Let's consider relative contributions:

Back in 1992 the museum provided an inoperable steam locomotive which was missing a number of components, and which had other components so deteriorated that they could not be repaired/overhauled/restored.

Northstar Rail/Friends of the 261/Sandberg contributed:

1. Almost $1.0 million dollars to the restoration of the 261
2. Approximately 20,000 volunteer man hours to the restoration of the 261

And the museum contributed:

1. Zero dollars and zero cents to the restoration
2. Pretty close to zero volunteer hours.

If the locomotive is worth more than scrap value at present, it is solely because of the efforts of Sandberg/The Friends of the 261. The museum contributed NOTHING to the successes of the locomotive and now wishes to profit from those successes.

Lotsa luck, dudes. Anybody capable of overhauling and operating the 261 is also bright enough to figure out that the museum is not an appropriate business partner.

My opinion and mine alone. Opinion.

Unfortunately, as demonstrated by other comparable locomotives on the open market right now--C&O 614, the CP Pacifics in Virginia, presumably the steamers at the Grand Canyon RR, Reading 2100 in Washington, etc.--it's fairly brash to presume that ANY steam locomotive out there has ANY more value above scrap. The fact remains that the pool of potential buyers is at least one less than the pool of potential sellers.

Definitely agree with ADM IV,

If you look at the engines that have been sold or traded in the last few years, they're mostly the "smaller" variety. The 2-8-0's to Mt Hood, then to Rio Grande Scenic, the 2-6-0 that also went there come to mind. The former New Hope 0-6-0, the two K&K steamers, the former Rail Tours 4-6-0, the Middletown & NJ 2-6-0 and so on.

If there is a commercial "market" for steam engines above scrap value, it would seem to trend towards the smaller units.

Dave Crosby

There is nothing like superpower steam and I really hope that examples live on in steam for generations. I commend the folks who made 261 happen and am excited to see what happens next. As for dollar value above scrap, the smaller engines is where it's at. In the UK there are a number of smaller locomotives that are boomers moving from one railroad to the other. There is a growing number of engines hitting the road here providing real steam excitement everywhere they go. These engine will play a huge role in providing the hook for future generations of steam people.

I like big, loud, fast locomotives as well as the next guy, but the reality is that it will be the small engines that will keep the needle above zero in the future. Just look at what the Gramlings have done with Flagg Coal 75. They are emulating the model from Britain, where engines routinely move about from one location to another on rubber tires. Quite a few British locos are privately owned, as well. We may not like it, but that's the way it's going to be in the future. No one will be able to justify the cost of overhauling a 4-8-4 or 2-10-4 and have nowhere to run it long enough to recoup their investment. A 2-6-2, on the other hand, can be be moved about on a lowboy or flatcar, to a location where it can earn its keep.

The Brits have been hip to this world for some years. But let's remember that a big locomotive in the British Isles is pretty small compared to American locomotives.

Sadly, restoring steam, especially big steam, is like working on a $500 used car. When the transmission goes out, and you put $1500 in it for a new tranny, what you get in return is.... a used car worth $500.

While nobody likes the fact that the base price for big steam is determined mostly by a scale and the current value of scrap iron, the used locomotive market has shown that all too often that's exactly the case.

Precisely why I hope museums like Steamtown look towards some small, comparatively less costly to operate, restorations. Can you deny an operable Vulcan in NEPA would not be the best of all worlds (local interpretation, impressive to kids, and fiscally responsible)?

Rob

I'm surprised this idea about smaller/transportable steam hasn't been done more in the US. The Gramling model appears to be successful, and our friends across the pond certainly have it fine-tuned with visiting engines all over the place. Theory says you should be able to do the same thing with a slightly larger engine (ie 2-6-0, 2-6-2, 4-6-0, small 2-8-0) that could pull your regular trains, and come up with an agreement between a few museums that would like to have steam operation, but do not have the finances/technical ability to afford it by themselves. Get a few groups together to pool resources (or one operator leasing it out) for a month or two at a time on the railroad--long enough to recoup expenses. I can think of certain engines that would be perfect for this situation--the ex-Reader 2-6-2 that was at Hartwell and later Kentucky Central comes to mind.

