This is a no-brainer.......
LEASE IT TO STRASBURG in the tradition of 1223, 7002,.......
When it gets worn out in 20 or so years somebody will decide that the most important PRR loco on the planet is then the L1......
and the tradition will continue.

As far as the L1 steaming again, I would not count on it. We do not have any plans to restore any of the PRR locomotives for various reasons which I will not delve into.

K.R. Bell
RR Museum of PA

> This is a no-brainer.......
> LEASE IT TO STRASBURG in the tradition of
> 1223, 7002,.......
> When it gets worn out in 20 or so years
> somebody will decide that the most important
> PRR loco on the planet is then the L1......
> and the tradition will continue.

> We do not have any plans to
> restore any of the PRR locomotives for
> various reasons which I will not delve into.

Please, delve! I, for one, would love to know why this premier steam collection will not see steam again. I am not criticizing, and I understand the thinking behind priceless artifacts being just that, and the risk of loss being real, however, I would really like to learn more about this side of museum preservation.


glueck@maine.edu

It's a good policy. BTW, we've seen three engines in the RR Museum of PA steam in the past 20 years.

Besides, they have the blessing of a full-fledged steam operation across the street. There is no pressure on the museum to eat up artifacts.

We should all be so lucky!

Rob

> Please, delve! I, for one, would love to
> know why this premier steam collection will
> not see steam again. I am not criticizing,
> and I understand the thinking behind
> priceless artifacts being just that, and the
> risk of loss being real, however, I would
> really like to learn more about this side of
> museum preservation.


Ahead of the Torch
trains@robertjohndavis.com

I would
> really like to learn more about this side of
> museum preservation.

We've debated it many times on this forum. Here's one recent thread to get you started reading...

http://64.226.170.141/cgi-bin/Interchange.pl?read=13865

for more, use the Search feature avialable on the Interchange home page--try searching on "historic fabric" "historic fabric" or "consume"--that should pull up the relvant threads over the months and you can read all the opinions.


eledbetter@rypn.org

try searching
> on "historic fabric"
> "historic fabric" or
> "consume"--that should pull up the
> relvant threads over the months and you can
> read all the opinions.

Make that second lead "original fabric"


eledbetter@rypn.org

> As far as the L1 steaming again, I would not
> count on it. We do not have any plans to
> restore any of the PRR locomotives for
> various reasons which I will not delve into.
> K.R. Bell
> RR Museum of PA

I remember the late (great) Ben Kline saying that the L-1 had one of the best boilers in the collection.

Something about chalk marks still evident inside the boiler, with little or no use after it's last overhaul before retirement ! ? !

Due to a low water failure PRR L1s No. 520 suffered from a boiler explosion while at Cresson, PA in 1942 and was subsequently reboilered. Essentially the current boiler of the L1s is identical to a K4s boiler, and I've also been told that it is in decent shape. It ran in freight service until about 1957.

The perpetual debate over operating museum artifacts vs. static exhibition is a perennial one which I will not rehash. Suffice it to say, our institution is comfortable with the fact that the Strasburg RR does a more than adequate job with providing an operating experience for our Museum visitors right across the street with their own equipment. Our business is to preserve, collect and interpret our collection. Although there is precedent with operating three of our PRR locomotives in years past (John Bull replica, #7002, #1223)we have chosen to take the "preserve" route with our locomotive collection rather than to consume artifacts through operation. This philosophy reflects the new professionalism in place at the Museum that was absent in years past.

I think the debate over running verses preservation stems from unfamiliarity on the part of the operating crowd in museology theory and
museum ethics. If this crowd could educate themselves in this area then I think a rational debate could ensue over this topic. All too often we seem to have this debate with amateurs and armchair buffs who are a bit off base or are misinformed or take the foamer position that "if everthing doesn't run, then something's wrong" (a very vocal minority, I might add). It is hard to have an intelligent discussion of the issues without all parties first having a grounding in the theory of the field. Understand that are sound, logical reasons why museum professionals take this position, and it is not in any way a conspiracy against railfans.

K.R. Bell

> I remember the late (great) Ben Kline saying
> that the L-1 had one of the best boilers in
> the collection.

> Something about chalk marks still evident
> inside the boiler, with little or no use
> after it's last overhaul before retirement !
> ? !

> Understand that are sound, logical reasons
> why museum professionals take this position,
> and it is not in any way a conspiracy
> against railfans.

No offense, maybe it is just me, but your post appears to smack of academic elitisim. If you wish a good, informed, debate to take place, maybe you should recommend some articles, publications, and other material us the average person can read to better understand your point of view. I don't think you are purposely trying to sound this way, but one must realize that most railroad museums in the U.S. are run by average people. RRMPA is an exception to the rule as far as professional curatorial staff, and state funding. No, I don't think that most people feel that the professional museum people think it is a conspiracy against railfans, but I do think that the argument that some equipment should operate is a valid one. If the Strasburg RR wasn't across the street of the RRMPA, I imagine that your point of view would be rather different. RRMPA is also an annomoly because the other large museums (B&O, California State, IRM, MOT, Spencer, etc) all choose to operate some equipment. I just think sometimes in discuession we forget what point of view we are coming from, and thus we forget the conditions that may make one's situation different.

david.wilkins@bardstown.com

must be all that museology theory and museum ethics that keep me from crossing the road. Strasburg rocks and the museum is, frankly, DULL.

Kurt, you know that I've known you since you were barely legal to volunteer with any group.

But I'm beginning to think you've been cooped up in the office too long. You're sounding like you're trying to out-R&LHS the R&LHS academics--described by a long-time second-generation member as "stuffy, stodgy, clannish, and excruciatingly dull".

