After many months of delay I have finally gotten the photos from the Friends of the EBT Spring Exploration posted to the site. The direct URL for the photos is http://www.spikesys.com/EBT/Pics/2001sp.html .

Photos include tunnel photos, spring on the mountain, work by the Mount Union Connecting Railroad and the construction of Railways to Yesterday's track extension (laid on the EBT Shade Gap Branch ROW).

Other recent updates to the site include the Links page and the Introduction to the EBT page.

Hope you all en

The East Broad Top Railroad Homepage

ebtrr@spikesys.com

For those of us who haven't been able to visit the EBT yet, Chris's website is the next best thing. Truly demonstrates the usefulness of the internet.

After many months of delay I have finally
> gotten the photos from the Friends of the
> EBT Spring Exploration posted to the site.
> The direct URL for the photos is
> http://www.spikesys.com/EBT/Pics/2001sp.html
> .

> Photos include tunnel photos, spring on the
> mountain, work by the Mount Union Connecting
> Railroad and the construction of Railways to
> Yesterday's track extension (laid on the EBT
> Shade Gap Branch ROW).

> Other recent updates to the site include the
> Links page and the Introduction to the EBT
> page.

> Hope you all en


bobyar2001@yahoo.com

Chris;

Thanks as always, for the wonderful EBT photos and write-ups.

What is the status of the other standard gauge 0-6-0 that the EBT had? Where is it now?

Thanks;

John Stewart
Ottawa.

Ontario TSSA
john.stewart@crc.ca

Glad you enjoyed the photos.

EBT #6 was sold the the Whitewater Valley Railroad in Connersville, IN in 1975. She was operated there until about 1982 when she was torn down for an overhaul. (She has been pressed into service without any major work) During the early stages of the work, Indiana boiler law was changed effectively outlawing her lap-seam boiler and work was halted. The change was later reversed, but apparently momentum had been lost and she has sat since then as little more than a boiler on a frame. In that form she has been alowed to deteriorate in the weather, but all her auxiliary items (pumps, valves, tubing, whistle, bell, headlights, etc.) have been stored inside or used temporarily on other equipment.

For more info, reference the following URLs.

http://www.spikesys.com/EBT/Pics/1999n6.html
http://www.spikesys.com/EBT/News/6sale.html


The East Broad Top Railroad Homepage

ebtrr@spikesys.com

> Chris;

Amen to what you said! I asked about that standard gauge switcher here a while back and the responce was the Whitewater Valley Railroad in, If I recall, Indiana.

And then there are the remains of one on the EBT itself. Ted Miles

ted_miles@NPS.gov

Chris et all,

I don't wish to be a pain, but I feel that you've left out some important details in your quick synopsis on EBT #6. First, I would agree that your concept that #6 was pressed into service without a major overhaul is generally correct. I would add that in the mid 1970's that was all too common at various RR museums throughout the US (including Mid Continent which I highly respect and others). Many of the "steam" guys at our organization at that time were steam traction engine people (with a few old railroaders thrown in) who really believed that steam engines would last forever and couldn't really be hurt....made to last forever. When they paid $15,000 in 1975 or so (big money at that time), they were under the impression that the engine was stored in good condition when it was put away and that it was generally ready to roll. As we all know, by the late 50's many of these early engines (on all railroads) had been on the deferred maintenance plan for some time. EBT #6 was no exception to this general rule. Perhaps this was because the shops were on the narrow gauge end and this made doing work on the standard gauge engines difficult. Perhaps the company was not well enough financially to make the investment, perhaps the diesel age suggested that this might be the future move (perhaps this would make a good research project).

EBT #6 was never a very reliable engine on the WVRR. An operating issue was partially (in my opinion) due to the fact that the center drivers are blind causing the engine to hunt around on the line (then owned by Penn Central & certainly not in top condition). Wheel work was not done by the EBT likely for a long time before retirement in the 50's and running gear work for a slow speed switcher was probably also very low on the list.

You also make a statement about Indiana boiler law that also needs clarification. I'm sure that whichever "member" or "source" you talked to meant well and tried to tell you the story, but probably got it mixed up a bit given the twists and turns. I'll try to give you the quick version. The boiler on #6 was being serviced (with the flues to be replaced) in the early 1980's with the full intent to run it the following season. Once the tubes were out and the boiler inspected (also meaning a full jacket removal along with the asbestos), a number of firebox sheet defects were found. It was clear that new sheets would have to be made. I can assure you the boiler law was not yet an issue and the lap seam construction was also not an issue at that time.

