Hi friends,

An interesting web find here... the National Park Service's early report on the locomotives of Steamtown is at http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_bo ... n/shst.htm

Rob



Steamtown NPS Report
trains@robertjohndavis.com

Steamtown NHS also sells a paper version of this in their bookshop. Interestingly, the recommendations at the end of each locomotive description have been omitted in the copies for sale.

Joshua


joshua@joshuakblay.com

Great read indeed. You've got to love some of the comments on the NKP Berks;

"I always ran the 700's with the throttle to the roof. Those engines have four valves--which didn't open all at once. Most of us engineers, about 80 per cent I'd say, just laid that throttle wide open and worked her more by the cut-off marking on the quadrant and by sound. Those engines were also equipped with a back-pressure gauge. If you didn't open the throttle clear up, you weren't getting all the power that was available."

"A good hogger [engineer] was able to run from South Lima to Frankfort, Indiana, a distance of 145 miles, in three hours and 30 minutes with a 75 to 85 car train, practically the same as passenger train No. 9. In fact, I often ran around the passenger with the NS-5, the Flying Saucer as we called it. This was the hottest thing on the railroad."

Fantastic!

Thanks for the find!

Jeff Lisowski
West Chester, Pa



unfunkyufo76@hotmail.com

What I found so interesting is the assessment of each locomotive with regard to restoration. SOme are described as junk, whereas some fantastic locos are noted as being worthy of the investment to operate them. Most notably is #4012, the Union Pacific "Big Boy". This locomotive is seen as operable and (here I am paraphrasing) "finding curves for it to negotiate does not seem impossible, though track weight might be of some account". Hasn't it bee the UP's argument for some time that there is no place to operate a restored "Big Boy"?
Other locos that are fascinating to read about are the RDG 2124, B&M 3916, and some of the tank engines. Remarkable.
Is Steamtown in the position to accept park engines if they are given to the NPS from communities that can no longer keep them up?


glueck@maine.edu

After reading Joshua's comment on the deletion of recommendations, I checked my two copies of "Chappell's Bible" The first edition (grey cover, Gov't Printing office)does contain the recommendations, whereas the second and third,(green photo cover, Haddon Craftsmen) doesn't. The newer editions were for general circulation, funded by the Steamtown Volunteer Association, and I guess didn't want to tie the hands of the NPS as though a recommendation means they will restore something or another.

Of note in these books are locomotives once in the collection and now in someone else's care, like the UP 4-4-0 no. 737, now at Portola Ca RR Museum.

http://www.nps.gov/stea/
mustang746@earthlink.net

Guys,

I sometimes work with Gordon Chappell here in the Bay Area and he did a good job on this book. He would have done more if they would have let him.
Several engines that are not now part of the Steamtown NHS collection. I have a paper copy.

Ted Miles

ted_miles@nps.gov

> I sometimes work with Gordon Chappell here
> in the Bay Area and he did a good job on
> this book. He would have done more if they
> would have let him.
> Several engines that are not now part of the
> Steamtown NHS collection. I have a paper
> copy.

I remember visiting Gordon Chappell at his then San Francisco office while he was preparing the Steamtown report. He was recruited for (or was it assigned to) the survey because he was the only NPS staff historian that had published railroad work -- several items with Colorado RR Museum. As I recall, he had photos of the Steamtown engines in the snow as that was the time of year he was in Scranton.

Brian Norden


bnorden49@earthlink.net

I am not sure if it was the notes for this book, or other docs, but I can remember reading a somewhat more detailed mechanical analysis of the locomotives when I was a volunteer (late 1980's) that revealed some of the pro's and con's of restoration. Some of these notes would never be published, I am sure, as they were a little "raw."

It is interesting to note that reccomendations published in these books do not align with current park policy. The book clearly states CN #5288's Vermont service, yet she was sent to TVRM as part of the continuing overall Canadian purge that has seen most of the CN and CP power released by the park.

When the guide was first published, the NPS management had intended to run the Canadian steamers and conserve the American locos.

I have my opinions on what engines were let go (I would have kept the CN and CP Pacifics as runners, considering you could have had 2 or 3 in steam by now), but I think a comparison between 1990 and 2002 shows that it is wise for the Park to keep what it can manage and find good homes for what it cannot (like the Fox truck equipped B&M boxcar sent over the ice house museum in Toby). That's just good museum practice.

