They're not all artifacts, guys.......some are just engines or parts sources, as in the case of the Barry Scrapyard refugees who were far enough gone to be partially used as the basis for recreating vanished classes.

If I were starting a new standard gage heavy tourist railroad today, the QJs would appeal to me - bang for the buck and parts off the shelf. You can buy two and a couple containers full of spares for what one museum spent "restoring" an already operational 0-4-0T.

Grand Canyon is big time tourist railroading, but not a museum. Their actions seem completely appropriate for their needs from my POV. There's little sense trying to hold any organization to standards not applicable to their own industry.

dave

Good God, Dave, I think we're in agreement. I believe all of us who have worked in this game would love to get to "work over" an engine like Robert Franzen and the Grand Canyon were able to.
I think its clear that every engine is a priceless artifact to someone. They have a memory and a fondness for it in their minds eye, and anyone who alters that memory is commiting a crime. On the other hand, someone with no such attachment may view a derelict old locomotive with thoughts of "what I could do with this!"
Think about what are referred to as "junk" collectors. Old cars, farm machinery, furniture or lumber - to them, its all treasure. Its just a matter of perspective.

Phil

Why even bother to have left the C&O number on 2716? Maybe she should have become SR 9999. If your fantasy is to have a SR 2-8-4, lets go all the way with the charade. Some locomotives were sold-off to other carriers and modified to fit their needs and specifications such as B&M 2-8-4s to the Santa Fe and Espee and N&W 2-8-8-2s to the PRR, UP and the AT&SF. Seconhand power was a reality but I don't remember any C&O 2-8-4s going to the SR.........

Suggesting that 261 be modified, even temporarily, into a Rock Island 4-8-4 makes my skin crawl. Les, how could you? Maybe N&W 611 should be backdated to approximate one of the earlier non-streamlined Js. (Listening closely for the uproar rolling towards the midwest from the East Coast and Tidewater.......)

I think I'll stop at the dog pound on the way home today and purchase a Shar pei. After I get it home maybe I'll decide that I would have rather had a collie. Possibly the local vet can get rid of all those awful wrinkles and make it sort of look like a collie. The Shar pei was ugly in the first place........

I'll now follow Mr. King's advice and make this my last remark on the subject.

Don C.

Don,

This is a bit scary to me , but I'm starting to enjoy it when you get your dander up. :-)

Ed Selinsky

I don't think we ever disagreed about anything of consequence, Phil. Drop in again when you are in the neighborhood.

dave

Grand Canyon is big time tourist railroading, but not a museum. Their actions seem completely appropriate for their needs from my POV. There's little sense trying to hold any organization to standards not applicable to their own industry.

Amen!, its so refreshing to see somebody draw the distinction and implicitly respect others PRIVATE PROPERTY rights. GCRR owns the engines and can do what they want. Ultimately, they have to make payroll, keep up the physical plant and pay the taxman.

Nobody buys a locomotive with restrictions on their rights of ownership, the bill of sale doesn't state (anything remotely like)

Purchaser agrees to consult with industry organizations claiming oversight on purchaser's rights of ownership: specifically, purchaser agrees to obtain advance approval of said organizations before placing item in service or modifying or altering in anyway. Failure to obtain permission in advance.. will result in forfeiture of property, fines. fees or penalties or public opprobrium.

Time for everybody who disagrees to look up the meaning of "fee simple".

Dave,

True about the disagreements. It was good to see you and the other guys. Keep up the good work at Silver Plume.

By the way, Dave, when are you guys going to build a "real" tender for #12, add a butterfly plow and a Ridgeway stack? While you're at it why not throw a couple of air tanks on top of the boiler? Silver Plume ain't Hawaii by any stretch and I think #12 would actually make a pretty good looking C&Sesk engine, don't you? (just kidding - I don't think we really want to go there).

I believe that I, too, will draw my comments on the topic of modifying locomotives to a close. Its clear some have strong feelings about this, and all we should do at this point is agree to disagree.

Phil

Frankly I thought Mr.Purdie's work on the 2716 was beautiful. Now before anybody gets crazy anybody take a look at the builders photo of the J3 class C&O 4-8-4 and look at the 614 today? I like the builders' photo look much better than her current look,but that's just my opinion. same class locomotive but a very different look. Not to stop there but take a look at the ATSF 3751 builders photo and her current look. Is she the same? Only in number.