I am stunned and saddened by the tragic fire at NCTM and echo the comments of concern and support already voiced in the other messages posted. But what can the preservation community learn from this event? In most cases, our sites are maintained in less than perfect condition, and have little provision for good security. The artifacts themselves are largely combustible, along with supplies, materials, and other stored items.

Of course it is all well and good to note this, but another matter entirely to remedy it. In the beginning, a group or museum may only have one or two cars stored outdoors and the potential for such a disaster is minimal. But as we succeed in building a significant collection, and housing part or all of it, we increase risks of a catastrophic loss.

Virtually none of the museums I am familiar with can address the questions of fireproof construction, fire protection or supression systems, or the possiblilty of adequate security to prevent unwanted intruders or vandals - strictly from a financial standpoint. But how can we not address or try to reduce our risk??

Yes housekeeping can be improved, electrical service inspected and meet code requirements, provision made for firefighting via on site water storage, etc. But numerous carbarn, roundhouse and other railroad related shop fires in the golden years illustrate again that the potential for loss is staggering. And with a volunteer workforce, often doing things on a shoestring budget, the temptation to take shortcuts is too great, even to simple things like safe storage and disposal of paints, solvents, and even trash and garbage disposal.

How can we ignore the possibilities of loss and yet how can we not ignore them - - - without a plan to fund and make necessary investment in this area?

Anybody have any bright ideas? I would hate to read another story like this personnally and for the loss of history and technology now and for future generations.

Bob Kutella

68trolley@comcast.net

Bob,
This year has been a shocker with so much lost and a lot of it permanently gone, never to be seen again. The only suggestion I have, if you are really serious about fire protection, is to get a representative of whichever fire department is primarily responsible for your area in for an inspection ...if you have not already done so. #1 give them a tour so they know what they are up against. #2 ask them to make recommendations for the best protection. A lot of the points they make will be simple easy fixes and some of them will be a major expense.


lamontdc@adelphia.net

In our case we have worked with the local fire department, but it is a small rural volunteer dept with no full time firemen and only a truck or two in the garage, probably unable to fight a disaster of the scope that befell NCTM. We have offered our site, and hosted some firefighting training exercises, have draft tanks of water underground and properly signed and identified, and have had some inspections. Although those can be a double edged sword from the standpoint of a recommendation vs. them issueing strict mandates. We also have the benefit of active firefighters on our volunteer rolls and they can point out the hazards to us.

One point I have noticed, is that the fire depts may have a slight bias toward how they will contain and fight a fire vs. our primary interest in avoiding any damage at all. So for that you need a strict focus on fire prevention and supression at the very earliest stages of an incident. Not an easy or inexpensive thing to do. And our carbarns or buildings do not help where the design often contains the combustibles or fire load (our rail equipment) inside a closed building with no windows, limited doors or other access, and which could act as a chimney or furnace if a fire should ever get a hold inside.

So back to priorities. Do we try to raise money to build another building to get rail equipment protected from the weather, or leave some outside to rot and upgrade structures we now have or are about to build?

Bob Kutella


68trolley@comcast.net

> So back to priorities. Do we try to raise
> money to build another building to get rail
> equipment protected from the weather, or
> leave some outside to rot and upgrade
> structures we now have or are about to
> build?

I think you raised all the good, obvious, and low-cost things we can do already (fire inspections, etc). I suspect bigger choices like these must always be negotiated by individual groups in light of their circumstances. In a wet and humid climate like the mid-Atlantic, anything wooden left outside will be gone beyond retrieval in just a few 10s of years. Pole barns for anything you want to save might be the first choice. In the dry, hot desert southwest, outdoor storage may be feasible for decades, whereas fire may be a very high risk: that might lead to different priorities.

In mulling over this disaster last night and mourning my friends among the cars lost, it did occur to me that, by design or by good fortune, NCTM had divided the cars in each of its 3 core collections (DC, American, and International) between the two car barns. Despite the complete loss of one barn, cars from each group in the collection survive in the other.

