From the Heritage Rail Alliance Recommended Practices Section 6.2 Conservation Practices:

11. Railway museums must pay particular attention to objects that may be designated for operation. While safe, reliable performance must remain a primary concern, documentation and preservation of original materials, parts, or configuration should be undertaken and samples retained, in keeping with standard museum practice.

12. Restoration and maintenance practices are to be developed that differentiate the type of work performed on an object, based on its classification and use. Restoration serves several different preservation- or operation-related purposes, and is separate from maintenance.

13. Restoration work should take into consideration whether or not any alterations can be reversed at a later date. In order to maintain historical accuracy and authenticity of an item whose service life (along with repairs and modifications) spanned several years, any changes to appearance, structure, or removal/replacement of components should take into account reversibility.

14. Consider adopting the Riga Charter created by the European Federation of Museum and Tourist Railways, which provides for 12 articles of guidelines for restoration and operation of historic railway equipment.

Wesley

Ah, but here's the rub. Not every railroad running vintage equipment is a railway museum. There's plenty of "tourist railroads" out there that make no claim to be museums or historic preservation. However, the public tends to lump them all into the "train museum" category, whether it's the Smithsonian or Disneyland.

Ed Horan, It can't be said any better than that!

If you read the Riga Charter, Article 3 states,


This is why I personally am at odds with how the RRMPA stewards their collection. Not allowing anything to be restored in that museum is something I can't justify for the "historical fabric" that the locomotives possess.

I can understand why they'd be hesitant to let Strasburg restore 1223 and 7002, considering the amount of work needed to bring them back to operational standards. However, the fact that they've let some of those locomotives rust away while one of the finest locomotive repair shops is right across the street is, in my honest opinion, a crime.

I understand that money has been historically tight over there (trust me, if you're going to tell me that instead of complaining I should donate, I am well ahead of you), but I'm sure that a deal similar to how 1223 and 7002 were leased to Strasburg could be mutually beneficial, no? Maybe lease 2846, 7688, or even 3750 to them in exchange for a full restoration?

Who provides the better experience? Would you rather look at the #1401 painted all nice and pretty... or ride behind a Baldwin Steam Locomotive passing by working semaphores with uniformed conductors giving hand signals to the engineers?

Of course both have their place in the world and both do what they do best... but I’d much rather see an engine operating than stuffed and mounted that’s for sure.

Yes.

RRMPA seems to have the best of both worlds. They can conserve their collection intact while across the street there's a working steam railroad drawing lots of visitors.

Phil Mulligan

Mcgrath618 —

Just for the record, the RRMPA would love nothing more than to restore every one of the objects sitting outside in the yard. But — two full-time restoration specialists and a handful of volunteers, any and all of whom are often called upon to perform other work, cannot possibly do it. When I started volunteering in the shop nearly eight years ago, I was told there was 55 years worth of work waiting to be done. And suppose we restore one of the 30-some objects awaiting our efforts. Where do we put it? If it goes back outside, in less than 10 years we’ll need to do it again. There is no more indoor display space. We will never catch up! The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania will not hire any additional restoration personnel and the pool of even vaguely qualified volunteers is vanishingly small. What would you have us do?

Mr. Laepple is spot-on. As a former RRMPa staffer of 18 years I'd say he hit it on the head!

I am not talking about cosmetic restoration. I am well aware of the struggles of having such a massive collection and nowhere to put it (hence why you have been trying to construct the roundhouse for so long). I am saying that if, for example, 7688 was leased to Strasburg and restored by their shops to operational condition, the museum would have a steady source of income from said lease, along with a perfectly presentable showpiece when its flue time runs out and it can no longer operate. Though after consideration, I'm not sure that Strasburg would play ball now, given that they have a much larger roster now than they did when 7002 and 1223 went away.

My point was that I think it is, in a way, foolish for the RRMPA to refuse to let anyone restore any of their pieces to operational condition. Again, I have always understood that money and room was tight there (hence why the MP54 and the Pioneer IIIs were scrapped), but there have been several instances when organizations have approached the Museum and asked to be able to restore some of their equipment, only to be told it would tamper with the "historical fabric."

Hence, the Ship of Theseus question of this thread. Does a locomotive stop being historical if some of its parts have been replaced? Is it the same locomotive? Does it really matter?

Apropos to my above comment, half of PRR 460 is from other various wrecked members of the Pennsy E class. Is it any less historical, knowing that some of the pieces forming the locomotive that ran in 1927 is gone?

The lack of a working relationship between RR Museum of PA and Strasburg is certainly interesting but they both do what they do best so it’s hard for me to complain.

Mcgrath618 — Here’s the bottom line. The RRMPA really has no say about restoring equipment to operation. The objects are owned by the Commonwealth and controlled by the state’s Historical & Museum Commission, which is staffed by professional historians who are from the “historic fabric” wing of preservation. End of story.

As a side note, the MP-54 and the Silverliners were disposed of because they were contaminated with PCB’s and could not economically be remediated to the level required by state officials with available funds. In addition, the Silverliners had been tubed out to the extent it would have been impossible to restore their interiors. Remediation of No. 4800 cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and the commission was in no mood to spend even more.

Is the museum / collection set up differently than North Carolina, California, Nevada, etc? They have State museums that operate their equipment.

I have no idea how Pennsylvania’s museum functions as compared to other states. It is what is is until someone comes along with a different perspective.

That’s the good news... nothing is set in stone. “Anything can happen if you let it!”