I don't have the proverbial iron horse in this race, but I have watched, and been a part of, similar "non-profits" that have to, by design, function like a for-profit. (Let us remember that "nonprofit" is a tax eligibility status, not a business plan.) Many of them adopt a similar strategy.

When we formed Baltimore Beer Week, an annual celebration of craft beer in Baltimore, we had two things to worry about: we had a brewery based in the Baltimore area that, the second we went to him with the idea, offered anything we needed to make it happen--a huge sponsorship check, accountant, seed money, corporate lawyer, etc.--but adamantly insisted we were not to let it become "[That Particular Brewery] Beer Week" as a result. Two other breweries instantly wanted in and tried to match the first one price-wise, but the first brewery earned the title "flagship sponsor." Then, we had to sit down and strategize a plan that would prevent Budweiser or MillerCoors from stepping in with a six-figure check to make it "Baltimore BudMillerCoors Week." Let's just say it got "interesting" really fast.

If you look at successful fundraisers at Kickstarter, GoFundMe, etc., the ones that work plan ahead to give multiple rewards at various funding levels, and they are limited in availability. Only one person is going to get that weekend motorcycle ride with the author or movie star and a stay at his vacation chalet. Only ten people are going to get that personally retouched art print, lunch or dinner with the author/artist, and the book, t-shirt, etc. It becomes a much more sophisticated game than the typical PBS/NPR pledge break rewards program, if you're doing it right. And it works. And if you're doing it even better, you keep modifying the rewards or adding new ones as you hit certain fundraising levels, raising the number of pages in the book, creating a second volume for a certain level of subscribers only, giving them his worn-out pens, etc. I watched one artist, a favorite of my wife's, timidly hope he could raise $16,000 to print an anthology of his works. He ended up just shy of $50,000, and is woefully behind in all the personalized inscriptions, sketches, etc. that his webmaster conjured as part of the campaign.

Now, just what the T1 guys are thinking, I can't say. But the people with business and marketing acumen are not going to (necessarily) be suspicious of the way this is being structured as Brother Delhaye seems to be. Worth closer examination? Sure. Red flag? Not necessarily.

Paying $1,000 to become a charter member is not a requirement to be granted access to their forum. A sincere interest in the goals of the project is. Being a charter member is more of a fundraising strategy than a true price of admission.

The effort is still in the planning stages. The concept is to construct a new T1 locomotive, but the how to get there part is what is now being worked on. A fully formed master plan can't just be pulled out of someone's rear end?. It takes participation from people in many disciplines to thoughtfully develop the plan, and the planning itself does cost money. I believe the leaders of the effort came to RYPN thinking that they would find a receptive audience of rational and like minded individuals with real knowledge that they lack. It does nobody any good when we eat our own.

Wilkinsd, where are you seeing this at? prrsteamlocomotivetrust.org is their official website and I am not seeing such information posted there.

Rick,

The organization seems to have two websites. The one I found the information was the one mentioned in the very first post of the topic, here:

http://thet1trust.com/

The "business plan" is here"

http://thet1trust.com/plan.htm

The "membership" levels are here (Warning! Lots of Buzz Words!):

http://thet1trust.com/membership.htm

This page also links to the page you mentioned, Rick:

http://prrt1steamlocomotivetrust.org/forum/member.php?action=register

Actually, the "scarcity" of membership is something I'm not concerned about. As mentioned before, it's a fundraising tool. There are plenty of other things. If what Mr. Rowlands says is true, and I have no reason to doubt him, that they are in the planning stages, they need to reconsider their public message via the website. A poorly messaged plan can sink such an organization.

It gets better:

Someone, purportedly from the T1 "Trust" made an unsolicited call to my office, my place of business, wanting to talk shop about the T1. Not professional at all, people.

If you see my comments on RYPN and want to discuss them privately, there's always the PM button.

I would be interested to know what percentage of the original manufacturing drawings have been obtained so far. Making a comparison with "Tornado" is all very well, but about the first thing any sensible UK new build project does is to mount an expedition to York to spend days going through the enormous engineering drawings archive at the NRM.

The T1 appears to be an absolutely magnificent beast, but weighs in at over 200 tons; how much of that is the cast bed, and who has been identified to make a pattern for that and cast it; how much will that one piece casting weigh? The UK replicas are being built up from relatively small components and plate frames, which is difficult enough in itself. This is a higher order of magnitude.

Tim

The title of the Trains issue below says, "Loewy's T1? Nope. But you're getting warm." The title is referring to a preserved South Australian Railways 520-class locomotive -- a very striking and appealing machine. Also below is another photo of the preserved locomotive, courtesy the Wikipedia commons.

