Some good comments. It would be a shame if Steamtown National Historic Site became a place where an 0-6-0 tank switcher ran around the shop and trains were hauled by first generation Diesels to show transition. They certainly have a wealth of locomotives to choose from, and bringing back a cycle of locomotives, ten-wheelers, consolidations, Pacifics and Mikes, would be ideal. Store them so they could be fired when desired, maintain them as such. I know, it's money, time and expertise. A plan to restore what is on the site and utilize it to show the grand picture of steam railroading is what was called for, not the realization.

They have a UP Big Boy there. Can't they restore it?
(OK, I'm under the desk now)

I had heard from a good "source" to remain anonymous that Reading and Northern owner Andy Muller was "open to the idea" of restoring 2102 to operation if business were to pick up - specifically through a new customer AND sales and interest in #425 remain strong. The economy has been an issue, as well as new mechanical effecting #425 which must be resolved first but it is reassuring to know that the 4-8-4 has not been forgotten or written off. At one point, former CP #1098 may be restored to operation for use at Jim Thorpe, at least that is one possibility I thought I had heard.

As for Steamtown - the standard response I've heard is that CP #2317 was next in succession to return to operation after #26 and B&M #3717 though you'd have to wonder why after all the negative commentary the park has received regarding the operation of "foreign steam" engines. The same would apply to the Canadian 4-6-4T engine.

A report on the status and practicality of restoration for each engine in the park had been performed (long ago) and I believe is available at the Steamtown site.

I doubt there is any logic in restoring engines that will not recover their cost of restoration (someone mentioned having them around for leasing or sporadic use). I question the parks ability or desire to even have more then 2 steam engines available after #26 is back in operation. Seems it would make more sense to invite visiting steam for special occasions.

Out of curiosity, I've wondered what it cost to restore #26? Perhaps more then the restoration of NKP #759? RDG #2124? UP #4018, lol. Course, all those engines were said to be too large for practical operation at Steamtown. #565 would've been the practical restoration and I often wonder if it would've cost less to do, albeit, off site.

/Mitch

Yah. Cosmetically, maybe put the drives on rollers so the drivers can be spun. Don't expect an operating Big Boy unless UP really needs one.

Do you perchance mean CP 1098? The scuttlebutt was that Strasburg now owns/has title to/whatever Hart's former CP 972 (which has been at Strasburg for years now) in lieu of payment for previously performed work.

Yup, I knew I should've double checked. Thanks.

Here's a shot of it at Jim Thorpe from June of 2007.



Also, while I'm at it, RDG #2102 at Jim Thorpe from June, 2005 (display only).



/Mitch

Yes, but I'm also talking probably 20 years down the road. Five to finish 3713, and fifteen after that until she's taken back out of service. That is plenty of time for 425 to get through her tube time and for Muller to start on and finish the 2102. This would give Steamtown a break, as they should invest at least 5 years of "resto money" into the site and collection of rotting rolling stock.

There are only so many locos in the Steamtown collection that fit their needs. While 6039 needs some heavy repair, I really cannot see them rebuilding another Canadian engine, no matter how loyal fans have been to 2317. I love the thing myself, but you could also argue that 3254 would be a better candidate as one, 3713 is a pacific and you would be running back to back pacifics, two, they have the parts mike there for any grave robbing, and three, 3254 was never plagued by the frequent derailing accidents that 2317 had.

The big decision is do you repair an engine that was recently in service, OR, do you repair an engine that has been out of service an extended time, and may be the last good chance to get that engine restored and operable again. If you're choosing the easy route you refurb 2317/3254. If you're looking at preservation of the collection, then you pick 6039 or 790.

It is entirely possible that 2317 will never steam again within my lifetime.

I also want to note that none of my posts are intended to bash Kip or the park, in fact Kip has done quite a bit down there considering what he has to work with. I care about the park and realistically want to see the right thing done in regards to the collection, and that is the basis of my posts. I want steam to stay in Scranton.

I beg to differ.