A read through these docs is a good reminder of the mid-sized gems in the collection. The 2-8-0's, 4-6-0 and others are great representatives of the early 1900's railroading, and in countless ways are far more interpretive than the Big Boy.

Good reading!

Rob



trains@robertjohndavis.com

I quite agree that the museum shouldn't acquire more that it can manage. preserve, and operate. If one was to look for a bottomless pit of money however, the United States treasury would likely be the place to find it!
Can Steamtown accept derelict steamer and donations?
Supposing you could "rescue" a few park locos and place them into the Steamtown Collection for operation or interpretation, which would you choose?
On my shortlist: Either of the C&O Allegheny's, C&O Kanawha #2760, one of the CB&Q Hudson's, perhaps one of the CB&Q 4-8-4's, MEC 4-6-2 #470, one or both of the mystery locos being dived on off New Jersey, UP 2-10-2 #5511.
Nominees?

glueck@maine.edu

Given the current directive at the park which seems to focus on northeastern US steam, I give you my mucn anticiapted, long awaited, breath of hot air on what engines would do nicely enshrined in Scranton.

1. MEC 4-6-2 #470 - someone needs to do something, or this old girl will succumb to the elements.
2. B&M 2-6-0 #1455 - She's as rare a beast as you can get, and the seminal New England branchline engine (no offense to the Danbury guys meant by her inclusion on this list)
3. M&NJ/Narraganset 2-6-0 - She's been partially assembled and in a shed for over a decade.
4. Any of the C&O 2-8-4's
5. B&LE 2-10-4 - A brute that deserves to be a star.
6. Any "Russian" 2-10-0 - preserved in USRA garb.
7. Any USRA design (#4070?).
8. C&O 4-8-4 #614 - an operating northern would be nice
9. K4s #1361 - No flames, please. After all the money PA pured into here, she should be able to run at will.
10. A midwestern 2-8-2 (EJ&E?)

trains@robertjohndavis.com

Whoa, Rob! Numbers 1, 2 & 3?? Enough New England stuff has left the region-- why should these follow?

I doubt anyone/any group will pry 470 out of Waterville. Too bad the powers that be up there don't pay her some attention.

CNJ 0-6-0 113 would be an appropriate exhibit item at Scranton.

And let's not forget that B&LE 643 almost became part of the Collection in 1995.

Railroad Museum of New England
hpincus@mindspring.com

> 2. B&M 2-6-0 #1455 - She's as rare a
> beast as you can get, and the seminal New
> England branchline engine (no offense to the
> Danbury guys meant by her inclusion on this
> list)

. . .And this locmotive was under common ownership to the Steamtown collection and got away, also!

Steve

PM Ry. Saginaw Roundhouse
SZuidervee@aol.com

> 2. B&M 2-6-0 #1455 - She's as rare a
> beast as you can get, and the seminal New
> England branchline engine (no offense to the
> Danbury guys meant by her inclusion on this
> list)

. . .And this locmotive was under common ownership to the Steamtown collection and got away, also!

Steve

SZuidervee@aol.com

The pair of Preston Railroad 2-8-0's along with the other rusty stuff surrounding them. They should be displayed as is in a setting as they occupy now as "before" pictures, clearly demonstrating how used a steam locomotive can get.

Dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

> Whoa, Rob! Numbers 1, 2 & 3?? Enough New
> England stuff has left the region-- why
> should these follow?

OK, OK... maybe my emotions played a role listing #470 first. She needs some love she has not found in ME all these years. As for #1455, yes, she's already too far south for my taste (again, no disrespect meant to her owners).

As for the old B&H/M&NJ #11, heck, she's almost in Scranton. ;-)

I agree with CNJ #113, but right now she has owners actively working on her, so I didn't list her.

Of course, I forgot the Preston 2-8-0's. One of those would be a sweet addition.

Take care,

Rob

OK, so a revision... may I add

> I doubt anyone/any group will pry 470 out of
> Waterville. Too bad the powers that be up
> there don't pay her some attention.

> CNJ 0-6-0 113 would be an appropriate
> exhibit item at Scranton.

> And let's not forget that B&LE 643
> almost became part of the Collection in
> 1995.


Steamtown NPS Report
trains@robertjohndavis.com