| Railway Preservation News https://www.rypn.org/forums/ |
|
| What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29384 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | filmteknik [ Sun May 09, 2010 8:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
With the former Friends buying 261 I presume things go forward much as before except they have additional funds to raise since their overhaul money is going for the purchase. I don't suppose there is much chance that they will still get involved with another engine. I'm sure the answer to the question about what other engines were being considered is "all of them" given the parameters we've discussed ad nauseum...midwest related, able to move a productive consist fast and reliably etc. I wonder then what engines had gotten to the negotiating stage. And I am especially interested in knowing what engine Doug was talking about here: Quote: I'll tell ya what: it's going to be interesting, and just to fuel the rumor mill one of the projects Steve is considering would almost certainly leave people utterly stunned for a good while. Is it time for showing cards or is there perhaps a hand still in play? Steve |
|
| Author: | tomgears [ Sun May 09, 2010 10:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
Don't discount that another engine might be in the works one day in the future. Word on the street a number of years ago was a second engine was a strong possibility. How many collectors stop at just one? Ten years out you never know what might happen. |
|
| Author: | Alexander D. Mitchell IV [ Sun May 09, 2010 11:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
Well, you see, Sandberg heard somewhere about this wonderful steam locomotive that was in a flooded quarry......... [runs for his life] |
|
| Author: | tomgears [ Mon May 10, 2010 8:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
Quote: Well, you see, Sandberg heard somewhere about this wonderful steam locomotive that was in a flooded quarry......... TrainGirl Kelli, DLW Joe (Retired after 45 years) and Mark the Steamtown exhibit supervisor are teaming up to drag it out of the quarry. |
|
| Author: | robertjohndavis [ Mon May 10, 2010 12:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
I am 100% convinced only the first shoe has dropped. We'll see. I may just be the victim of rumor+wishful thinking. Rob |
|
| Author: | Gary Gray [ Mon May 10, 2010 1:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
Per some of the constantly flying rumours, perhaps a red train & matching 4-8-4 to go with their business car.....................8-) http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPictur ... id=1900932 |
|
| Author: | wilkinsd [ Mon May 10, 2010 1:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
What I find humorous with all of this somewhat useless speculation is that when N&W 611 was runninng, many fans bemoaned the fact that she had become "common" and was not "spetacular" anymore. Now, nearly 20 years later, people want her back. What is not spetacular about MILW 261? The fact that the group that has operated her for years is now the owner, and that should ensure future operations is spetacular enough. The fact that the group can put a matched passenger train behind her is spetacular. Seeing the 261 pass through at speed is spetacular. Heck, even seeing the Flagg Coal 0-4-0T is spetacular to many. Bottom line, steam is spetacular, and we should be glad it is around. Be glad for what is occurring, and quit bemoaning what hasn't, might, or won't happen. |
|
| Author: | filmteknik [ Mon May 10, 2010 3:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
I'm not bemoaning anything at all. Quite the contrary. Since someone who had talked to Steve Sandberg was told of an engine that was being considered that would have stunned us all I'd be curious what engine that was--even if it was a total long shot. If Doug doesn't want to say I understand and respect that. Worth asking about though. I would like to be stunned. Everyone elses' replies...well anyone can think of something outrageous but the only thing stunning would be what was actually given serious consideration so pure speculation is meaningless. Steve |
|
| Author: | steaminfo [ Mon May 10, 2010 3:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
filmteknik wrote: I'm not bemoaning anything at all. Quite the contrary. Since someone who had talked to Steve Sandberg was told of an engine that was being considered that would have stunned us all I'd be curious what engine that was--even if it was a total long shot. If Doug doesn't want to say I understand and respect that. Worth asking about though. I would like to be stunned. Everyone elses' replies...well anyone can think of something outrageous but the only thing stunning would be what was actually given serious consideration so pure speculation is meaningless. Steve With a little luck, I might just be able to "stun" you in a week or two. Discussions/negotiations are ongoing with the owners of a total of at least three (3) big locomotives. Patience. Plus, Thursday, Steve and I are going to sit down and right a 'behind-the-scenes" history of what transpired with the 261 over the last two or three years. |
