A few passing thought:

1) I still talk about the Southern Mainline from New York to DC even though it is now NS. I still talk about PRR but PRR became Penn Central On Feb 1, 1969 (IIRC).

2)

This is quite plausable if you read country slang. If the creek under the trestle or river below might have been deep enough for a high dive of about 80' or so. If the picnicers would walk out over the trestle to the creek and dive (jump not submerged swimming) down, swim to the bank and (or maybe the engine was sticking out above the water level at the time), crawl up on the loco to ring the bell - not too unlikely.

3)

I would not be surprised if US military kept steam in reserve into the 1960s on various camps and forts for this reason. I have not been able to relocate the site for the airplane grave yard in Arizona (?)) supposedly several WWII and Korean era bombers and fighters were recently decommisioned and scrapped. I can not verify - sorry.

4) I recall a story (Urban Myth?) of the first USSR MIG captured - the team(s) that took her apart laughed and laughed about the fact that the USSR was still using vacuum tubes. Somehow, they found out the USSR was building tactical (?) EMP missles. The not-as-yet hardened US electronics in war planes that would cease to be flyable at high altitude would fall out of the sky (for some reason, I think this fact came from the CIA but ....)

All four items are plausible and as a conservitive (old fassioned definition as in I'm from Missouri) I hope for but do not expect confirmation of any of these.

The largest myth came truth was the recent (past 20-odd years) of the Fredricksburg or maybe Richmond VA find of an old RR tunnel that really did have a steam loco and several cars in it. It was in an urban area and deemed too unsafe to try to pull them out but there were photos of the equipment using fiber optic (maybe) cameras.

Oh Well.

Doug vV
(Just turned 60 in November 2015)

It is amazing what one can learn from just random posts on this wonderful board. I can add a little about soviet "reserves" and the thinking that went into it from their side, I have studied military history for much of my life, and this subject fascinates me.

The Soviets where class "A" hoarders. They saved just about everything that had "potential" use. The steam locomotives were well known among railfans, but they also hoarded military gear. I acquired a beautiful German K98k Mauser rifle, that had been released from Russian Stockpiles back about 10 years ago, they were being imported by the shipping container full. It even had been "refurbished" by Uncle Stalin, post war. Just a few years ago, German Walther P38 pistols started showing up from Russian stockpiles. This is not even talking about the just now starting to recede 20 year FLOOD of Soviet era Mosin Nagant bolt action rifles, and Soviet era ammunition that is just now starting to slow down. At its peak about 10 years ago you could pick up a completely serviceable bolt action rifle in "good condition" for $39 wholesale with bayonet and other accessories, and for another 20 you could get an unopened "spam can" holding 440 rounds of Ammo for it (with 40's, 50's and 60's dates on it). The hot thing they are importing recently is Mosin Nagant Sniper rifles, with proper scopes, matched to the rifles.

They also stockpiled heavier military gear as well. They kept IS-2 tanks ( a late WWII era heavy tank with a 122mm gun) in "active" reserve until the mid 1990's. They are said to still have a few SU 100's still in inactive reserve (another WWII armored vehicles) They dusted several of these off for the last big military parade in Moscow in honor of the 70 year anniversary of the ending of the "great patriotic war" and ran the with a column of T34-85's (those came from museums, they did not hold on too these like the IS2's and SU100's for some reason But from what I have read the SU100's survived so long in storage because they simply were forgotten long ago)

They kept all manor of tanks, heavy guns, and other weapons in long term storage as a war reserve (and TONS of ammunition for these obsolete weapons). They reasoned that if war was too come, and they were forced to call up they reserve's (most males had served in the military at some time) that it would be far easier and simpler to "refresh" them into the same equipment and weapons they had used during their time in the Army, than to teach them how to operate the most modern equipment available. Say if a war was to come in 1980... It would be far easier and quicker, to stick 40 year old Yuri in a rapidly resuscitated IS2, just like the one he learned to operate when he was a teenage conscript in the mid 1950's, than to try to teach him how to operate the modern and highly computerized t72's. Actually part of his unit's refresher training would be to have them help get the tanks out of storage and to prepare them for action. Take Yuri and his crew, in their old tank, and tell him to follow the T72's at a distance, or to dig in, and hold this crossroads, or help protect this rear area, or help put down angry mob of civilians, and Yuri will do his duty, yes they would be an easy kill for a modern tank, and the modern missile, but they may take someone with them, or get lucky and take several with them. Same goes for Truck drivers, AAA gunners, Artillerymen, Mig 21's crews, Juillet Class Diesel electric subs, etc etc... The IS2's are now gone from storage but they have scores of T55's. Granted the Mig21's and Subs, are not exactly "short term ready" anymore but a couple of decades ago, they would have been. The Soviets long remembered the lessons of the two world wars, Napoleon, mongols, and others, and they do have lots and lots of room for storage, unfortunately this storage can sometimes kill.

