One answer to "dibs" between the two groups is alternating years by coin toss.

I've been kicking this around in my head for awhile, as un-mechanically inclined as I am. Taking a page from the locomotive re-manufacturers who are taking older D-E's and essentially stripping away everything except the frame and maybe truck parts to make gensets out of them, perhaps something similar could be done with old rusted out coaches. From reading around here, there have got to be a significant number of old heavyweights that have been "saved" to rot away on museum backlots, and isolated sidings all over the country. Instead of just cutting up the whole car, what about taking the coach frame and salvageable truck frames and designing a standard, historic-looking, but modern open-window car body and interior for them? If enough of a coalition of interested parties and potential operators got together on this it might be feasible. A FRA compliant standard design built from a salvaged frame-up with all of the currently desired features might be more expensive than a restoration, but with all of the time-consuming, and tedious restoration and retrofitting work necessary to do it right, maybe not? The numbers would have to be crunched by those of you who are experts in the field. Plus, you would have an end product with 40+ years of good service life to depreciate against when all was said and done.

I realize that nobody wants to scrap any historic equipment, but we've all seen the photos of rusted out coaches that are pretty much beyond any reasonable hope of being restored. I'm not talking about one-of-a-kind cars, but the aforementioned mass fleets of commuter cars that were "saved" 20 or so years ago. There are/will be well-preserved examples of those cars. The well-preserved ones really don't belong in heavy mainline service anyway, so those that can contribute components to partially new cars should. Better that than the whole car going to scrap.

I'm surprised that no one had gone to China, India or Korea with plans for a nice US 'generic' coach, and gotten a quote on having some built new. Very similar to the SY or QJ imports- Or have they? I'm partial to what I grew up with, of course, but something like a CNJ with modern trucks, couplers, brakes, restrooms and HEP (or self contained) could be used as stand-ins for many railroads coaches.

They would have to meet current FRA standards, but there are a lot of commuter cars and locomotives coming from overseas now. It shouldn't be that big a deal. In a perfect world, several tourist lines would get together, come up with a design, and pool an order for a large order of 'standard' coaches. Isn't that how the PCC came about in the '30s?

It's quite likely that anything "original" (and older than 1945) that is restored "in-kind" will fall outside the Part 238 passenger car rules. Anything that is new-build, even if to older appearance/specifications, will be considered a new car for regulatory purposes.

As for going off-shore for new cars, let's keep in mind that any custom railroad cars (replicating older North American designs) would be much more expensive than simply importing used Chinese coaches. Remember that all the talk of "building a new NYC Hudson-- just ship 'em the blueprints" cheaply in China was just talk-- the reality is that anything not standard to their regular patterns and production is expensive, possibly as expensive as it might be to have such equipment built here.

My opinion only, your mileage may vary.

Howard P.

I agree with Howard. Even with using cheaper overseas labor costs, I think that it would cost far more to replicate historic coaches than to restore original ones, even to mainline standards. Metalwork costs money, but if you have something other than air to weld to, there is generally less metalwork in a restoration/reconstruction than in building from scratch. There are plenty of original heavyweight and lightweight coaches still out there. The problem is that many of them are either spread out away from where they originally operated, are in places where it is logistically hard to move them, or the owners are not in a position to maintain them. Another recent thread here discussed a listing of endangered historic equipment. An N&W car that we would have saved had we known about it was scrapped a couple of years ago. What I think would be usefull is a listing of what passenger cars are where, and what condition they are in. I'm fairly confident that I could sell my Board on bringing home another good N&W car if the price is right. We have three servicable N&W cars, (2 in the TVRM/NS pool) and are planning to start on a 4th sometime in 2013. Rather than a "generic" fleet, get original cars back in service.

Let's try this one: can we find a way to "mass produce" the upgrades necessary to make older equipment comply such that it becomes more cost effective? Is it feasable to avoid making every job a custom fit one off?

