http://cjonline.com/news/2013-11-24/dis ... sf-no-3463
It seems that the original owners of the 3463 (some digging here on the forum will reveal some info on the Coalition for Sustainable Rail and their plans) have somehow come back from the dead and want "their" engine back.

Posse of locals who never paid any attention to their local steamer (or have the ability to restore/maintain) + steam locomotive (that was displayed neglected) = non-restored rusting disaster.

Posse of non-locals who have done quite a bit of stabilization for transport of local steamer (and have money, research, and qualified guidance + steam locomotive (that is better off since their involvement) = great possibility of restoration and operation.

Oh, Little Town USA, thou-est have no-eth idea how to maintain your little tokens of history. You barely can keep your budgets semi-balanced...and now the citizenry arise from their armchairs to magically take care of their tokens lest their tokens be removed from site.

Amazing how a group can re-constitute itself and magically say, "It's Ours!" Can I show up at the IRS, the bank, or any other institution and demand my taxes, money, or whatever back? SIGN ME UP!!!!

IC382,

In my opinion, the locomotive is not better off with an acquisition by CSR. And I believe their plans are so far reaching that they would be better off starting from scratch with a clean sheet of paper rather than remodeling an antique.

Your characterization that the people in Topeka presently engaged in this dispute did not care for the locomotive and let it become a rusted disaster is inaccurate on several levels. The restoration and maintenance on the locomotive had been under way by a local group when the locomotive was “acquired” by Great Overland Station. Then when Great Overland Station abandoned their plans to move to the locomotive to their site, they ordered the local restoration effort stopped.

I have studied this case in great detail and I would not be surprised if a court decides that Great Overland Station never owned the locomotive, and thus had no right to give it to CSR. When the ATSF donated the locomotive, they did so within a specially made framework designed to perpetuate the gift by diffusing the ownership of the locomotive by the recipient.

Please understand...that 90% of my posts are tongue-n-cheek.

Well, in any case, if this newly re-birthed group ends up the winning party...may the engine sit forever cold, and rust-in-peace. The list of citizen groups that were going to make the magic happen is MUCH larger than the citizen groups that have MADE the magic happen.

If Topeka wanted this engine running, or even cosmetically restored...why didn't they move to do it till now?

I always play the devil's advocate. The CSR is attempting to essentially fulfill a large scale research project. The CSR is not destroying the boiler barrel or the running gear. Is an engine better off cold and mounted on 100ft of track, or is the engine better off running anywhere?

It seems like this is an occurrence happening more and more often. Town has rusty engine, shoreline railroad, or railroad preservation group wants to move, restore, operate rusty engine. All is well...and then BOOM! Someone who has had little to do with, if anything at all, with rusty engine screams, "Oh My God! They are taking the engine away. I played on that when I was 5 and lawyers didn't rule the land. My grandpa farted beside this engine when it used to come to town on trips. Old Smoky has always been here. It is part of this town's history! It can't go away! (I couldn't add the shrieks, curse words, references to the Almighty, etc.)"

Do any of you snicker, even just a bit, at how many times this has happened in the last decade? All of the sudden, "That engine is historical! So is that one! And, that one! That engine is hysterical!" Everyone wants an engine, or to make a $100K from a rusty ingot. "We just don't have the budget sir. Maybe someone can raise some money to make this thing work? Oh wait, we are going to regulate where, how, if, when the engine can run after you raise/restore/and take care of the engine sir....oh and where is our dollar?"

Sounds like lots of money will be spent on lawyers and none on the 3463. The CSR group has done more for the locomotive in the past year than the previous group(s) have in decades. Does this new group have any connections with the original one other than using their name?

"My grammie was the first woman to ever stand next to this engine in 1950 (pick a number). She probably arrived here on a train pulled by this very engine."

The comment about the lawyer, spot on! The groups could potentially spend enough money to buy tubes, or turn drivers, or any other host of repairs...on arguing about this is mine, that is yours.

Pretty pathetic isn't it?

People in Topeka were working on the engine, but they were stopped by a new presumed owner after that new owner decided that it did not fit their plans.

I understand your points about groups with good intentions about caring for a locomotive not delivering on those intentions. It has happened, but that does not mean it has to happen. It doesn’t always happen.