In 1983-4 it looked as though we were going to have a problem with the landlord (Penn Central) and we pushed through a court ordered purchase plan. This meant that we now had a mortgage to pay (though it also meant we had a permanent home, unlike some groups to this day). So, given the resources needed to pay this and operate the 2-6-2 #100, EBT #6 was not pursued as an immediate project. Many believed at that time that #6 was going to fit into the next year's budget. Problems with the other steam engine continually ate up the available money however and it was thought that one reliable steam engine was better than two that were not. So, funds continued to move towards #100 (sometimes to the detriment of the full organization's financial stability).

Contrary to your assertion that the boiler law was reversed, #100 was removed from service because of the lap seam boiler operating under the Indiana code. An option at that time would have been to operate under the FRA code, but that would have meant doing a great many things that the group was not willing or able to do. Mind you, only a few years later and our group, like others, would find the FRA inspector visiting and a letter of jurisdiction in the mailbox anyway!

For #100, a fellow by the name of Stan Mathews contracted to make a new welded boiler to the ASME code to replace the lap seam one. The project took a large sum of money (well beyond the quoted budget price), was 8 years behind schedule, and still wasn't entirely right when completed. Complicating matters was the death of Mr. Mathews and the estate process. During the building of the new boiler, Gettysburg happened, and the rules changed for us all (for the better in my opinion). The changes were not for the better of this project though as many things now have to be done again, revised, etc. There are even problems with a "new" ASME boiler being in conflict with the new part 230 in some areas. Nothing that money won't solve, but in the end, we will have to decide which priority comes first and whether that engine is the right engine in which to invest the considerable funds needed.

EBT #6 is not a "boiler on a frame" as you describe, rather it is a cabless locomotive, with the restored wood cab stored indoors. While we would love to store the full engine indoors, we haven't the ability to do so. As you point out, the smaller items have been put into indoor storage. It is moved periodically and the working parts oiled when this is done. It is not stored under trees, has the jacket and lagging removed, and is behind a fence with a locked gate.

NOW, the part that hasn't been mentioned as much. We have offered this engine to "qualified" buyers under various terms in the past and will continue to do so until the "right" situation is found. In the past this has included the RR Museum of PA and the Friends of the EBT. The Friends group has received two offers in fact. One many, many years ago for a high figure (too high in my opinion) and one at the same price as the RR Museum of PA. When I spoke to the Friend's President he even said that they had the money, but EBT #6 wasn't really the way the wanted to spend it (again organizational priorities that I fully understand and respect). I believe the Robertsdale Post Office was the project at hand. The RailRoad Museum of PA also declined our offer citing restoration funding priorities, storage, transportation, and other issues. I fully understand their unique position and problems that go with it. Again, both groups would accept #6 free, but could not or would not commit as to when or how they would move it off our property. As this leads to other problems, we chose not to pursue these options. Right now another, more novel, option is being looked into that may be the final answer to get #6 on regional turf, only time will tell.

We are made offers every year it seems, by someone who "wants to own his OWN steam engine". Often they have plans to return it to steam in a year, oblivious to the realities of this statement. Some of these can come up with $15,000 "they saw we were asking" for it, some want a land contract arrangement, a lease, or.... most want us to "give it to their good home" although nearly none of these actually have a "home". Some groups want "a steam engine" to put in front of a restored depot. We think that EBT #6 is not just "a steam engine" and want it to go back to its general region. We know that if it is moved for display to a town depot that it will be hard (if not impossible) to dislodge for a trip back east...ever. This is therefore why we haven't accepted any offers from Iowa, Colorado, Texas, etc. some of which were only made in passing.

LAST But NOT Least, it is amazing to me how many people are concerned for the health and well being of EBT #6. I think this is great and I too am concerned. But.... sometimes the concern is only that "they or their group" should get the engine. This is when that concern seems to be somewhat shallow. When I have suggested to these people to volunteer their time to repaint or clean up the engine, they don't or won't. When I suggest to these groups or individuals kick in $50 (or whatever amount) to the #6 fund for cosmetic work, they don't. Of even greater benefit would be to help erect a shelter over the engine, but again no interest in funding such a project. So, I must ask, how concerned about this engine are they?

What I can say is that if the money for the paint or lumber, for example, would become available from sources outside our organization's budget, I am sure it would be used on #6. The painting, labor, and similar work would be done by one or more of our volunteers. Many in our group would like to see it look better and be in better shape. Nearly none of us want to put the cab back on until it is under shelter. That might never happen in Connersville in the short term.

Regarding the current storage, I'll go so far as to say that of the many stored steam engines out there, #6 is far from being the most threatened. It is relatively stable and safe as it is. It is not in a million pieces all over the place and it has not really been taken apart. With the cab off, it just doesn't look like a complete engine. The running gear has not been removed or taken apart. About the only thing that has been pulled are the tubes. The engine is not going to be cut up, it is not on land that is (or could be) sold or developed at a moment's notice, and is not held by an individual or group who is not willing to sell, or talk about sensible trade alternatives.

