Hello all.

As I finish up my college education, I often find myself pining to be volunteering at the rail museum back home. When I'm not working on final projects, I find myself coming up with various ideas for improving exhibits at the museum (I'm currently working on a soundscape idea for the depot).

We've talked about having a place for the kids to climb and explore at our museums. In the recent "what is preservation" thread, the issue came up about whether or not an artifact is to be used (which include the discussion of whether or not the car is tour-able).

There's always the option of the train-shaped playground, but they usually aren't very realistic:

http://www.geraldangelo.com/sites/default/files/photos/wooden_playground_train.jpg?1285537950
http://www.byoplayground.com/image/product/pg/product/b/y/byo_express.jpg


Some Children's museums have incorporated full-size trains that the kids can play inside into their exhibits. Others have placed on a locomotive on static display behind a fence: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/The_Childrens_Museum_of_Indianapolis_-_Reuben_Wells_steam_locomotive.jpg

We often have the discussion when we see a piece of rolling stock that it too damaged to restore that "it's not worth it since there's not enough historical fabric", or "there's better examples out there that should be preserved". The idea that struck me is "not enough historical fabric for a restoration? Perfect! Let's make a kid-friendly replica".

How many museums have done something like this? Say you've got a rotted out wood caboose. The museum already has two that are perfectly restored and not to be touched, and one more in the back lot that is a better candidate for restoration. This rotted out one is looking like a source of income for scrap metal. Instead of scrapping it, why not build a kid friendly, tour-able replica out of it?

So you pull the old rotted caboose out back, draw up some plans (there's enough rot there to make a pattern from), save a few parts like the underframe, the trucks (those aren't even necessary if this is to become a static display), the grab irons, and then bulldoze it down to the metal frame. Then you build a replica on top of the old frame. Tongue-and-groove siding isn't absolutely necessary, plywood can be used, newer, longer lasting roofing material can be added (especially if this display is outdoors), and soon you have, for all practical purposes, a reconstruction of a historic caboose. The cupola can be accessed, replica waybills placed on the desk, etc. You now have a fairly historically-accurate playhouse. Interpretive signs can be installed, and suddenly, the caboose is a teaching tool, unlike that stock playground equipment. If indoors, leave some engineer's hats in one of the cubbies for the kids to play dress-up with.

As I get further into the museum field, I see the need for preserving historical equipment and placing it behind ropes, "putting it on a pedestal". But as the historic stuff goes on the pedestal, we still need a usuable education collection down here at the human level, a collection that visitors can interact with, a collection they can play with. I think we needs collections that can be used up, worn out, and rebuilt. A collection that DOES stuff. A collection that we can't do without.

Thoughts?

ARM Recommended Practices includes this definition in support of what you have said:

Operation/use: A specific class of objects accessioned into the permanent collection that are primarily to be used for operation on a regular or semi-regular basis. Original fabric, machinery, material or appearance may be secondary to safe and reliable function. May be further formally subclassified as a demonstration collection-to be operated heavily, kept in general historical form though materials may be substituted for safety; may include creating replicas or near-replicas for operating use; or equipment designated for limited use to ensure preservation, yet available for some operation to supplement normal role as static exhibits .

In practical application at National Capital Trolley Museum, we use our Toronto PCCs and the Hague PCC in the "operated heavily" manner described in Recommended Practices as operation/use. DC Transit 1101, another PCC, falls into the category of "limited use to ensure preservation", while our Brussels tram and Blackpool boat fall somewhere between "operated heavily" and "limited use". Someday we will restore WRECo 650 to the extent that one might say it was a "near replica for operating use."

Wesley

Back in the day... (Yeah, I know "Sonny, get me my cane and get off my lawn!") there was a playground near the town where I grew up that had all kind of kid friendly exhibits. I had a couple of wood Pennsy Cabeese, along the lines of an N6, classic look.

There was also a tank, one of those "rocket ship" towers you'd climb up and shake like mad, and one of the most fun was a fighter jet. It was an old style, with the engine in the fuselage, and they had pulled out the engine to make a tunnel that kids could crawl through. You entered at the tail, crawled through the jet and when you reached the nose, it had a slide. You could also climb up and sit in the cockpit.

I seem to recall some other stuff too, though I'm vague on what, probably a fire engine, and of course all the usual swings and teeter-totters and the merry-go-round that you'd spin faster and faster until kids started flying off.

In fact, the whole playground was pretty much a lawsuit waiting to happen. The fighter jet had a ton of sharp metal edges on it. If the kid on the other end of the teeter-totter jumped off, you learned, first hand, what that whole "acceleration of 9.8 meters per second per second" thing was all about, as you hit your butt hard! Fall off the wing of the jet? Well, be more careful, you'll know better next time!

Even as a kid, it was obvious that the "artifiacts" were in rough shape. They never claimed they were anything other than playground toys though. The cabooses were pretty much just the shell. All the gauges and stuff in the jet cockpit were gone. Same with the tank, though I think both had some levers and stuff still there (good grief, a kid good get hurt!!!!)

We didn't care. We played there and had lots of fun. I can't tell you how many Migs I shot down in that fighter jet, or how many times I took enemy fire and had to eject. The history books say Neil Armstrong was the first on the moon. Nope, Sorry, that's wrong. Me and the other kids flew there long before him, and did it often. (This was the early 60's, before the moon landing, but when Space Exploration was totally cool! So playing astronaut was a big deal.)

I don't care that the thing was bolted into the concrete, we still flew it to the moon and back, which was pretty good since I think the only "controls" it had was a little steering wheel, LOL! We did have some definite cases of space sickness, as those things would bend and sway like mad, which kids loved, but adults didn't seem to enjoy as much.

So, what's my point? Well, my point is that you could have put the FL9's that were just scrapped in a park someplace, painted them up, and imaginary engineers would be running the 20th Century Limited from them in no time. Even if they were nothing but a shell and a couple of seats. Cut the cab off and make a place for kids to play! Got lots of money? Cool, buy train simulator and some fancy control system and create a sim. Got a low budget? Let them use their imagination and have fun.

No, you could do a lot with stuff like that, though these days you've got to kid proof it and make it safe for everyone.

it probably would get the youngster's into the real feel by doing this making it kid safe and make the replica caboose as realistic as possible, instead of a half baked playground of semi-Thomas stuff that isn't true railroad. just be ready for quick fix cheap stuff that might be roughed up with minor child play, nothing in the car/caboose would be vintage/preservation/original.