Did Reading/Northern get a "new" unit?

Gary Gray · **Posted:** Wed Apr 21, 2010 10:06 pm

o anderson wrote:

Excuse me, but I was not aware that SD40-2 and SD50 locomotives fell into the railway preservation category. Similarly, seeing something go by my house and talking about it here does not seem to be about railway preservation. This discussion is banter between two people, more than discussion of railroad preservation. If I am wrong, please correct me.

Otherwise I request that you end this discussion here and take it offline or to another forum.

Disregarding the question of "banter", I would respectfully disagree about at least SD40-2's falling into the preservation category. These units are mostly now over 30 years old, and were the 2-8-2's or GP9's of their era. They are now older than our Alco T-6 when we purchased it for preservation, and much older than most surviving modern steam locomotives when they were retired. A large number of surviving F and E units were younger when they made the transition to preserved artifacts. Ubiquitous, yes. But the SD40-2, because of it's popularity, reliability, and longevity, has to rate as one of the most significant locomotives of the post-steam era.

SteamPWR · **Joined:** Sun Dec 30, 2007 6:01 pm **Posts:** 52

o anderson wrote:

Excuse me, but I was not aware that SD40-2 and SD50 locomotives fell into the railway preservation category. Similarly, seeing something go by my house and talking about it here does not seem to be about railway preservation. This discussion is banter between two people, more than discussion of railroad preservation. If I am wrong, please correct me.

Otherwise I request that you end this discussion here and take it offline or to another forum.

I see nothing wrong with this.............

Mr. Ed · **Posted:** Thu Apr 22, 2010 8:57 am

"O" is confused. On another post he leads the reader to believe that banter is OK, yet here it isn't. Confused? Yea, so am I on his posts. But if I don't want to view a post, I pass it by.

Later!
Mr. Ed

tomgears · **Posted:** Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:07 am

While an SD40 was the equivalent of a USRA 2-8-2 and might be a worthy preservation topic. This is not a train spotter board. The goings on of your favorite local railroad is not preservation. There are other boards for train spotting. I guess Len got excited when he saw the train by his porch and wanted to share. I don't want to sound to critical because I do applaud his work on the DLW engine at Steamtown.

Ed Kapuscinski · **Posted:** Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:52 am

Gary Gray wrote:

Disregarding the question of "banter", I would respectfully disagree about at least SD40-2's falling into the preservation category. These units are mostly now over 30 years old, and were the 2-8-2's or GP9's of their era. They are now older than our Alco T-6 when we purchased it for preservation, and much older than most surviving modern steam locomotives when they were retired. A large number of surviving F and E units were younger when they made the transition to preserved artifacts. Ubiquitous, yes. But the SD40-2, because of it's popularity, reliability, and longevity, has to rate as one of the most significant locomotives of the post-steam era.

And that is why they're high on the list of things the Conrail Historical Society would love to get our hands on.

The flipside though, is that they STILL have lots of life left in them. The tricky part is finding one is "done" with its productive career and isn't going to get rebuilt.

I'm actually quite worried about that possibility, that these things will live on forever, but in forms far removed (as far as artifacts are concerned) from their "in service" state, or even appearance.

As far as the ex-Cons go, I'm most concerned about the ones NS got, because they seem to be into rebuilding their equipment (take a look at the SD40Es that have displaced them from their long held duties out of Altoona and Cresson). There's no reason the SD40-2 fleet wouldn't be good candidates for this.

Unless we find a VERY wealthy donor, the price of purchasing something like that for anything remotely close to its value as a rebuild donor is going to be difficult if not impossible.

I don't know why post 1950s diesel preservation always seems to need to be defended, but here's some food for thought for those who don't think it's important.

The CR SD40-2 fleet served as helpers on the busiest stretch of mainline grade east of the Mississippi river for 30 years. I believe that would be longer than the Pennsy's famed I1s did.

1981: http://thecrhs.org/Images/CR-6372-and-C ... na-in-1981

1994: http://thecrhs.org/Images/SD40-2-6373-a ... na-in-1994

1998: http://thecrhs.org/Images/CR-6374-6388- ... ra-PA-1098

2002: http://thecrhs.org/Images/NS-3387-ex-CR-6454

2007: http://thecrhs.org/Images/6457-8-18-07-Altoona-PA

jrevans · **Posted:** Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:25 am

tomgears wrote:

I guess Len got excited when he saw the train by his porch and wanted to share. I don't want to sound to critical because I do applaud his work on the DLW engine at Steamtown.

As much as I don't want to defend Lenny, I have to say I'm quite sure that Leonard Shaner doesn't live in Tamaqua. Here's my proof: He's stated on the web that he lives in Pottstown, and a quick search over at anywho.com will easily show you his phone number and address along with a link to a bing map which can be "street viewed" to see the house and tractor that he shows in his many youtube videos....

As much as I can't stand having experienced YEARS of lenny's multiple internet personality syndrome (MIPS?) over on other forums, I'm glad he's going somewhat legit with the Steamtown work. He does have some decent video content on youtube, if you can excuse some of the varying quality.

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:26 am

jrevans wrote:

As much as I don't want to defend Lenny, I have to say I'm quite sure that Leonard Shaner doesn't live in Tamaqua. Here's my proof: He's stated on the web that he lives in Pottstown, and a quick search over at anywho.com will easily show you his phone number and address along with a link to a bing map which can be "street viewed" to see the house and tractor that he shows in his many youtube videos....

And not that it matters, but I've also managed to figure out "GSPro's" real name, and elsewhere on line found one of 15 or so folks with that same last name in that town (spare the jokes about coal towns and the inability to leave, folks) living at a location that approximates the photo angle of the Reading & Northern photo...........

GSpro · **Posted:** Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:37 pm

Anyway, could we please stop doing "research" on me? I told everyone to begin with, that I wasn't Len. Maybe this topic should be locked or whatever.

Wowak · **Posted:** Sat Apr 24, 2010 2:26 am

Alexander D. Mitchell IV wrote:

(spare the jokes about coal towns and the inability to leave, folks)

I'm from one of those coal towns, and I managed to leave. :)

Sure explains my irrational love for RDG T-1s, tho.

Jdelhaye · **Posted:** Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:03 am

o anderson wrote:

Excuse me, but I was not aware that SD40-2 and SD50 locomotives fell into the railway preservation category. Similarly, seeing something go by my house and talking about it here does not seem to be about railway preservation. This discussion is banter between two people, more than discussion of railroad preservation. If I am wrong, please correct me.

Olin, Consider yourself corrected!

For an example of a preserved SD40-2, see your previous hangout, IRM.

Jeff

tomgears · **Posted:** Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:26 am

Quote:

I'm from one of those coal towns, and I managed to leave. :)

Sure explains my irrational love for RDG T-1s, tho.

Not irrational at all. T-1s rock. SD-40s wish they had 10% of the coolness of a T-1.