When the Soviet Union collapsed around 1990, the proper maintenance of these reserves did as well. This is why from time to time, you read about huge ammunition dumps exploding somewhere deep in the former Soviet Union, all these old explosives,and shells, definitely have a "use by" date and are getting more unstable by the year.

From RT news.. https://www.rt.com/news/ammunition-depo ... ussia-888/



Another oddity of Soviet Era armored vehicles is that much of the time over the years when they pull a tank out of storage and "stick" it on a monument somewhere the tank is complete and still fully functional, and aside from the change in location, it is left in it's "mothballed" state. They have been several instances of tanks, and SP Guns, simply with a bit of work, driven OFF their pedestal, or out of some decades long display, then taken down the road. A IS3 was "used" by the Ukrainian rebels recently, it was "requisitioned" from a pedestal that it had sat on for years, and had simply been driven off of it. This tank was eventually "recaptured".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1Z4IOQWNKY

I cannot speak about the vacuum tubes, but here is the report from the captured MiG 17, and Mig 21... The "Have drill" and "Have doughnut" program, Interesting light reading.

Have drill (Mig 17)
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4 ... a51_51.PDF

Have Doughnut (MiG 21)
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4 ... a51_50.PDF

If there was something capable of making noise underwater that a child or teenager could reach, it would get rung. I speak from experience.

Don’t get me wrong about ringing the bell. I am convinced that the locomotive is there. I suppose it is possible for the rung bell to have been heard above the surface and thus validate to bystanders that the bell ringing feat at been accomplished. So there is nothing implausible about the bell ringing detail per se.

The most implausible element of the lost train legend is that it is not well known by recent diving and photographs. I am aware of how attracted divers are to any possible underwater wreck or other interesting details. They always greet the legend of a lost train with overflowing enthusiasm.

What we have with this Kerr Lake legend is a quite detailed and plausible story from the relatively recent date of 1918. Due to the two fatalities, I am sure that the story is detailed in at least one newspaper existing today in the archives. Obviously we also have one or more historians who have deeply researched the story.

But in this context of knowledge, if the locomotive were simply lying exposed on the lake bottom at even today’s depth, I am surprised that the publication of the historical research is not bolstered with modern photographs or even just accounts of seeing the wreck by modern SCUBA diving.

The one possibility that explains that mystery is that the locomotive is buried in the soft lake bottom and therefore not visible for photographs or direct inspection. This is quite common because locomotives are very dense and lake bottoms are often composed of a deep layer of soft, organic material. Not only can this explain the fact that the locomotive has not been found by divers, but also explains why the railroad company never recovered it.

Therefore, my overall point about ringing the bell is that the detail suggests that the locomotive is resting on a hard bottom, and not buried in mud. So then that eliminates one obvious explanation as to why the sight of the locomotive in recent times is conspicuously missing from the story. That needs to be explained.

I suppose there could be other explanations. One could be that the water is too turbid to see the locomotive. That can be true of any waterbody, either full time or just seasonally. Another possibility is that the creation of the reservoir in the creek bed has caused the bottom to receive a deep layer of silt which has buried the wreck.

Want to find out? Start a Go Fund Me account and attract enough dollars to get a dive team in the water. There must be a water-borne search and rescue unit within 100 miles of that spot, try reaching out to them as well. Might make for a good training exercise.

Just borrow a magnetometer from the university and troll the lake near the old roadbed. You'll know pretty quick if there's a lot of old iron down there. If there is, maybe then find a diver interested in taking a closer look with a specific place already known.

Hi,

What I am failing to express clearly is that the loco was not submerged until the resivoir was built. Prior to that, it was stuck in the mud in the river maybe surrounded by water but mostly above water - including the bell.

The description of the picnicers could go out over the trestle and dive off the trestle down into the stream or water and swim over the surface of the stream to climb up out of the water and onto the loco standing on end int he mud where the bell was above water and could be easily rung and heard.

After the lake was formed, the loco is under water and I fully agree with you.

It would be interesting to see what it looks like today.

Doug vV

Would also be interesting to know more about the engine. The original news story showed both a 4-6-0 and a 4-4-0. Later there is a photo of the two brothers (who died when locomotive number 2 went off the trestle) shown in a photo with the Ten-Wheeler, but I can't tell for sure if that's the engine that is supposedly in the lake, or even if it is number 2.