So Chris, my challenge to you is to consider posting (on your EBT page) that the WVRR does have a fund account for the cosmetic restoration of this engine to which anyone can donate "stabilization" funds. This is how things can really get done. Again, talk is cheap, action just a little more expensive.

Feel free to email me with questions or ideas.

David R. Farlow, CMO
Whitewater Valley Railroad
Connersville, Indiana

> EBT #6 was sold the the Whitewater Valley
> Railroad in Connersville, IN in 1975. She
> was operated there until about 1982 when she
> was torn down for an overhaul. (She has been
> pressed into service without any major work)
> During the early stages of the work, Indiana
> boiler law was changed effectively outlawing
> her lap-seam boiler and work was halted. The
> change was later reversed, but apparently
> momentum had been lost and she has sat since
> then as little more than a boiler on a
> frame. In that form she has been alowed to
> deteriorate in the weather, but all her
> auxiliary items (pumps, valves, tubing,
> whistle, bell, headlights, etc.) have been
> stored inside or used temporarily on other
> equipment.

> For more info, reference the following URLs.

> http://www.spikesys.com/EBT/Pics/1999n6.html
> http://www.spikesys.com/EBT/News/6sale.html


hudson.industries@worldnet.att.net

David:

Bravo! I applaud your rational approach to a piece of equipment that is both valuable and yet not a logical part of your collection. You cannot be faulted for putting your resources where they will help your organization. Hopefully, someday the right organization will approach you resulting in a win for everyone.

Erie Lackawanna Dining Car Preservation Society
tstuy@eldcps.org

David,

Thank you for your reply and more detailed information on the disposition of #6. The information on IN boiler law and the work done on #6 came from persons with closer ties to the WWV than I. I did not mean to imply that there was any wrongdoing in running #6 without an overhaul, as the EBT had her running near the end, but rather to imply that her subsequent heavy boiler work was due. The EBT did inquire to GE about dieselization on two occasions, but did not puruse it. The steamers were kept in good repair until the end, but #6 was the oldest and runt of the litter. With much larger and more capable #3, also a standard gauge 0-6-0, the lions share of attention doubtless went to her. The 'boiler on a frame' was indeed inaccurate and I apologize for that.

A similar clarification to your post: although FEBT has enough money, those monies were raised for the continued work on specific projects which FEBT has already assumed (The Post Office is only one, EBT Combine #16 is another.) Purchase price for the locomotive would have to come from a separate fundraising effort for that purpose. That alone would be a bit inappropriate since the property the group currently owns or leases is not physically large enough to accomodate the locomotive. That, coupled with the fact that there are several other new projects the group is seeking (which are more endangered than #6) makes acquisition all the more unlikely. Were the locomotive to be donated, the acquisition cost would not compound the substantial transportation costs and storage location as a barrier to its acquisition. FEBT will need to acquire storage eventually for the combine, so it is not a question of if but of when. But the advancement of such plans for #6 could not be seriously contemplated unless an offer of a donation of the locomotive were on the table (doubtless with a stipulation by the WVRR that a plan for it's acquisition and care be in place.) It was generally the hope of the FEBT (as I beleive our president expressed to the WVRR) that the RRMPA would acquire the locomotive as they have no representative EBT equipment, but they were unable to do so.

#6 was on the property at the end of EBT service and when it was declared a National Historic Landmark. I consider #6 to be a part (on a leave of absence) of the EBT whole. My own concern for #6 stems from that motivation. Although I wouldn't mind owning and restoring the locomotive myself, I do not have the funds for purchase or transport or the ability to store her. I'd donate her to the FEBT anyway. So I have chosen to try to publicize her plight in the hope a credible guardian will emerge.

I must admit to some aggravation at the locomotive's condition and lack of preventative measures. It reassures me somewhat that WVRR has specific conditions for the deaccession of #6, and I certainly wouldn't want to see her go to Iowa, Texas or Colorado either, though this is the first I've heard of any thoughts for the future of #6 by the WVRR. I agree that #6 is better off than many locomotives that have been 'saved' but I lack the confidence in it's future stability. I will not go into detail (I'm not a steam locomotive pro anyway) but most of my concerns would be allayed by basic preventative measures like a couple coats of paint, closing up of exposed orafaces and general cleaning up of elements of the locomotive that are causing continued deterioration.

I would be exuberant at placing information on donating funds or labor toward #6 on my site (in multiple locations) under the provison that the funds would go to #6 and not be diverted elsewhere at WVRR's discression. I encourage you to send the information to me.

Further I counter-challenge you to do the same on Whitewater's own site, which has only photos and synopsis of the locomotive now.


The East Broad Top Railroad Homepage

ebtrr@spikesys.com