I'm assuming we have carbodies and frames that are already in useable condition, and the job is one of trucks, brakes, draft gear and HEP only.

dave

Only if the existing fleet is all one type of car, otherwise each retrofit becomes a custom. That was one reason for my comment about IRM's fleet of Rock Island commuter cars; I think they currently have seven, with an eighth coming, and someone made the comment that they don't need any more. If one had plans to build an excursion fleet, one would need more.

Let me refine the idea: base the mass produced design, specs, and hardware for classes of car of which we have many multiples in suppply and available for the purpose. I can't help but reject the idea that all cars of a common class must be differently equipped as custom work. Also, there are commonalities that run across multiple classes of car that could - with minor modification (same coupler, different shank length, for example) lead to even greater common ground.

Perhaps we should start by identifying the major classes of car that are out there and see how many things they need in common?

dave

I thought that's what I said... you need to start with a fleet of the SAME car, OTHERWISE each car becomes a custom.

Using IRM as an example, they have three Boonton cars, built in 1914, and six (soon to be seven, if I understand correctly) Rock Island cars, built in 1927. I somehow doubt the upgrades for each batch would be the same.

The problem with "identifying the major classes of car that are out there" is that if you don't own them, they are not available. IRM's cars don't need any big bucks upgrades for the service in which IRM uses them, the same with Mid-Continent's four Boonton cars, or the Valley RR's coach fleet, or whatever. So, what's the impetus to spend scarce cash to upgrade cars for service they will likely never see? Much better to spend the money on historical restoration work (we are museums, most of us, remember?) than spending money to destroy original fabric.

Has anyone checked with the owner of a fleet of SP Harriman coaches--the Grand Canyon RR--lately as to long range plans and possible availability? It seems the last time I was out there they had about four trains' worth of various types of cars out there, including the "Arcadian" trainset...... and I seem to recall a bunch of "Boise Budds" out there, too......

I'm just going to leave this setting here.......

402 seats
Functional A/C
HEP equipped w/ Power Car
Tightlock couplers
All AP bearing equipped (EE or F)
All cars D-22 or 26-C equipped

OK, I'll bite with the $640,000 question:

How much to run them to, oh, I dunno, Washington DC, Chicago, Atlanta, etc. for two weekends' worth of trips, provided we find a host railroad willing?

OK, I'm going to stick my big fat opinionated neck out, and state that at least 50% of a coach consist to be operated behind a steam locomotive must be open-window.

What is the point of paying big bucks (yes, even in coach seats) to ride behind steam, and be sealed up in an a/c coach?? (there, I said it)

Nothing says an excursion consist cannot have both a/c and openable windows. The 1980-era Chessie Safety Express car fleet that I was once involved with was planned around just that concept.

We used 6 PRR P-70FBR cars, which have H-tightlock couplers, 2-axle roller bearing cast frame trucks, and seat 72 in decent comfort. Modifications included removing the old windows and battery a/c equipment, leaving the steam heat equipment intact (it works fine if you have a steam source!), installing new openable windows (JT Nelson sash), Thermo-King a/c units and an Onan genset on each car. These cars were "designed" to be useful for almost any sort of excursion or other sort of service, as a unified fleet. We even had some discussions about these being used for an emergency service during the Spring 1980 NY City transit strike! (settled before things progressed very far)

Those streamlined cars that are running behind 765 on NS are nice cars; could some of them be fitted with openable windows?

Once again, my opinion only, your mileage may (and probably will) vary.

Howard P.
Sash Lock, CT

Agreed Howard......there's no magic when you can't see, hear and smell what's at the head end putting on the show. There are only so many vestibules.

dave

I suppose that one could rip open an Emergency window and then you have an open window car............ Just be sure to update the annual test sticker when you re-install it!

Brookville Equipment claims that it's cheaper to buy their remanufactured streetcars built on carcasses of old trolley car frames instead of importing new from the Orient. Maybe they just charge less, or the savings is in the lack of ocean transportation charges. However, Amtrak California seems to think that old Jersey Arrow electric MU cars, already recycled into coaches, can be the raw material for a similar, if less drastic, makeover. The commuter seats will be some of the things to be replaced with more luxurious stuff.