Les:
The story of NYC RR #2933 was covered recently in the NYC HEADLIGHT magazine.

Kevin K.

Regarding the 5344 headlight: I was pleasantly surprised when I visited a suburban Chicago hobby shop, and found its headlight, number plate, and both builders plates, on display. This was relatively recent, perhaps six or eight years ago. I believe that the shop has since closed.

I have heard, from a "primary source", that the NYC offered a Niagara to the Kingston, NY model railroad club. The source was a club member at the time. They did not have a place for the loco, so they declined. (Kingston was the home of IBM, during this period). I don't have documentation, or any other proof of this, so "Take it for what it's worth."

JR

As the author of the 2933 story in Central Headlight I would refer one and all to it. Most of what you read about it is not only fantastic but false. It was newer "hidden" in the Selkirk roundhouse behind a wall of boxes, saved from a fire there, or any of the like. There are photos of it outside of the roundhouse in the article, and it was exhibited with 999, also kept there. The fire only destroyed a part of the building and some diesel locos. Mr. Perlman was vefy gracious about donating it when approached by the Arthur Atkinson, former Wabash President, acting for the museum. It arrived at the St Louis area the year before its formal donation ceremony and was stored st the Alton & Southern roundhouse until the ceremony at Union Station. The delay was requested by Mr Perlman due to pressing business at the time.

Well, I don't have any tales from my Dad (NYCRR Fireman/Engineer Buffalo NY, 1941 - 1989) about the Hudson that "got away". But the NYCRR at that time was trying to save every dime possible. They put hundreds of railroad building on the market including Buffalo Central Terminal (no buyers were interested).

That included scrapping as many unnecessary assets as possible. The steamers where just another tool to the railroad men. If the company could get $ 20k for it's scrap value off it went to the scrap yard.

I suspect they would have sold them to anybody for the same dollar value but that was before folks thought too much about buying obsolete railroad engines to preserve them.

It all came down to saving money. Parts of the four track main line across New York State were lifted (rails and ties combined in panel track format) and sent to build a new classification yard in Ohio.

Buildings that could be scrapped were. The East Buffalo Roundhouse (between BCT and Frontier Yard) was where most of the passenger power was serviced. They chopped up the turntable bridge and hauled it away for scrap. Then they took all the "obsolete" boiler servicing tools (tube cutters, brushes, etc.) and threw it all in the turntable pit. Then they bulldozed the brick round house building into the pit to fill it up.

A taxable building became a much less valuable empty field as quickly as possible.

The property tax situation in New York State was awful, every turnout, signal mast, telephone pole, mile of track, outhouse, etc. etc. was assessed by the "taxman".

The Railroad was "big business" with "deep pockets" so the tax assessors had a field day. The railroads property tax was not based on how many acres of property they owned, but how many tracks, structures, improvements, etc the government could think up.

At the same time the government was building airports and interstate highways that paid no property taxes.

Not too much later (1960's) the NYCRR wanted to sell their legally owned "air rights" to allow someone to build an office tower above Grand Central Terminal in Manhattan. The rent from that would have covered much of the cost of operating GCT. But some folks complained about the RR doing what the RR wanted with it's property.

It's a shame that none of the Hudson's or Niagara's got preserved, but the NYCRR was just trying to survive as a profitable business. Donating stuff that was considered obsolete was probably way down on their list of concerns. I suspect they would have donated a Hudson to a well prepared outfit that demonstrated an ability to keep the loco looking ok, but there where not too many outfits like that back then.

Cheers, Kevin.

At risk of going way off topic, it's worth noting that this is exactly the dynamic that led the PRR to do what it did with Penn Station.

-Philip Marshall

If I remember correctly, the actual 'push' to put a building over GCT came in the mid-1950s, as distinct from the Pan Am building (over the platforms) or the Marcel Breuer 'contingency plan' over the waiting room that became the focus of the Landmark Commission activity in the mid-'70s. And it has to be said that the structure in question would have become at least as famous a landmark in its own right as the Terminal building is. Robert R. Young as early as 1954 commissioned Webb and Knapp (and architect I.M.Pei) to put what by design conclusion in 1956 was a 108-story building over an almost 'incinerated house' framework of the roadways around GCT:


While of course I'd rather have GCT just as it is, this was a dramatic vision for the site. I suspect that only Young's suicide kept it from occurring, since I think this represented a more lucrative real-estate opportunity than what was done over Penn Station a decade later...

Folks,
President Perlman wanted to get rid of that old stuff! Before he went to the NY Central he had scrapped all the standard gauge steam locomotives on the Denver, Reo Grande Western. The only one that survived was already off the property; and Bob Richardson took it home to the Colorado Railroad Museum.