Your assignment, should you choose to accept, is to get yourself a ticket on the next mainline steam trip possible--behind 3751, 261, 4449, 3985, or whatever. I don't even care if you go up to White Mountain Central and spend an afternoon chucking logs into the Climax for Leon. Just do it.

Then get back to us with some stuffy academic insight--if the baptism by cinders doesn't do something to it. <:-)

lner4472@bcpl.net

Gotta agree ... please don't change a "consumable" living and breathing steamer into an "objet d'art".
Continue to run the daylights out of them, performing the same maintenance that the parent road would have if they were running them. Don't get so technical that the original fabric ... which was replaced many times in service ... becomes the deciding, defining factor. Make it a museum not a mausoleum!



lamontdc@adelphia.net

please don't change a
> "consumable" living and breathing
> steamer into an "objet d'art".
> Continue to run the daylights out of them,
> performing the same maintenance that the
> parent road would have if they were running
> them. Don't get so technical that the
> original fabric ... which was replaced many
> times in service ... becomes the deciding,
> defining factor. Make it a museum not a
> mausoleum!

Well, to be precise--I think you want to make RRM of Pa "a living history museum" not a "long term conservation and interpretation" museum. They are not the same thing.

RRM of Pa and CSRM are practicing basic good museum practice by not operating their collections. They are on the default right path according to basic collections administraiton principles. Like it or not, conservation or "stuff and mount" as some call it is the correct defualt position in collections care; it's for operating and using an artifact that you have to make a special case in the museum/preservation circles.

Anyway, and anyhow, this is essentially a theological debate. If anybody really wants to read and evaluate the academic argument for conservation not operation, from me if not from Kurt, see the link I gave a few lines above to another post a few weeks ago, or do the search I recommended. In those threads I give the argument for conservation without operation in a nutshell. After long thought its a position I'm comfortable with for myself, as Kurt is also from where he sits.

If after reading it, you disagree, well, OK! If you have questions about the ideas, ask and I will try to answer. But if you just disagree, well, OK, it's a free country.

I just don't understand why one side of this argument gets labelled eggheads and other unsavory names. Instead, I'd ask us all to agree to disagree, and go on doing the best we can by the artifacts we have in care at our own various places of volunteering or working. If that means operating at your place, more power to you. If it means conserving, that's good too. Vive la differance.

eledbetter@rypn.org

I knew I'd rustle up some "interesting" responses. I'll always stand by my words, stuffy or not, and don't really give a hoot about the critics. If I have stirred up the nest, so to speak, then I'm on the right track. There is nothing elitist about museum ethics--it keeps one on the right track professionally. A few of the preceding posts still shows that this field has a long way to go before it can be taken seriously by the museum community at large. I commend Erik for moderating the arguments on both sides of the fence.

K.R. Bell

> please don't change a

> Well, to be precise--I think you want to
> make RRM of Pa "a living history
> museum" not a "long term
> conservation and interpretation"
> museum. They are not the same thing.

> RRM of Pa and CSRM are practicing basic good
> museum practice by not operating their
> collections. They are on the default right
> path according to basic collections
> administraiton principles. Like it or not,
> conservation or "stuff and mount"
> as some call it is the correct defualt
> position in collections care; it's for
> operating and using an artifact that you
> have to make a special case in the
> museum/preservation circles.

> Anyway, and anyhow, this is essentially a
> theological debate. If anybody really wants
> to read and evaluate the academic argument
> for conservation not operation, from me if
> not from Kurt, see the link I gave a few
> lines above to another post a few weeks ago,
> or do the search I recommended. In those
> threads I give the argument for conservation
> without operation in a nutshell. After long
> thought its a position I'm comfortable with
> for myself, as Kurt is also from where he
> sits.

> If after reading it, you disagree, well, OK!
> If you have questions about the ideas, ask
> and I will try to answer. But if you just
> disagree, well, OK, it's a free country.

> I just don't understand why one side of this
> argument gets labelled eggheads and other
> unsavory names. Instead, I'd ask us all to
> agree to disagree, and go on doing the best
> we can by the artifacts we have in care at
> our own various places of volunteering or
> working. If that means operating at your
> place, more power to you. If it means
> conserving, that's good too. Vive la
> differance.

Sandy and David make some very good points. Every Museum has a few consumable, or "for use" artifacts, such as duplicate vehicles, that can be used for interpretive purposes, such as what is done at CSRM or at B&O Museum, among others. Operating artifacts have priceless educational value to visitors because they are working and impart understanding in how they were used. But when it comes to irreplacable "one of a kind" artifacts or pieces with authentic "in-service" (notice I'm not using the term "original") fabric, then I feel that museums should draw the line. Hey, when I am not being a stuffy museum person I love this stuff just as much as you guys do...but that is my professional opinion, and you can agree or disagree. That's why it's America folks.

K.R. Bell

> But I'm beginning to think you've been
> cooped up in the office too long. You're
> sounding like you're trying to out-R&LHS
> the R&LHS academics--described by a
> long-time second-generation member as
> "stuffy, stodgy, clannish, and
> excruciatingly dull".

> Your assignment, should you choose to
> accept, is to get yourself a ticket on the
> next mainline steam trip possible--behind
> 3751, 261, 4449, 3985, or whatever. I don't
> even care if you go up to White Mountain
> Central and spend an afternoon chucking logs
> into the Climax for Leon. Just do it.

> Then get back to us with some stuffy
> academic insight--if the baptism by cinders
> doesn't do something to it. <:-)