form a long-term preservation plan for this equipment and some short term action items.

At the top of my list for a short-term priority would be the construction of a pole-barn to house this equipment could be constructed for between $150,000 and $300,000 (based on costs of similar buildings at the Illinois Railway Musuem, with a range to allow for differing labor and site preparation costs). Putting these cars indoors would go a long way toward arresting their deterioration.

Moreover, having both organization and a facility would give the project credibility – which is important for attracting both outside fundraising and volunteers.

While $150,000 - $300,000 may seem like a large sum, it is roughly what it would cost to make a passenger car in otherwise good condition Amtrak compatible.

Is there anybody here who is in the region and who would be willing to initiate the creation of such an effort? It would take somebody who understands broader principles behind historic preservation and conservation; as well as non-profit and for profit businesses. Likewise the person would have to be willing to endure friction or outright hostility from individuals and groups who would refuse to partner/sit down together because of decades old misunderstandings. Moreover, the person would have to be willing to compromise and let others take the credit in order to facilitate partnerships? The possible result – saving a unique group of passenger cars representing 1920’s-1950’s PRR passenger trains (or a 1930-1980 EL commuter, etc).

Tom Cornillie

Tom,

As a NJ native I might be a little cynical on this, but the URHS was formed to do exactly what you suggest, which is round-up numerous groups with equipment and form a cohesive plan.

It hasn't worked yet to the extent you describe.

Some of these groups are down right tribal. Many of them are new tribes that split off from bigger tribes because someone didn't agree on the color mix for Cornell red or someone else prefered Yeungling to Bud. You know the drill...

The are reasons so many small groups (and larger ones like the Reading Tech) have developed... its because the politics and in-fighting in the other teams posed too great a barrier for meaningful preservation.

Obviously there are exceptions, but if you look at the Jim Thorpe saga, you'll get an idea of the kind of bullsh*t in NJ groups.

Rob

While I do not have enough details, I have followed for years the squabbles between the various groups by reading between the lines of various reports that shy away from discussing the conflicts outrightly.

Nevertheless, I will assume that the both the membership and (perhaps) even the leaders of these groups are rational actors - and want this equipment preserved but simply lack the capital to make it happen or the will to cooperate with others to accrue it.

Therefore, I will provide a bit more structure to what I outlined before.

- The creation of a new NPO formed, to receive financial backing from various organizations and individuals

- The new NPO acquires the equipment outright from the group/individual -
This structure is particularly well suited for conflicting groups, as the group owning equipment is released from further responsibility to it and they can continue to exist in their present form to do what they wish. The new NPO, being a new organization has no formal ties to any existing organization. Where other organizations contribute funding, they so on a voluntary basis (e.g. the PRRTHS giving a donation/grant to the RMPA).

I fully agree that the entire New Jersey situation is frustrating - especially when one considers how much has been spent without taking basic steps to stabilize the equipment. However, with more and more people talking about "rationalizing" (read: scrapping) various portions the collection, I think that even the most hardened are realizing that status quo is not sustainable.

It is important that options other than scrapping be developed and presented while there is still time to meaningfully discuss them and make them actionable. Waiting until a scrapping deadline date is all but futile.

Tom Cornillie

This topic is interesting to me because I have been around the edges of New Jersey railroading and then preservation for years. I don't believe you can preserve any of this equipment by committee. I think the URHS has proven that. What needs to happen is for there to be a core group that are dedicated and hard working to a specific cause.

Two examples in recent history. Back in the late 1980's the original NYS&W T&HS members secured a lease for an original NYS&W RDC. This car had been nicely abused by the CNJ, NJDOT-NJT and finally in Boston on the MBTA. A core group took the thing apart, piece by piece and got it completely restored and operable. (Since then the group has wandered onto things far afield from that original focus - but that's another story). The second story is the Erie Lackawanna Dining car group. What if, at this late date you could assemble enough passenger cars to field a decent 1960's passenger train? Well these guys have, one by one, put together several such cars. From the photos I have seen here occasionly it looks like the first diner will come together. Again, a core group of do-ers.

Certainly these examples are more piecemeal than what Tom proposes and what URHS proports to do. But these are 2 more passenger cars saved and restored than if they waited for a committee.

Say these cars do get preserved and restored either by URHS or by a successor group. What then would the plan be for them? Use them in excursions? Where? Put them in a musem? Where would the money come from to keep these cars up?

Don't get me wrong: as a New Jerseyan I would very much like to see these cars preserved, but I think a long-term plan is also needed before any restoration of these cars is started.