Let me see if I understand this correctly. There is a privately owned ex-Reading T1 in somewhat close to operable condition (translation: nothing known that precludes its eventual restoration to operation as is, unlike allegations about 2101, a T1 that probably is safe to say in a position where it will never operate again), in an enginehouse pretty much as close to the Reading RR "heartland" as you could ask for absent a dedicated Reading RR museum in the heart of Reading. She's on a railroad whose owner and staff are more than sympathetic to not only passenger operations, but *steam* passenger operations. It comes out for show now and then. It doesn't appear to be going anywhere, and "it doesn't eat much," as they say.

About the only real way you can improve on this scenario is to somehow, through magnificent changes in American law, psychology, economics, and culture combined, make it so that operation of the 2102 on a regular basis on passenger excursions and freight service is a feasible proposition. And if we did that, in twenty years or so someone would have to replace the boiler. Then you would have only a semi-historic loco.

Remember: These guys HAD a working, regular steam excursion railroad, almost literally a slobbering Pennsy/Reading railfan's "wet dream," as it were, and that line was last being used for car storage when I drove by it last. If they could make more money running fan trips, don't you think they would be?

Now, suppose somebody undertook the expense of not only bringing back 2100 from Tacoma, but repairing her and converting her back to coal.

Then what?

Where do you go? What do you do with it? The former Reading lines are mostly run by NS, which has its own steam program ideas that don't involve a 4-8-4, and the Reading & Northern, which, as we've noted, already HAS its own home-town T1, passenger cars, etc. SEPTA won't listen to that idea; ditto CSX. WK&S/Strasburg/Black River & Western? Get ready to be laughed out.

And whose money are you proposing to lose in this proposition? The 2100/Tacoma debacle seems to be a textbook example of "how to lose your shirt with big steam," a cautionary tale for other Jensen/Rowland wannabes. It doesn't look like Rowland, who by the way already HAS a 4-8-4, can talk CSX into allowing steam on the Greenbrier Limited even if he were so inclined. Are you proposing to use taxpayers' monies on this endeavor? Prepare for pitchforks and torches, especially in this current hostile environment. Have you won a mega-powerball-wretched-excess lottery lately, or are you and your associates "independently wealthy" or mega-corporation CEOs making too much money?

The only thing I ever hear is "that 2100 needs to come home." I've heard not one word uttered from those same folks about how to make that happen. Apparently some Reading fans feel that the current owner should ship it east and put it on a plinth at Hamburg or in downtown Reading at his own expense, if not convert it back to coal and make it operable in addition. That's not going to happen. You guys want 2100 back? Come up with a coherent plant to raise the acquisition and shipping costs and find a home for her. Owner won't talk to you? Then offer that funding to the owner of 2102 in hopes of getting her running. He stalls, or dies or whatever? Hey, I know another T1 that needs paint.......

I long ago found out the best way to stop useless protesting and complaining is to say, "Propose a viable alternative."

Right, which is why the only way you will see a Reading T1 running at Steamtown would be on someone else's dime. This could be an opportunity for 2102 though, as you could literally double it's number of excursions, running trips on both the RBMN and at Steamtown, as the NPS seldom runs both Sat and Sun even in peak season. Even if there were a conflict, Steamtown still has it's diesels.

Should Muller's steam program fail, one option that I have hesitiated to mention, would be the purchase of 425. That would give Steamtown a recently run, appropriately sized engine, that is very close to home.

The downside would be that it is another pacific, and again I don't know if that offers the variety that Steamtown would like to present.

I'll put my helmet on now.

The Strasburg has owned the 972 since 1995. Just to make that clear.

-Micah

[quote="6-18003Yes, but I'm also talking probably 20 years down the road.There are only so many locos in the Steamtown collection that fit their needs. The big decision is do you repair an engine that was recently in service, OR, do you repair an engine that has been out of service an extended time, and may be the last good chance to get that engine restored and operable again.
quote]

OK, I'll bite as I'm seriously interested: What will Steamtown's needs be 20 years down the road? What will Steamtown's needs be next week? If there's a developed long term plan based on real supported projections I'm unaware of it, and would like very much to know what it contains. Everything I see listed as possibilities in your posting implies a mode of operation much like that that has been done but do we really expect that things won't change in the future?

I'm suggesting that the questions you pose are those that need to be posed after a long term set of goals has been developed based on real planning - no point selecting what will be restored and run until you know what train you need to haul under what conditions and for however many years into the future and most importantly WHY. Beyond that, it doesn't really matter.......