Has there ever been discussion on something like this?

I've discussed this subject with several friends over the past few years. It all comes down to dollars. If one overhauled a 50-60-ton 2-6-2 or ten-wheeler, would it pay to move it from Ohio to Florida and back every year for six months of service in each location? I think the Mount Dora Scenic RR in Florida tried it with a locomotive from somewhere out west for a couple of years. Does anyone know the results?

The Gramling model works because their loco spends a couple of weeks or a month at one location and then moves on to another railroad. Since no. 75 is small enough to travel on a standard low-boy trailer at relatively low cost, there's no need for pricey heavy haulers. Would the response be as good if it spent several months at a museum or tourist railway?

The British model works so well because distances are much more manageable. The whole country isn't much bigger than Pennsylvania. But I'd love to give it a whirl on this side of the Atlantic. Anyone got a 2-6-2T or 2-6-0 that needs to start earning its keep? I'm retired, and I'd love to travel around on such a venture.

I don't think it went over too well (judging by the fact that it didn't last very long at all)....but they were running it out of Mount Dora going to Orlando every now and then, as opposed to the opposite. If you've never been there, Mount Dora might as well be Tallahassee in terms of closeness to Orlando. It's in the middle of nowhere, and you have to know where it is to find it. Your average Disney/Universal/Beach-going tourist would never find the place in a million years. Cute little town to run an excursion to, but not one to base it out of. Theory says they would have probably done better with the steam engine running out of Orlando where the population base is. That said, by the time I saw Mount Dora, the steam engine was long gone, so maybe someone with more knowledge of that timeframe might be better able to answer this one.





My guess is that for a venture to be successful, you'd have to keep the engine at any location in the 1-2 month variety, so that the crowds stay up. Keep it there for six months and it becomes "another steam engine". Then again, can the market tolerate another traveling steam engine that would essentially be competing with the Gramling loco?

"Then again, can the market tolerate another traveling steam engine that would essentially be competing with the Gramling loco?"

It's a big country.

I would agree... Dan Markoff with the narrow gauge "Eureka" has shown that it can work - even for a week at a time on the D&S, or in Nevada, etc. He uses two trucks with trailers to haul his locomotive and tender. The Galloping Goose also makes similar trips to both the D&S and C&TS. I don't see why something similar couldn't be done for several weeks, or a month at a time at several museums/railroads in one general area (ie. northeast, or southwest, or midwest) in one year.

Hey, Wayne, I'll be retiring in a couple of years - do you need some help?!

Phil

Realizing "Friends of 261" is still licking its wounds and settling all accounts, may I inquire if it's too early to request a "short list" of steam locomotives being seriously considered for renovation and long term operation by the re-organized group?

If, ultimately, there's going to be another locomotive restored (and I have every reason to believe that that is true) then I'm pretty sure Steve won't leak a word until every i is dotted, every t crossed and the contract signed.

The mere act of inquiring about the availability of a locomotive has perils that may not be obvious. Before the 261, when Steve was looking for a locomotive, I was more directly involved. At the time Soo Line 1003 seemed a possible candidate. It was the subject of a failed restoration which lay moribund, and owed the city of Superior, WI a substantial sum of money. I was sent to a city council meeting to make an offer on the locomotive, and was quite surprised to learn that I was an evil, spawn of the devil, potential thief, who wanted to steal the cities heritage. So much for that idea.

We also looked at a Pacific which had some considerable problems, but which was deemed restoreable. Same sort of reaction. Eighteen years later the Pacific is slightly more disassembled than it was, and every so often some one moves parts from one side of the building to the other.

Steve's been pretty open about what he ISN'T considering, but I'm afraid I'm in the same boat as everyone else. I'll find out what is being done when they're ready to go public with the information.

Regards,
Doug

Well, not EXACTLY mid-western....might I suggest a certain Pacific in Waterville, Maine?
:-)