It's too bad that this board frowns on the use of emoticoms... 'cause I have one called "stirpot" that would sure be appropriate here.



The operative word here is LIKE. I would LIKE to have Warren Buffet's money... and I would like to have my own stable of chooches, and my own railroad to run them on, perhaps in my own country, so I wouldn't have to put up with someone telling me what to do...

Brings to mind, If wishes were fishes...

Exactly! He purchased the engine with the intent to operate it. He never claimed to be a museum or a railway preservation group.

Want to preserve a T1? Buy the 2100, paint her up and put her in a glass case. The alledged mechanical and boiler problems won't be an issue for static display. Some nice black paint will get rid of the dreaded retro-red.

Nothing here that a cool $ 5-7 million wouldn't cure.

Ross Rowland

That's true, Dennis. But some (maybe most) museums also operate their antique equipment under a philosophy of "run to failure", which to me is indefensible for any organization that calls itself a "museum." I can think of a "museum" steam loco right now that was run to failure, and the museum spokesman posted elsewhere that it needs "serious boiler work." When is the preservation community going to grow out of the 'playing with steam engines' mentality?

Association of Railway Museums' Recommended Practices recognizes that some equipment is being "consumed" for operation and demonstration purposes. This is a fact of life in the operating museum community.

Wesley

Just as they were "consumed" during regular operation. As we've mentioned before, when you buy 2100 and restore it "original condition", how far back do you go? Do you convert it back into an I-10a 2-8-0?

I understand the idea that operating them wears them out. I agree that some examples should be preserved as is, and not operated, especially one of a kind locomotives, and/or engines from the 1800's.

However, I also contend that viewing a steam locomotive on static display is a lot like viewing a stuffed tiger at the Smithsonian. Yes, you can appreciate its beauty and learn from it, but until you see one in action, you won't really understand.

If there wasn't such a difference between steam and diesel, we'd all be running F units and GPs. But the public wants steam, even if that "vintage steam" is the K&K 2-8-2 built in 1989. (I recall riding that line in the very early 90's and trying to convince a fellow passenger that there was a good chance the engine pulling the train was newer than his car, LOL! I don't think he ever did believe me...)

I guess maybe we could store all of the vintage stuff and build new, I don't know, but some sort of steam needs to run if you're going to have folks understand what it's all about! Otherwise it's like collecting wine but never drinking it.

Maybe we're both right. If one wasn't available, maybe the casino tried for another. Tom Payne told me that about 2100 himself.

[quote]"Alexander D. Mitchell IV
For all we know, the owner discovered the pleasures of the opposite gender. >;-D
A somewhat related side issue is the railroad's loss of "steam expertise" in the form of the former "walking encyclopedias" of steam that are no longer with the railroad.
...and that 2102 hasn't yet been donated to the RCT&HS, and that the RCT&HS doesn't have such a terrific relationship with the R&N that they aren't conspicuously interacting with one another probably speaks volumes about the viability of repatriating 2100.[/quote]

Colonel Potter on M.A.S.H. would say ''HORSE HOCKEY !!''

1. Andy and Carol Muller have been married for about 40 years.

2. SOME of the steam expertise is no longer with the RR (or living). Others still are.

3. Mr. Muller is an RCT&HS member since the early 80's. He is one of our biggest financial supporters. He has helped with some of the planning for the Museum, and he brings his grandchildren to see the place. He knows 2102 would be welcome under our roof any time he wants to bring her over. Simple fact is he and his family still treasure 2102. He told me in a conversation just 3 months ago, he ''would like to get her running again''.

We are concerned about 2100, because she has that cloud of mystery and threat of scrapping hanging over her.
The other three surviving T-1s do not. They are safe and secure at this time.

So far, there are two of us RYPN'ers on record ready to write checks to help bring 2100 home.
Anyone else care to step up to the bar ?

I'll only post this in the interest of possibly clarifying who the players last were...
(if there's a more recent public news item regarding this, lets see it)

http://www.heraldnet.com/article/201106 ... /706099967

Interesting line in the article Randy posted:

"GNP, which owns no locomotives or railroad cars, does have a permanent easement to run freight trains between Snohomish and Woodinville."

So, if the article is correct, who actually owns 2100 and the train?

Steve Hunter

Too bad there's no "Friends of 2100" group. I think she's just too far from home for something like that to develop...

Stephen

Anyone know what has happened to 2100's "pal" the F40PH that it used to hang around with? Wasn't somebody on here looking for an F40PH recently?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0VqmDRLvAk

PC

As Foghorn Leghorn was wont to say, "THAT'S A JOKE, BOY!! A JOKE!!!!" And God bless Carol. >;-)



Yet the continued obsession with a "forced repatriation" of 2100 among certain quarters of Reading fanatics (and I thought Pennsy fanatics were obsessed....) can't help but lead the casual reader to assume that the RCT&HS, or at least that certain gaggle of Reading fanatics, apparently regards 2102 as being "lost" in the "TOP...... men!" government warehouse along with the Ark of the Covenant and the wreckage from Area 51. I am most happy to hear that Muller and the RCT&HS apparently have a somewhat friendly and cooperative relationship, but from the way such energy is focused (some would say wasted?) on 2100, it's easy--and possibly warranted--to assume otherwise.



With all due respect, I've SEEN the yard at Leesport jammed full of RCT&HS rolling stock and more. Several times. If I had $1,000 to spare (which I don't) and I were inclined to donate it to the RCT&HS, I would MUCH rather put it towards remediation and restoration of all the other more "unique" stuff there instead of "yet another" T1.

And I realize that you are making a personal pledge rather than one with RCT&HS funds. But to advocate a LOT of money to acquire a not-necessarily-unique artifact when the yard is already pretty full of fellows that need paint and TLC bespeaks an emotional, obsessive mentality that is better replaced by a rational, curatorial approach.

What bothers me most about this thread is the continued perception that people seem willing to accept 2100 being cut up as scrap simply to prove themselves, or whatever point they are trying to assert as valid. There are four T1's that have survived fifty years of miraculous preservation. How can one be sacrificed and that be okay? I expect "Mr. Sunshine" to be negative about preservation, but other prominent steam preservationists to toss out figures like "Seven million dollars" and chuckle about it?
Very disturbing.
Am I being to focused about the fate of one locomotive, or am I missing the 'punch line"?

My $ 5-7 million dollar figure was a semi-educated ballpark guess as to what it would cost to return this locomotive to compliant operating condition. It was not meant as a " chuckle" line but rather based upon the current condition of the engine and what things cost in 2012 dollars.

The only person that really knows the engines near term future is Charles Allen the wealthy Canadian insurance broker who got stuck owning it when Tom Payne defaulted on the loan which the 2100 was the collateral for.

The rest is just idle speculation.

IMHO-Ross Rowland