Les

Doug,

On what do you base that interpretation? Are you referring to some other account besides what is stated in the video linked to the first post here?

In the video, the historian says, "they used to give prizes to people who could swim down and ring the bell."

I interpret that to mean that the locomotive was submerged, and "swim down to it" means to swim down through the water covering the locomotive.

I have made a few phone calls today to try to find out where the locomotive is located in Kerr Lake, plus some clarification of the site before the reservoir was created.

From a Kerr Lake message board:



And

Hi,

I was trying to make a point.

Watych the video - I have a dial up connection and do not watch video.

The word "gay" has at least two menings. One was used in the 1950's prime time TV cartoon The Flintstones - "We'll have a gay old time ..."

By the 1980's it evolved into something else as the primary meaning.

I am trying to point out that the original story of the locomotive has to use the meaning of the era - c1918.

For intstance going over to the store in some regions of the country means the same as going down to the store in others.

Since I have stired up an argument instead of gotten people to think of the wording and the era it was said, I give up.

If it is best for you, I am wrong.

Doug vV

Doug,

I was just wondering about what reference you might be referring to. Your interpretation may be correct. I recall finding other references to the Kerr Lake train a few months ago. I can't remember if they totally agreed with the linked video or not, and I cannot seem to find them now. Overall, the details conveyed are confusing. What I would like to see is a map showing today's lake, the underlying Nutbush Creek, the route of the railroad, and the location of the trestle.

According to the discussion in the fishing forum posted above, it sounds like the old trestle still exists. However, it is not clear whether this is above or below the water surface.

I have located Mark Pace, the historian in the video who explains the history. I will try to contact him tomorrow. I talked to a diver this morning who dove in Kerr Lake frequently from 1960-1980, and he had never heard of the lost train story at all.

I have some more details about the Kerr Creek lost train story. The railroad was originally a branch line that left the Seaboard RR at Manson, NC, and ended without connection at Townsille, NC, a distance of 9 miles. Earlier, this branch extended to Clarksville, NC.

The line crossed Nutbush Creek on an 80 ft. high trestle. This route with the trestle is not near the crossing of today's active railroad on a long truss girder bridge. It has nothing to do with that railroad bridge and route.

On the route where the wreck occurred, the trestle collapsed under the passage of a train. At the wreck site, the creek was wide, similar to a shallow pond. The creek valley floor was muddy and marshy on each side of the creek, and the mud extended through the bottom of the creek water. The locomotive fell with its front leading. It entered the water and punctured the soft mud bottom, leaving a portion of it buried in the mud of the creek bottom. I do not know if a portion of the locomotive was left exposed above the surface of the water. Whether it was or not, everyone knew exactly where it was located. Generally, I conclude that the water was not more than 10 feet deep.

The bell ringing story indicates that the bell was submerged in the creek water, but not buried in the mud of the creek bottom. So if the locomotive struck the bottom vertically, you can get an idea of how deeply in entered the mud.

The locomotive reportedly was not recovered because of the challenging site conditions. It remained there during the scrap drives of WWII. In 1955, the site was flooded by the reservoir created by damming the creek, and the water level at the wreck site was raised approximately 30 ft.

So, the overall conclusion is that the locomotive is still there, partly embedded in the mud bottom and partly exposed in the lake water body. This leaves the question as to why the site is not well known to sports divers, considering that the locomotive is not completely buried, and therefore would be accessible by diving.

The apparent explanation to that question is that Kerr Lake is said to be very turbid water due to fine clay silt. I have not seen the lake site, but I assume that it is surrounded by land that surface drains directly into the lake, thus stirring up the lake bottom over a very large area. This could produce a condition of total darkness at the wreck site. Even with artificial lighting, the visibility might be very short such as less than 10 feet.

If this turbidity is caused by a constant churning of the lake bottom, it is probable that whatever exists at the wreck site is heavily coated with the clay silt several inches thick. So even if there are large portions of the locomotive exposed in the water, its details are likely to be completely obscured by the silt coating. It is also possible that this silting has completely buried the wreck thus completely hiding it from divers.

Ron: I'm led to believe oxidation of the metal would be fairly severe. Fresh water from active streams or rivers would be rich in oxygen. The clay coating could slow the effect, but not stop it. I doubt it's entirely light-free, but certainly the turbidity would reduce visual inspection. Might be translucent to the eye.
Fascinating story, at the least.