I have a question for which there is probably no right or wrong answer. We have a seventy-five year old tank car at Steamtown for which we have no definitive proof of its original number. After exhaustive research, were able to determine it was one of a lot of ten built by ACF, and were able to find a builder's photo. We know the numbers for those ten cars, but do not know specifically which one ours had (none of the cars of that lot, besides ours, seems to have survived).

The question is, when we do a cosmetic restoration, what should the number be? The current appearance does not really fit our scope, while its original appearance (Cities Service-ERIX) fits nicely into the steam era. I propose that we restore it with the number of the builder's photo. Others suggest we find the next unused number by ERIX, and arbitrarily assign that number (we did something like that with one of our existing X26c Pennsy boxcars).

Any strong feelings one way or the other, or maybe there is an approach out there I have not considered. Just thought some might find this interesting.

Patrick McKnight
Historian, Steamtown NHS

pat_mcknight@nps.gov

I think either one is fine, so long as the decision and the reasoning is noted both in the artifact's accession file, and on any interpretive signage which accompanies it.

eledbetter@rypn.org

In this case I would go with numbering according to the builders photos you have, until such a time when someone unearths the car's actual number, if it ever happens. Just document it. Sicne it IS one of those ten cars, there is no need to start numbering outside that series. It isn't a replacement.


The Tod Engine

todengine@woh.rr.com

In this case I would go with numbering according to the builders photos you have, until such a time when someone unearths the car's actual number, if it ever happens. Just document it. Sicne it IS one of those ten cars, there is no need to start numbering outside that series. It isn't a replacement.


The Tod Engine
todengine@woh.rr.com

In this case I think either approach is valid as the number is only paint and it can be changed rather easily if the original one is ever found. It may be under many layers of paint on the center sill, for example, so I'd look closely and do a lot of sanding there during the restoration.

Museum of Transportation
rdgoldfede@aol.com

Having been involved in several rebuild/restoration of rail equipment I can tell you for sure that if you take the old paint off slowly you will find and be able to read most everything that was there from earlier times. When sandblasting a privatly owned locomotive the lettering and numbers of the former owner came through clearly. If sandblasting I would go with triple ought sandblasting sand and keep moving as not to "drill" down through the layers of paint. By getting on layer at a time should be able to shed some light on the number and even be able to stop and make templates for correct lettering.

Tom Gears
Wilmington, DE

Forgotten Delaware
tgears1@comcast.net

Agreed, no matter what recommendation I make, or the powers above me should make, if additional information is found in the restoration process, we should act on that. We also know where to look from the builder's photograph. The piece has been sandblasted twice from what we can tell, and part of the underframe came from another tank car, so we know what we are dealing with. And, of course, anything we do to the piece will be fully documented and used in its interpretation.

Pat McKnight
Steamtown

pat_mcknight@nps.gov