I'd place my bet on Stationary Steam to get the job done, properly, safely and at a reasonable cost.

One little wrinkle, though: 643 is owned by a person who seems to have the same affliction as a well-known multiple-steam locomotive owner who once lived in Chicago. That story did not end well for at least three of his locomotives and I doubt this one will be any different. If Campbell really cared about 643, it would have been in a good home long ago. These characters think they can take these things to the grave with them, and they do seem to succeed at that. Having a grip on reality seems to evade them, unfortunately.

Howard P.

As sad as it is, Howard has pinpointed the major obstacle, namely the locomotive's owner (and alleged protector). And that's the really sad part. I do not take lightly the owner's intense desire to hold onto something he may dearly love, but, as the saying goes, if you really love someone (or something) you need to let it go when the time comes. Been there, done that (with railroad equipment) and hopefully we'll eventually come full circle.

Not very optimistic here,
Mike

IRM just had a Silver Pony dome passenger car delivered to the museum via flatcar
there were costs involved but BNSF and associated lines ended up donating the move at no charge.

You need a volunteer organization non-profit established to deal with the engine, it creates certain opportunities.

Since the engine has been worked on for operation, you finish it, and let it power its own way out.

Fantasyland? ask the owner. Ask any of the other mainline excursion operators.
Ask 765 group and the FWRHS, ask IRM and all those who found ways to do things.
Keep the ideas flowing, a way will be found, and something practical.
In the meantime the owner may have his own ideas, but as time goes it could run into a "Lost Engines of Roanoke" problem.

Keep the attention on this engine.

-edit-

needed to add to the thought, no concept gets started without that "dream" behind it. The owner of 643 has his "dream" for it for sure, 765 didnt get restored without that "dream" behind it. NKP didnt get created without that "dream" behind it, the transcontinental railroad didn't get connected without that "dream" behind it.
Fantasyland...well we landed on the moon. Dream on.

People are calling private owners selfish, vain or insane for not transferring their treasures to museums, because don'tcha know, the museum would be a better steward. I'm a hardcore museum guy, but i'm also a skeptic. IT'S UNTRUE.

Many museums are tenants on someone else's land. Virtually none own a car house. Even the ones that ought to be reputable are pretty touch and go - consider California State Railroad Museum's reputed handling of the Santa Fe collection, or - my God - the Brookins collection. Or the backlot at any "top drawer" museum. You donate a unit to Illinois Railway Museum? You better donate $10,000 along with it, or it goes outside.

There's the fellow with the streetcar in the second floor of his barn, who won't give it to one of the top 10 museums in the nation because their carbarns are worse than his barn, and it'll probably end up outside under a tarp anyway.

So we museums need to get our game up before we wag any fingers at private owners. I'm not saying don't wag fingers. I'm saying get our game up, THEN wag fingers.

There's still a lot to be said for a nonprofit business structure. If you are a private owner with hobby equipment, to spend $1,000 on it, you have to earn about $1800 first, so you can pay taxes on the $1800 up in the tax brackets where car owners live. On the other hand if you structure a nonprofit, the entire $1800 goes to useful work. And you don't pay property tax on that barn.

Well, at least I'm not hearing anyone trying to get estimates on the price of a "hit man" in the Pittsburgh region........... but............ <:-\

I see that thought and thats far wrong albeit in comical jest.

Dick Jenson had equipment in construction way but the operators made the wrong moves, but we lost some engines in that ordeal. 643 may not be in that ordeal, not in any problematic position, but the concern is the engine one way or another something done.

Very sadly I'm afraid that Howard P.'s hit the nail on the head re; the real problem here is the owner. I'm also very afraid that the situation here in many critical elements is another Dick Jensen incident in the making.

Also, I respect Stationary Steams professional bona fides and am sure as Howard says that he could get her out of there. I'm also 110% sure not anyway near the figures he gives which by the way didn't include the over the road cost ( high,wide, and EXTREMELY heavy) to get it to a new home.

As previously posted the VERY legitimate operator whose offer was refused estimated that the total cost of the operation ( NOT including a museum quality cosmetic restoration at the new home) would be between $ 275,000-$350,000 depending on the total hours needed to seperate her into truckable parts and then reassemble her upon arrival. In that case the final destination was approx. 130 highway miles from where she sits. Enough hints?? They did the homework to get hard numbers and I'll wager whatever Howard P. or SS or anyone else wants to bet ( even money) that those numbers are a LOT closer than SS's! Any takers pls. PM me.

Sad but true!!

Ross Rowland

I wonder if a good lawyer could glean anything from the Dick Jensen fiasco(s) that might save the 643 if worse comes to worse? It seemed so insane that a historic locomotive could legally be cut up for scrap, but could not be legally moved intact without the owner's permission.

Let's hope this situation gets resolved long before it comes to that.