The Hudson picture is not all lost; in addition to the one in St Louis there is Chicago, Burlington & Quincy #3007 Hudson at the Illinois Railway Museum.

ted66

There are 10 preserved Hudsons in the US
2 from ATSF
1 from C&O
5 from CB&Q
1 from CP (at Nethercutt)
1 from NKP

R.M. Ellsworth wrote;

"Robert R. Young as early as 1954 commissioned Webb and Knapp (and architect I.M.Pei) to put what by design conclusion in 1956 was a 108-story building over an almost 'incinerated house' framework of the roadways around GCT:"

I do admit that I am a bit of a NYCRR history aficionado and I thought I had devoured all of the available information about the property but your posting is NEWS to me. I have never seen that sketch of an ultra modern skyscraper above GCT. Very interesting and UGLY.....

Glad it never happened and still sad that not one stinking NYC Hudson was saved.... For cripes sake they had 270 of them, how hard would it be to park one "out of the way" for 10 years until a good resting place could be found ????

Cheers, Kevin.

Does the CN 4-6-4T at Steamtown count as well, or are tank engines disqualified? :)

-Philip Marshall

CN 4-6-4T #47 would most likely be considered a Ten Wheeler with a permanently attached tender, since on a Hudson, the 4 trailing wheels supported a larger firebox, rather than a tender. BTW, CN #47 and several other preserved steam locomotives, including CP #2816, show up in a Film Board of Canada film from 1961 on the end of Canadian Steam that can be viewed on YouTube. I would highly recommend it.

Don't forget there are six Hudsons in Canada and one in Mexico.

I sympathize with the above postings, but while there are a few 4-6-4s preserved, there are no Hudsons. If you need a generic name for 4-6-4s, go back and use the term used for the first American ones designed, which was taken from the first 'true' European ones designed: Baltics.

There, I've gotten the rant out, but still: this thread is about the fact that not one of the J-class engines was saved; not by NYC, not by the Railroadians, not by someone like Nelson Blount, not by cleverly building a wall around one the way CNJ did with the Baldwin double-ender. I do suspect some efforts were made to preserve one, but I suspect the situation around the time of the proxy fight putting RRY 'in charge' is the overriding reason -- the same idea of maximizing current return from assets that led to the Grand Central hyperboloid.

Apparently there have been several essays into building a replica Hudson (one of which somewhat implausibly was said to have foundered when its 'funder' discovered his Chinese development team was planning on continuing "production" after the first one was complete) and I think of all the iconic locomotives that could be chosen for such a nostalgic project, the J1e is right at the top of the list. At least some of the production resources for the T1 Trust have been developed with an eye toward facilitating a 5345 when some team takes a proper interest. And, rightly or wrongly, if you want a Hudson that's the approach that will have to be taken (the tender and, perhaps, the trailing truck being a first step).

I would disagree on the hyperboloid being called 'ugly' -- or on its base being a cruel parody of Grand Central's traffic arrangements -- it would have been a showplace of continued faith in the NYC's presence at 42nd and Park in the modern postwar world. The problem to me was that it had to replace Grand Central to become that. I can be glad that didn't happen, but still be unhappy that the building couldn't be put up somewhere else even if my taste doesn't really run to googie and marble lollipops.

Hi
A 4-6-4-T are known as a BalticTank Type locomotive Not as a ten wheeler.

The Canadian National #47 is a preserved 4-6-4 tank locomotive in the United States of America. It is one of only three preserved CN 4-6-4Ts (CN #49 at the Canadian Railway Museum, Delson, Quebec and CN #46 at Vallée-Jonction, Quebec), and is the only Baltic type suburban tank locomotive remaining in the USA.The Canadian National #47 is a preserved 4-6-4 tank locomotive in the United States of America. It is one of only three preserved CN 4-6-4Ts (CN #49 at the Canadian Railway Museum, Delson, Quebec and CN #46 at Vallée-Jonction, Quebec), and is the only Baltic type suburban tank locomotive remaining in the USA.The Canadian National #47 is a preserved 4-6-4 tank locomotive in the United States of America. It is one of only three preserved CN 4-6-4Ts (CN #49 at the Canadian Railway Museum, Delson, Quebec and CN #46 at Vallée-Jonction, Quebec), and is the only Baltic type suburban tank locomotive remaining in the USA.

My original question was to try and pin-point a reasonable expalnation for why a NYC Hudson wasn't preserved. I extended that to the ultra-modern Niagaras. I'd like to bring us back to that topic.

I am "king of going off thread", so I need to go after the obvious. CPR #2816 is basically ready to run, as soon as somebody in management gets over their current state of mind.
We had a Royal Hudson, basically ready to run, but allowed it to get enshrined in (of all places) California. There have been several suggestions that a CB&Q Hudson get returned to service; not a bad idea if BNSF will bless the project.

Should a responsibly organized group, similar to the PRR T1 Foundation, get the bug to really look at producing a J class 4-6-4 in the New York Central design, they would get some serious approval from potential funders. Right now, a Mohawk seems more possible to acquire.