Chris J.

The concept is novel but perhaps a bit "Utopian". I commend posters Davis and the "Steamtown Observer" for their keen observations with regard to URHS/NYSW THS/and the political overtures of many of these and similar groups. Been there, done that.

I was active in the restoration of NYSW RDC M-1 and was an active member of the Mechanical Divison from 1990 until January of this year. As the Steamtown Observer accurately states " The group has wandered onto things far afield from their original focus". (Probably due to having open elections for Trustees positions, ex: New Board, new focus, but once again that's yet ANOTHER story).

To say that we need a core group isn't quite the answer. The old saying goes: "How many ways can you slice this pie?" If one were to surmise that our appeals would bring a group "out of the woodwork" so to speak is highly speculative.

As mentioned, the Erie Dining Car Society is in fact a group of "doers" but they've contracted out their work to Ozark Mountain, and that's an indication of a firm commitment that will lead to a result! Not to have it lay in a field, and pray that someone will come along to the rescue. Money talks!

The concept of building a "pole barn" also a bit whimsical. In the winter of 1994 the old Newfoundland shop, built by the Morris County Central in 1974 collapsed. This was a "pole barn". The NYSW group immediately went to work to have a new structure built and the building was built but not after a lengthy period of time. They found that todays building codes in most of the towns adjacent to the railroad precluded the use of such buildings other than for a agricultural nature. This was 1994, not 1974! All plans submitted had to be by a certified licensed engineer with the appropriate seal, and every board member of the town's building committee supplied a copy. An engineering study, including soil tests, the whole nine yards. What they hoped would be a six month endeavor turned into years, not counting the lease, permits, and inspections, and other red-tape escapades.

Then the fact of ordering the building, soliciting bids, electrical plans, services such as water and electric, special plans for footings, more inspections.

I hate to see these things lying around as much as anyone else. But I've worked out there, and as mentioned in many previous posts by many others, there's simply not enough "doers" out there, and what 's presently there are not available to simply drop what he or she is doing and take on yet another project.

As for the description of that individual that we're looking for, I sure would like to see him come along in my lifetime and I guess that we should never give up hope that he (or she) may be out there!

Good topic, thanks for listening.

There have been several points raised, so I will briefly address them

The type of organization I am proposing would not be like a traditional railfan group/historical society that has many interests or departments. Likewise, attention should also be paid to how maritime and historic building preservation have been organized and carried out – which is largely due to their ability to articulate the significance of efforts within a larger social and historical context – which is then used to make their efforts of interest to a broader range of individuals and benefactors. As others have noted – there are not enough resources in the traditional railfan community to make such a project work. I agree! – and it is time to look outside of this relatively small population for support.

I agree that a long term plan is absolutely essential - but I haven't done all the research to determine exactly what one should be (I would estimate that it would take a few hundred hours to research and write a comprehensive document). However, what I can say is that the prime focus need to be placed on devising means to stem the further deterioration. I have suggested using pole barns because it is a low-cost option to provide many years of indoor storage – for example, the several at the Illinois Railway Museum are over 30 years old. Yes, building construction is expensive – but it is a necessary expense if these cars are to survive.

Obtaining indoor storage is step one – and taking this big step forward provides a basis to then make decisions over how restoration work should be organized and carried out and what the ultimate goal of the project should be. This also provides a completely different cost structure – as it would costs far less to any of this equipment undercover than it would to return it to any kind of revenue service. I think that too much emphasis has been placed on a how soon a given piece of equipment will restored to operation, how it will be used once it is restored – while not enough attention is paid to preserving it before/during the restoration process. I think this is one of the roots of the persistent friction in New Jersey (and perhaps other places too) as every body focuses on getting there share of the benefits while the equipment languishes and restoration costs rise as the equipment deteriorates.

Where should this be done? I would suggest that this should be done wherever the greatest support is – and where it would be welcomed by a community and could possibly augment other historic preservation efforts. The Cape May Seashore Line has done some impressive restoration work at Rio Grande, NJ and Tuckahoe, NJ. and their line would provide an appropriate place to display and operate such equipment when the project would reach that point. Likewise, the Ohio Central may be interested in such a project as it would nicely compliment their steam locomotive collection. There may be other such places where the project would augment non-railroad historic preservation efforts.

As I said before, now is the time to talk about how accomplish the preservation of this equipment while there is still time to actually do something. Dwelling on past failures has only limited usefulness. If you do not like my plan/idea, what are yours? By posting alternative plans of actions and constructively criticizing them we can work together to create some workable ideas. If we don’t, who will?