Like Richard, I can easily see a valid need for a yardgoat under steam on the site as a part of daily interpretation, but in my mind the "mainline" operation can be anything from a lightweight commuter train pulled by a 4-6-0 to a heavyweight Pullman reconstruction behind a streamlined 4-8-4. How about putting passengers in converted coal hoppers and giving them the drag freight experience behind a hulking plodding 2-8-0, which was mostly what happened around Scranton? And, how often will it run? Special occasions or every day? How far?

I'm not sure how NPS does long term or strategic planning in this economic climate when change is the only reliable constant - i couldn't fault them for holding off on any investment commitment until they have a better idea how the dust will eventually settle. Any projection made in absence of such information isn't worth the bandwidth to post.

dave

Well anything could happen, but I really think that Steamtown has found their "formula," and it has stuck to it for quite some time. Kip Hagen has bumped things up a bit, and while it may seem like everything moves at a snail's pace, they have finally pushed the abatement program though, kept up the roundhouse and visitor areas, restored at least ten pieces of rolling stock in ten years (roughly 1 per year), brought in the diesels to help flesh out what they have to offer, and have kept 3254 on the rails while advancing restoration work on two other engines. Not too shabby.

Steamtown has found what works for the amount of people that they bring in combined with what the federal government chooses to budget them. If the FEDs weren't pushing to keep steam on-site, we probably wouldn't see #26 being restored, but someone understands that the excursions are a major draw and great advertisement for the park. So in order to stave off the diesels taking over the excursions completely, you need a yard goat plus a main line engine - running both means that operating costs go up and staff is strained, all in the name of keeping the excursions going.

I don't see the size or scope of the main line consist changing much at all, and certainly not converted coal cars with practically no suspension hauling octogenarians. I think they could benefit from an operator's type trip, where a small group could ride behind a switcher in a caboose and be allowed to get out and throw switches, help signal the train to couple, etc. Of couse this would require a lot of supervision and could not be done all the time, but if they could tie it in with a really hands-on shop tour they could charge a premium and I think there would be a waiting list. I don't even know how much legally they could get away with.

I have only made a suggestion as to what could possibly put a T1 back on Steamtown's main line, while fitting in with the established operating plan that has been in place at the park for over a decade. If Muller can double his profits while giving Steamtown a break to catch up on other projects and save a few bucks on operating costs (2102 would no doubt use Muller's crew and workshop in most cases, plus use HIS time and resources for restoration), it's a win-win all around. Not too sure what restrictions the FEDs may place on Muller or what other problems may crop up, but this topis is in regards to 2124 and not just Steamtown in general, so that's why I'm keeping it to the T1s.

This is an easy enough concept to try, they can begin by using 425 as soon as the blow by issue is repaired. From what I have seen the park is open to cooperative ventures so long as it meets whatever guidelines the FEDs have established.

Dave and 6-18003, Here is food for thought...............If you owned a operational steam engine and your overhead costs were climbing, i.e. track maintenance, building maintenance, utilities, insurance, etc, and you could strike a deal with the NPS, yes you would have to play by their rules, wouldn't you? Look at the diesels that are there now, they have security, a roof over their heads, a machine shop with all the trimmings and really reduced overhead. I personally would! If this could be worked out right it could be a great model for the future of steam operation/preservation. But remember you are playing with the FEDs so you must play nice and by their rules.

In terms of 2102 I do think it would be a great opportunity, and the only chance of seeing such a large engine, and especially a T1, operate at Steamtown. I think the average ridership at Steamtown is what, 200 p/excursion? I'll tell you right now that a second trip to Nicholson behind the T1 would sell out no problem, and that's at $44 a head.

Without straying the conversation any further, if Mr. Muller wasn't interested I'm sure that several other avenues could be explored as well. There have to be at least a couple steamers in the Northeast with tube time on the clock and no where to run.

6-18003, That would have to be worked out with Steamtown. A good point of contact would be the folks who own the F3s there now. Plus the thing is they, the owners of 2102 would need to contact Steamtown. I don't think Steamtown is in the business of looking for more stuff. Mr Rowland would be a good contact too. He knows the management of Steamtown, I think, and would be a reference to see what could be done. Anything is possible.