I have no idea what CSR will destroy or not destroy, or what will become of the locomotive once they take possession of it. I have read their rhetoric, but I cannot connect all the dots. They say that traditional preservationists should not worry because their work will be reversible. So who will pay for reversing it? And in what circumstances would CSR allow their work to be reversed? Their promise of reversibility makes no sense to me. It sounds like nothing more than an attempt to placate their opposition.

It is not a forgone conclusion that the outcome of this will either be the engine displayed on 100 feet of track; or being restored and running. Where do you get your assurance that the boiler and running gear will not be changed?

He said "destroyed" not "changed." And considering we live in an age where a museum decides to restore a locomotive, purchases a completely new boiler and completely new tender and somehow calls its preservation, changes to the boiler and running gear aren't necessarily a bad thing (see what Mid-Continent is doing with C&NW 1385). But I digress.

A group was created in 1956 to maintain the locomotive. The group was forfeited as a valid business entity and the city of Topeka took over ownership of the locomotive in the 70s. Topeka transferred ownership of the engine to Great Overland Station in the 90s, who in turn sold it to CSR in 2011. Now that this sale has been made, the 1956 group has been resurrected and claims that the original group never lost ownership of the engine during its 40-odd years of forfeiture. This is exactly the situation IC328 is describing. A group of people who are fond of a locomotive are trying to prevent said locomotive from leaving the area. It's similar issues that are halting any preservation work on MEC 470 in Maine.

I'm on CSR's side on this. At some point we all need to ask ourselves, what is better for the locomotive? To sit in a park to rust away, or have steam in her cylinders? My feeling with the modifications is this: if she stayed in regular service with ATSF she would have had many modifications done to increase her efficiency, they are simply doing what the railroad would have done.

I think it is a cool idea and wish them all the luck

This is similar to the C&O 2700 situation. It's finally settled but Good Lord! Look at what's left! A boiler with wheels! That's it! My thoughts are this: You really haven't done anything with it for the last 50+ years. If you're that concerned about it, why didn't you do something sooner! If anything, make a deal where the engine has to come back to pull a trip or 2. But for God's sakes, let the engine go to a place that has resources to rebuild it! Go to www.steamlocomotive.info and look up that locomotive I mentioned. Very sad sight.

[quote="Mark Z. Yerkes"]
A group was created in 1956 to maintain the locomotive. The group was forfeited as a valid business entity and the city of Topeka took over ownership of the locomotive in the 70s. Topeka transferred ownership of the engine to Great Overland Station in the 90s, who in turn sold it to CSR in 2011. [quote]

Mark,

How do you know that the group that was created in 1956 to maintain the locomotive was forfeited as a valid business entity? How do you know that the city of Topeka took over ownership of the locomotive in the 70s?

I know for a fact that the city of Topeka has no record of ever owning the locomotive or of transferring ownership of it to the Great Overland Station. Also, Shawnee County, the owner of the site where the locomotive stands, has no record of ever owning the locomotive. I was also told by the office of Shawnee County that the Great Overland Station said they were unable to produce any record of ownership when asked.

For my own education, what has CSR actually done to the locomotive?

The whole thing sounds like just another case of "We don't want to take
care of it, but we don't want anyone else to take care of it, either."

No one ever believes this, but I had a museum volunteer complain at me at great length because "they" had painted 2700 and "destroyed the collector value." She honestly thought it was like repainting a piece of furniture, rather than preserving something that was deteriorating outdoors. By that logic, the depot shouldn't have had a new roof.

http://www.csrail.org/images/the_train/csr_locomotive_3463_move_prep.pdf

http://www.csrail.org/index.php/news-information?start=18

Probably much more, but the two links above show they have done more for the locomotive than its previous owners did in the previous four decades.

Steve Hunter

My favorite quote from the article "...akin to removing the Wright Flyer from the Smithsonian Institution’s museum and putting a jet engine on it."

Actually, no, it's not. It's much more like removing a ratty, deteriorated DC-3 from a county airport entrance, restoring it to flying condition, and maybe installing fuel injection on the engines, with a promise that you'll restore it to original condition once you're through with it, and that you won't touch it until you have the money in-hand to do both.