Not much on the Net about this venture--found out about it through a friend in York, Pa. via local newspaper reporting. They plan to operate a Civil War replica train out of York in the future, and have signed a trackage agreement with the county (?). A 4-4-0, "YORK 17", is currently under construction by Kloke Locomotive Works--though Kloke's web site doesn't show much progress recently.

A while back, newspaper reference was made to three Civil War era coaches being built for tourist service behind the 4-4-0. A potential builder for the coaches was mentioned--though I who forget at the moment. My question: if the new operation is under FRA jurisdiction, how will the "new" Civil War era coaches be viewed by the FRA? Will they run into the same problems that the Durbin & Greenbrier RR did with their new Edwards motor car that was built 10 years or so ago? Could the Strasburg Railroad, for example, build "new" Civil War era replica coaches that would meet current FRA Passenger Car rules--or would it simply be better to seek an exemption from the FRA for their construction?

Frederick G. Bailey

Fred,

This is a general statement, and not intended to be specific to the proposed operation in York County.

If a new operation is either non-insular, non-general system; or general system; new standard gage passenger cars in tourist-excursion-historic service not in 49 CFR Part 238 designated service would have to meet Safety Appliances (including automatic couplers, Part 231) and Air Brakes (Part 232, Appendix B). They do not come under the conditions of the Edwards car because they are not considered locomotives (Part 229). Because they would be built after 1945, by policy they would not be considered "antiquated," and would therefore require Part 223 glazing and emergency windows. Because glazing is based on a regulation, a glazing waiver could be entertained; however, since safety appliances and power brakes are based in statutory law, the waiver options are severely limited. The statutes also require "safe and suitable condition for service", so, even though there are no present strength requirements for tourist and historic equipment, it still needs to be robust enough to ensure the safety of the public.

Steve

If an organization truly wants to represent totally archaic railroad equipment and operating practices, it sounds like the only way to do it is to use a size small enough that the FRA either cannot or will not step in to regulate. My understanding is that they generally will not bother with anything under 24" ga. I also understand that if they really wanted to they could regulate a roller coaster, so I'm sure that whether they step in or not is very situational.

If you do try to represent, say, mid-19th Cen. operating practices in a smaller, but large scale - no air brakes, link-and-pin couplers, brakemen who actually perform the function, lap seam boilers, etc., you would probably run into problems with the state's amusement park regulators. Even if you assert that what you are doing is a historic re-creation, and not an amusement, the bureaucrats will probably keep picking away at you until they win. It happened with a live steam operation in a public park I know of.

I think it would be very worthwhile to try and have an operation that represented a complete mid-19th Cen. railroad experience, right down to the sexist and racist aspects of society at the time. It definitely would be an eye-opener for students. It works for Colonial Williamsburg with the 18th Cen. The thing is, there are reasons that we have equipment like air brakes and Part 223 glazing - fewer people get hurt and killed doing the job today.

There's got to be a way to build them to look authentic, with modern safety appliances worked into the period design...

Stephen

There was a good article in Trains magazine, many years ago, on what the L&N did to bring the General into the mid 20th century. They converted it to burn diesel fuel, and added air brakes. A pair of Briggs and Stratton engines was hidden under the "wood" pile. One ran a pump for the fuel, and the other ran an air compressor. The brake cylinders and rigging, between the drivers, were copied after some of the earliest engines with air brakes, and represented what the General might have eventually been equipped with. The engine still looked 'right', though

I don't remember who was interviewed, but recall reading that over the course of years, most of the locomotive had been replaced. Maybe only a few of the driver centers, a boiler course and part of the frame were original, or something along those lines. Its been years since I read the article; maybe this paragraph belongs over on the 'historic fabric' thread-

The York, Pa. newspaper has apparently gone "all out" on its coverage now:

http://www.ydr.com/ci_18995870

I like this that they are working on bringing a Civil War era appropriate train to Gettysburg. With it being a reproduction and having the advantage of modern technology and safety standards it should be able to be enjoyed for many years in the future. This is something I will be following the progress of as it takes shape.

Except that it won't actually be in Gettysburg, but a ways south. Not too far away though. :)

My dad had an uncle who lost a hand in a coupling accident back in the 1890's. Link & pin couplers are one piece of authenticity we should leave in the past, except for very special cases, with extra safety precautions.

FWIW, Crown Metal Products, Harpur, et al were doing something not too far from this for amusement parks since the 1960's. Nothing new about this concept other than a greater interest in authenticity.....the details of which would be wasted on everybody except us. I've seen steel commutuer cars used in Civil War movies, along with 1920's steam locomotives, and it certainly ruined any credibility the film might have had for me, but other people I know not contaminated with specific knowledge found it worthwhile.

If authentic is compromised to include tempered glass and air brakes, I'll still support it, as I support Golden Spike NHS with similar compromises.

dave