The Wikipedia article says:
"During the war years in the early 1940s, the South Australian Railways (SAR) had a desperate need for additional tractive power on increasingly growing troop and supply trains and with the combined need for quick acceleration and high speed running on the flat and general straight mainlines to the north to Port Pirie, as well as power "under the belt" for the long 19-mile (31 km), 1-in-45 (2.2%) graded slog up the Adelaide Hills to Melbourne, a new locomotive design was required by the SAR. With this in mind, the 520 class was commissioned..."

Firstly please allow me to say that Wes Camp is a dear friend, long time loyal friend and has MANY years of proven, successful, mainline steam locomotive experience to his credit, and well earned at that.

When I sent him as a 28 year old in Jan. 1968 to Steamtown to prep the N&W 1218 for movement to Roanoke as part of the 759 deal I had made with Mr. Robert Claytor ( then VP-Law,N&W RR) he found her buried behind a huge snow drift and everyone at Steamtown said " come back in May when the snows gone". As Mr. Claytor was anxious to get the engine to Roanoke asap I told Wes to see if he could pull a rabbit out of his hat and he did. He somehow got the Vermont DPW to send a giant front end loader onto the Steamtown site and make a clear path from the mainline switch to the 1218 and a day or so later she was on her way to Roanoke!! Wes doesn't quit and failure is not in his vocabulary.

The T1 project is certainly ambitious to say the least and like most big dreams it will probably never cross the goal line, but that's what makes the few big ideas that do succeed so special.

From the volumne of postings by the usual NNN's I'd say this one has a slightly better than normal chance of gaining some traction as anything the Nabobs dislike must have some merit!!

I wish the T1 folks all possible success and would be honored to be invited to be their test engineer when that day arrives. Who knows we might be able to recapture the world speed record for steam from the Brits with this machine??? Interesting possibility!!

Ross Rowland

If this statement was true, that my level of skeptecism bore an inverse relationship to ideas with merit or projects that will be sucessful, I would be able to go watch the Yellow Ribbon Express parade through town or buy a ticket on the Greenbrier Presidential Express on my next trip back east.

Dare I say, how many successes have you had in comparison to Ross?
I count myself among those who are thinking, "They'll probably never get this done," but it seems pretty childish to not only slam the possibility, but to also slam people with a track record (pun inteneded) within the preservation field, knocking a few hiccups in that person's experience because he dares to say the original concept might possibly work out.
I seriously think people of this ilk (never been a big fan of ilk) want plans like this to fail, just so they can say, "I told you so"...

Ross,
Just for once, could you get down off your high (iron) horse, and admit that others opinions may be just as valid as your own?

Jeff Delhaye
Nabob Heights, Illinois

501(c)(3) application has been filed and is under review by the IRS. Board composition is pending the formal establishment of the tax-exempt entity.

Organized feasibility plan is coming soon. Should have been ready weeks ago; that does not mean that most of the work and thinking has not been done.

Planning is to ANSI standards (PMI PMBOK, 4th ed.); design CAD is Dassault SolidWorks; multiphysics probably Comsol. A very large amount of the design research, and necessary/desirable modifications, has been done.

There are many people associated with this effort that understand where, and how, the serious thinking and planning is being done. I, for one, have tried to advise 'holding back on the rhetoric' until more of the "collateral" is in place, but I am quite certain this is not a Nigerian funding scam, or a foamer-driven dream site. On the other hand, my answer to any criticism can only be to wait a bit longer, or participate in some of the planning activity. I'm not sure where this 'paywall' business got started, but there was no financial requirement to join a planning committee; on the other hand, there are very significant reasons why the working-group status and file repository contents are not available for 'general' viewing.

Stop it. Please.

Good points have been made but none recently.

OK, let's give the people working on the proposal some time to fill in the missing pieces and then perhaps we'll know more.

I'm not sure if the lack of success resulting from any of the trial balloons floated since the meltdown says more about the economy, failure of the models to change as society has evolved, failure of the principals to adapt to new models, general fracturing of a constituency that could have pulled together to reach critical mass in other times or places or both, or just indicates a lack of sufficient interest to make any of them reach critical mass.

I miss adults talking seriously about interesting things.

dave

It shall be interesting to see the project develop.

Small note to Jdelhaye:

Can you please, pleeeeeeeeease fix your post at 11:44. It's bad enough having the G's change so quickly; having to scroll past a screen full of them gave me a hemiparetic migraine, and I'd prefer not to have any more of them.