Hey Bob,

have another cup of coffee. You need it....



Yeah, everybody is an expert on Alco.That is why they are the number one builder ? Funny thing is-don't see a single Alco on his roster. BTW, the ballpark on making that thing operation got into the value of a good used SW-1500. From someone who DOES know.



There you go again-invoking the great god of rail preservation Doyle-with whom you are on a first name basis-right ? Do you actually get to rub shoulders with the great man ?

FWIW, not only have I seen those shells before Doyle got his mitts on them-I reduced a similar locomotive down to the same state those PA's were. Big deal .
Been there -done that.

BTW, the idea of transplanting one locomotive into another was NOT the 'great mans' idea. This idea was suggested to me by a former ALCO employee way back in 1987 .

DPK

Not to start a flame war here, but you guys all do realize that virtually NOTHING in this hobby is "preservation", right? Restoration work destroys original fabric to varying degrees, and isn't serious preservation work in any stretch of the imagination. The whole "Thor's Hammer" syndrome and all that.

As an example, Southern 1401 is "preserved", while NKP 765 is "restored", and the C&NW's "Pioneer" is...well, repainted and hanging out in a museum.

Just sayin'.

No flames from this reader, as I've always had problem with the taxonomy of rail-related preservation.

How many rail museums go through the trouble of documenting the layers of paint on a railroad vehicle ? More than likely, the SOP is blow the old stuff away via some sort of blasting process and restore the exterior to like new.

How many museums remove-or backdate certain vehicle safety appliances, even if the next result is that the vehicle is no longer fit for operation ?

If we focus on diesel-electric locomotives, is all the equipment underneath the hood or in the electrical cabinet date to the same era as the paint scheme ? I doubt it.

A final note-in the old car game, attitudes and values have evolved to the point where a somewhat shopworn but original example of a vehicle is seen as more desirable than the samae old 100 point restoration.

Well, since you looked at Dick's roster, you know that he doesn't choose his locomotives solely based on cost. He obviously enjoys unique and historic equipment, and he wanted to add this one to his roster. I've seen what he's done before, and still think he could have done it.

Even if he isn't an Alco expert, I'll bet he has the ability to find somebody who is. Gee, wonder if there's anyone who's worked on Alco diesels in the Portland area that knows him? Maybe that "Mac-something or other" guy? Or somebody on his crew? Or several somebody's?



Yes, I do. I'm not on the 4449 crew, but we know one another. Then again, this is a small industry, and we are both located in the Pacific Northwest. I've been doing this in the area for nearly 30 years, so it's not exactly a surprise or anything unusual that our paths cross from time to time. The same is true for most folks who work on steam around here. It's not like there's dozens of steam railroads in the Northwest, so we pretty much all know one another.



Don't recall him, or I, saying that it was. I only said that if he can take that rusted hulk and restore it to operation, surely the same could have been done with the C415. I didn't say it would be cheap, I didn't say it would be easy, and I didn't say it was the best approach from an economical point of view, I simply said it was possible.

You're definitely right. There's a whole can-o-worms in that question. What is it you're preserving? The locomotive that rolled off the factory floor, or the (vastly different) one that was retired, worn out, and maybe with a driver from some other loco and a tender from another one?

Heck, let's consider one of my favorites, the Reading T1's. When you restore one of those, be careful how far you "backdate" it, lest it turn into an I-10sa 2-8-0 on you. ;)

Personally, I've come to terms with preserved engine being one that is similiar to what it was like when it was in service, with compromises made for various things such as safety and operation.

If the artfiact is in a museum, and can be displayed in as original manner as possible that's great. It's also understandable that it can't always be done.

So you are correct, there will always be compromises, especially in the area of maintaining the historic fabric versus doing what's needed for operations. "Those are the original boiler tubes, we can't change them out!" :)

However, it's my opinion that removing all of the insides and painting the shell doesn't constitute preservation. Then again, neither of these projects are being done by an operation that claims to be a museum, so maybe it's fine...

Wow, this sure stirs up a lot here!

I can certainly argue either side here myself, and I'm doing such a good job of it I can't make a conclusion worthy of posting.

But the arguement on preservation is missing something. So what makes this special? If it's the exterior cowl, that's being preserved, and we've got two of the FP45's actually in museums now. In my mind, the real story to these here that is NOT being preserved, and seems to be ignored, is the entire story of the EMD 20-cylinder 645E3 and what that did to diesel locomotive evolution with the SD45. Having grown up in Irvine, PA - site of National Forge (now Ellwood National Forge), that's where the crankshafts came from, and that was a HUGE step forward. I worked there for a few years, and the sight of a big forklift carrying around a 20-throw crank - SIDEWAYS around the plant, teetering, was unforgettable, along with the polishing operations where the symphony of that 20-throw chromed movemement on a lathe was as every bit as pretty as watching a Shay.

Those 20-cylinders have been falling like flies and have been replaced by 16's and downgraded to 3000 hp all over. We're worshiping sheet metal when it's the evolution of the crank that made the difference. Go back to the Trains July 1972 issue and you'll see a full-page ad by National Forge about that crank. I'm struggling on who even has any operating 20's now. Anybody?

There is a small museum in Irvine adjacent to the plant, they have some interesting stuff (including a 37mm WWII tank gun made there) but no crank.

I'd love to see any railroad museum, anywhere, get their mitts on a worn 20-throw and put it out there, better yet, move it at about 100 rpm. That's a wow. It's the 4-8-8-4 of diesels.

Here, to get the idea look at Chrome Crankshaft's web page; they have a slick animation and it's just a little one: http://www.chromecrankshaft.com/

Actually, according to this roster, six, and not counting the ex-Amtrak SDP40F that served under ATSF for a while:

http://atsf.railfan.net/atsfpres/

Give the Santa Fe fans their due: They produce a heckuva online roster.

Give the old AT&SF under John S. Reed their due, too. They did a fairly nice job in preserving a good selection of early diesel power.

Six units preserved out of a class of ten ??

DPK

Was able to photograph GN 441 yesterday in Burlington Iowa. I think it looks pretty darned good.

Regards,
Burlington John

One of the previous posters mentioned automotive preservation. When one of my daughters inherited her grandmother's 1959 Chevy and restored the timeworn body parts (it only had about 45,000 miles on it), she had the brake master cylinder replaced with a newer dual master, and told me that at Old Chevy meets, owners do not lose judging points for safety improvements like this. Seat belts are another non-factory addition that's OK. Getting back to diesel locomotives, one of the advantages of diesel over steam is the concept of parts replacement. Engine throw a rod? Drop in a spare (assuming you have a 50-ton crane handy). Traction motor cooked? Jack up the unit and roll an overhauled truck underneath. The likelihood of an "all-original" diesel from a Class-I making it to the land of historic preservation is rather small. Same thing with streetcars, especially from larger systems.