Conversations I've had with Glenn made me think he's still holding out hope that CSX or NS is going to come knocking on his door and ask for the 643 to pull employee specials or something to that effect. Glenn maintains that the locomotive can be ready in days to weeks, almost the proverbial "just throw a match in it" mentality. Perhaps he hasn't gotten the memo from the FRA about Form 4 work? I'd sincerely doubt he has a waiver for those twenty year old tubes, though they only have a steam test or two on them.

In any event, I give Glenn respect and credit for keeping this this around for future generations to appreciate. But the time has come for the next step. Like Rob and Stationary have said, any of us that have been able to get his attention for a few minutes have attempted to make him aware that change is necessary, and soon. His illusions of grandeur and trophy-like treatment of the engine continue, showing me that things aren't going to change. I think Glenn feels that if he lets the engine go he'll miss his opportunity to be the star of the show. The offer Ross speaks of would've put the locomotive in a good home, where people could appreciate it. Along the same lines, the Carnegie Science Center people tell me they were "promised" the engine from Glenn years ago, but they're still wondering why he never returns their phone calls. I'd love to see the thing stay here in Pittsburgh, but a good home is a good home. When Glenn refuses to answer the phone I've gone as far as showing up at his door, to no avail, to talk to him. This admittedly embarrassing "blindside" attempt is what it's come to. Glenn needs to make peace with the fact that this thing isn't running anytime soon. He needs to stop using the engine as a way to get all his local foamers buddies to worship at his alter. And then he needs to sit down with whomever he needs to sit down with and hammer out a deal. The clocks ticking, and we need a little less ego and a little more action.

*My observations and thoughts only, as always.

Somebody close to the situation needs to have a friendly chat with the property owner to ensure he understands how important it is that the engine is saved.

As well, would the idea of a long term lease sit better with the engine's owner? That way he would still own it as long as he lives... as long as an option to buy the engine (or better yet, donation) upon the owner's demise is written into the agreement.

Would remaining the owner, and having the chance to take credit for moving the engine (whether deserved or not) stroke the owner's ego enough to modify his position? Sure, it would require a pretty patient "buyer" who could forgo the glory, but the engine needs to be saved one way or another.

Note that I don't know this gentleman at all, I'm just wondering out loud about possible ways something might be done that would meet his approval.

Steve Hunter
Cardinal, Ontario

The term "FOTFL" (falling on the floor laughing) is overused far too much on the Internet.........

But that's literally what just happened here with me. (Maybe he intends to hire the same crew that "overhauled" Reading 2101 in 28 days in 1975?)

Ow. my gut.....

Tim Botti's post, a post by someone who has met and conversed with Campbell, shows very clearly that 643's owner has no concept of the reality of his situation. This locomotive will die on the spot it is on now, with a 99.9% guarantee.

643's epitaph will be the same as 5629, 5632 and 965 (the NKP 2-8-2): "Its fate was ordained the day it was sold to a man with few resources, and a tenuous grip on reality". (borrowed from B. Lamar Spruell, a noted Midwest railway philosopher).

"CSX will come knocking on the door to use 643 on employee specials"? It has been a long while since I've heard insanity of that degree. Truly amazing.

Howard P.

I agree with Ross, the engine could be disassembled and trucked out, it would be quite expensive. One major consideration is whether there is any real chance of it ever being operated again, if there is no realistic possibility of operation then it opens up more options for disassembly.

But I think Howard has the likely outcome stated very exactly.

PC

Maywood Station in Maywood, NJ.

The Susquehanna cut thier mainline twice to swing it over to the panel track next to the station to first move the bay window caboose there and then a few years later for the S2 #206. I will have to say they have done an amazing job of bringing that station back again, I saw it first hand years ago before it was touched and figured it was a goner. It's on my list of things to see again.

Pics of the temporary mainline realignment for the Alco S2 from thier site, a gondola was used as an idler car to push the S2 onto the track without the powered engine going onto it. I guess The Susie-Q is much easier to deal with for requests like this than CSX.

I would doubt that 643 will "die where it sits". This huge locomotive is is a prime example of the steam types that powered trains of the thirties and forties, those that powered the World War II trains that saved a nation. If it does come to that, whose fault will it be other than ours? We know its value, we know it possibilities, we know its capabilities. If the general public or even CSX fails to appreciate the importance of preserving this functional "dinosaur", it seems the guilt should fall upon those who knew, but failed to take a stand.
What can we do, proactively, so another Jensen debacle doesn't occur? This one would be worse, because we've seen this one coming by example. Maybe it's time to start enlisting railroad publications to set up a fund drive, as has been successful in Europe. Perhaps a delegation of authorized, authoritative individuals should make an appointment to address the president of CSX in a private meeting? Is Mr. Campbell, the owner, on board with giving up his locomotive?