Tom Cornillie

2004:



Are we too late?

http://railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=174322

Tom Cornillie

"Stainless steel", my @$$. I have lots of respect for the Cape May Seashore Lines, but it erodes every time I see this...............

When I first down-loaded this photo I thought it was taken of the ex NYSW M-2 and M-4 that are languishing in a similar condtion in Rochelle Park, New Jersey.

The major RR's in Northern New Jersey are no longer accomodating "gratis" moves of equipment. The NYSW Historical people have basically isolated themselves in Phillipsburg, New Jersey, 75 miles away. The last move of the 142 steam locomotive cost somewhere in the area of $15,000+ and involved three railroads. That could be considered a "bargain" by anyone other than a non-profit.

I guess everyone can have an opinion as to whether theres ever going to be a solution to this equipment stored throughout this state.

R.O.

Tom,

I have been thinking about the same thing. I recently joined the Jersey Shore Commuters Club which has a "private" section of a Comet coach but used to run a P-70. That car is in the URHS collection, and I would love to see it back out and restored (Juniata Terminal?).


Your pole barn plan has merit, though the big cost might be moving the worthy pieces to wherever you build the barn.

The Winslow equipment is mostly private or ARHS stock, not URHS so your point of cooperation is well taken.

Rob

Before you damn the CMSL, read up on the news articles and see what role NIMBYS and the declining social mores of my home state have played in this.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=cape-may-seashore-lines+vandalism&btnG=Search

The fact that it is now 2 years later and the situation is the same or worse tells you all you need to know about the NJ "preservation" scene.

If that isn't enough, the URHS/"Friends" organizations have just presented a brand new plan to build a museum in a corn field about 10 miles east of Phillipsburg, NJ. The plan calls for restoring the Morris Canal, building a car barn for a fleet of old busses, having a loop of track with an overhead wire for trolleys and an amusement park type kids train (to entertain families!). Most importantly it calls for NO RAILROAD EQUIPMENT, TRACKS, TRAINS, NOTHING!

Please read it for yourself to laugh (or cry):
http://www.njthc.org/news/WarrenCtyFreeholdersDec202006%5B1%5D.pdf

Maybe they plan on paying for this with the value of the scrap metal from the no-longer needed railroad equipment!

Unfortunatly, the 1995 decision to not persue locating the NJ Transportation Heritage Center in Liberty State Park has proved to be a fatal error(as some of us then said it would be), and subsequent efforts to fund its construction in remote Phillipsburg and now an even more remote site in a County owned cornfield have been and will continue to be a waste of time and energy.
As was the case a decade ago and remains the case today, the ONLY way a facility worthy of the effort will ever get built is IF it can attract substantial corporate sponsorship funding and that is only feasible if its located where the exposure makes the expense a good business investment.
Liberty State Park currently gets 3 million plus visitors/year,most of whom come to board the boats to the Statue of Liberty or Ellis Island and that number grows each year. A reasonably well put together and promoted museum attraction there could certainly get 10% of them to be paid visitors which equals a starter audience of 300,000/year.
You couldn't get 300,000 people to go to P'Burg if you PAID them $10/head to come!!
The whole notion of creating it out in the boonies has been a loser since day one and remains that today!!
Sad but true!!
Ross Rowland

What's a shame here is that this topic started out as a request for help and it reverted into something somewhat less than positive.

The idea of simply focusing on the preservation of equipment via various structures, regardless of ownership of the items to be stored, is an outstanding idea and should be supported by the preservation community.

As to Warren County being the boonies, there are few places left in NJ that might qualify for such designation. There's 103,000 people living in the county with many more commuting through it from Pennsylvania to jobs in north Jersey. Two major interstates run through it (80 and 78) and the median household income is quite a bit higher than the national average.

Certainly Liberty State Park would have been an outstanding site, but that is behind us. Based on the above, the new site seems to have merit. Its starting small. I would suspect a focus on school groups and on what I call the "Volvo crowd" or families that are fairly well off and within an hour ride of the museum.

Again, I'd say lets support these guys as well in their attempt to get something off the ground.

And as to "amusement type trains" being a part of it, such trains were a part of Jersey history with their extensive use along the Jersey shore and the NJ tie to Cagney locomotives. Plus, from a business plan perspective, it may bring in a few bucks.

Lets be positive and supportive of these efforts. Its better than the alternative of doing nothing.

J.R. May