|
| Author: | robertjohndavis [ Mon May 10, 2010 9:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
See, some people know where the bodies are hidden. Doug knows where the other shoe is. Waiting for the drop... :-) Rob |
|
| Author: | filmteknik [ Mon May 10, 2010 11:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
Eggcellent! Look how much entertainment 261 continues to provide and it's sitting there cold and stripped! Steve |
|
| Author: | j32885 [ Tue May 11, 2010 1:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
Here was the possible replacement list for 261: Burlington Route (Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy) - #3001, 4-6-4 (City Of Ottumwa, Iowa) - #3002, 4-6-4 (City Of LaCrosse, Wisconsin - CB&Q #4000) - #3003, 4-6-4 (City Of Burlington, Iowa) - #3006, 4-6-4 (Galesburg Railroad Museum) - #3007, 4-6-4 (Illinois Railroad Museum) - #4963, 2-8-2 (Illinois Railroad Museum) - #4978, 2-8-2 (Union Depot Railroad Museum) - #5629, 4-8-4 (Colorado Railroad Museum) - #5631, 4-8-4 (City Of Sheridan, Wyoming) - #5633, 4-8-4 (Douglass Railroad Interpretive Center) Frisco (Saint Louis & San Francisco) - #1522, 4-8-2 (Museum Of Transportation) Great Northern - #1355, 4-6-2 (Milwaukee Railroad Shops) - #2507, 4-8-2 (Klickitat County, Washington) - #2523, 4-8-2 (Kandiyohi County Historical Society) - #2584, 4-8-4 (City Of Havre, Montana) - #3059, 2-8-2 (City Of Williston, North Dakota) Milwaukee Road (Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific): - #265, 4-8-4 (Illinois Railroad Museum) Nickel Plate Road (New York, Chicago, & St. Louis) - #765, 2-8-4 (Ft. Wayne Historical Society) Norfolk & Western - #611, 4-8-4 (Virginia Transportation Museum - City Of Roanoke, Virginia) Northern Pacific - #328, 4-6-0 (Minnesota Transportation Museum) - #2153, 4-6-2 (Minnesota Transportation Museum) - #2156, 4-6-2 (Minnesota Transportation Museum) - #2435, 2-6-2 (Lake Superior Railroad Museum - North Shore Scenic) Santa Fe - #2903, 4-8-4 (Illinois Railroad Museum) - #2913, 4-8-4 (City Of Fort Madison, Iowa) Seattle, Portland, & Spokane - #700, 4-8-4 (Oregon Rail Heritage Foundation - City Of Portland, Oregon) Soo Line (Minneapolis, St. Paul, & Sault Ste. Marie) - #735, 4-6-2 (City Of Minot, North Dakota) - #736, 4-6-2 (City Of Appleton, Wisconsin) - #1003, 2-8-2 (Wisconsin Automotive Museum - 1003 Operations, LLP) - #1024, 2-8-2 (City Of Thief River Falls, Minnesota) - #2713, 4-6-2 (City Of Stevens Point, Wisconsin) - #2714, 4-6-2 (City Of Fond Du Lac, Wisconsin) - #2718, 4-6-2 (National Railroad Museum) - #2719, 4-6-2 (Lake Superior Railroad Museum - North Shore Scenic) |
|
| Author: | Alexander D. Mitchell IV [ Tue May 11, 2010 2:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
wilkinsd wrote: What I find humorous with all of this somewhat useless speculation is that when N&W 611 was runninng, many fans bemoaned the fact that she had become "common" and was not "spetacular" anymore. Now, nearly 20 years later, people want her back. I think what happened was not that people "bemoaned" her being commonplace. What happened was a certain derailment in the Great Dismal Swamp. Before said derailment, NS seemed willing to run 611--within reason and restrictions for curves based on her high center of gravity--at what the track and loco could bear, but later reined in all steam locomotives systemwide with a 40-mph speed restriction. One of my fondest memories was chasing 611 on a run from Buffalo to Conneaut, Ohio, grabbing photos of 611 at sunset creeping down the street trackage of Erie. West of Erie, I somehow blundered upon a good gravel road that paralleled the former NKP for several miles just as 611 came storming alongside. That couple miles of post-sunset pacing at speeds in excess of 60, with no one else around, will be among my richest railfan memories. By comparison, 611 or 1218 ambling along the Southern main at 40 was like trotting a racehorse, mentally speaking. Nice to see, but you know she wants to be let loose and do what she was meant to do. |
|
| Author: | big-bad-2666 [ Tue May 11, 2010 3:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
j32885 wrote: Here was the possible replacement list for 261: ... Was there a reason why C&O 614 wasnt there? |
|
| Author: | Bobharbison [ Tue May 11, 2010 4:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What "utterly stunning" engine might have replaced 261? |
big-bad-2666 wrote: j32885 wrote: Here was the possible replacement list for 261: ... Was there a reason why C&O 614 wasnt there? Well, at first I was thinking that was a snide remark, but then I realized it is a good question. I suspect maybe the asking price is too steep, but I would also be interested in the answer to why it wasn't considered. There are several others on the list that seem unlikely prospects, so it would not have been too unreasonable to toss 614 in the mix for initial consideration. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|