As for NCTM's own choices: they were and are vigorously planning a more fireproof collections building; site grading and preparation are already underway. They were allocating resources well: 1. get the collection under cover, and 2. work on improved, fire-safe buildings to follow. Bad luck caught up with them first, which is a rotten shame.

eledbetter@rypn.org

You posted what amounted to my first thoughts on the subject, but I certainly didn't want to be accused of being yet another wet blanket or doomsayer during yet another disaster.

For the record, the Baltimore Streetcar Museum's carbarn and library are complete with alarm systems, all-weather sprinklers, and other fire suppression systems. I think the BSM pays a fortune for the alarm systems, and at times it seems a bloody nuisance, but I think the evebts at Nat'l Capital will keep us from the "nuisance" comments for a decade or more. The BSM carbarn is in the middle of an expansion project (a fourth track for restoration space), and it's incorporating steel beams and concrete ties (rejected by neighbor Amtrak and being used for a retaining wall!) in its construction.

LNER4472-NOSPAM-@bcpl.net

Erik Ledbetter sums up our strategy very nicely:

"As for NCTM's own choices: they were and are vigorously planning a more fireproof collections building; site grading and preparation are already underway. They were allocating resources well: 1. get the collection under cover, and 2. work on improved, fire-safe buildings to follow. Bad luck caught up with them first, which is a rotten shame."

Wesley Paulson



National Capital Trolley Museum

As much as this is a tragedy, and I see it as such, I just hope that this somehow was related to the electrical storm at the time, and not the result of arson or vandalism. Some things are harder to take than others, I can accept natural disasters more easily than I can the idea that someone would deliberately torch someone else's years of hard work.Photo by Erik Ledbetter

One other thought to be added to this discussion. We can and should all work together to help NCTM in recovering from this tragedy and by sharing information and resources to prevent its recurrence elsewhere.

For example, I have been involved in the design of the sprinkler system for the carbarn presently under construction at the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum. I will be pleased to share what I have learned about sprinkler systems with any other group working on new or improved facilities.


artschwartz@sprintmail.com

> One other thought to be added to this
> discussion. We can and should all work
> together to help NCTM in recovering from
> this tragedy and by sharing information and
> resources to prevent its recurrence
> elsewhere.

> For example, I have been involved in the
> design of the sprinkler system for the
> carbarn presently under construction at the
> Pennsylvania Trolley Museum. I will be
> pleased to share what I have learned about
> sprinkler systems with any other group
> working on new or improved facilities.

I for one would be happy to have the benefit of your ideas and decisions. In talking to a firefighter today one idea surfaced that might spread the costs over a phased installation of sprinkler protection. It is to install a dry pipe sprinkler system connected only to exterior standpipe connections on the outside of the building. Alarm to the local fire dept could be provided by heat/smoke detectors inside the building, and then the responding units could siphon water from the buried draft tanks (or other water supply connection) and pump through the standpipe(s) to reach the fire. This would deliver water to the fire without the attendant risks to the firefighters, or delay in accessing the fire directly.

At some future time this installation could be converted to a free standing fire actuated system by installation of pressure switches, air source, fire pump, water reservoir, and controls. Presumably, it would also require a standby generator (for the fire pump - or a diesel powered pump set) for a more or less redundant and complete system which would also work in the case of a power outage. Museums in city environments may be able to do this cheaper depending on city water supply and whether it would be adequate to deliver the required gpm.

The first stage would increase greatly the damage control aspect, especially if there were members on the site at the time of the alarm. Admittedly not perfect but at a substantially lower investment.

Has anyone had a fire assessment/risk analysis considering occupancy - that is, the risk to visitors/members who may be inside these structures including head count limits if appropriate?
Bob Kutella

68trolley@comcast.net

Another consideration for fire prevention is to store flammable chemicals and materials in separate buildings (oil houses) from sheds where rolling stock or machinery is stored. It's expensive and can be inconvienant, but if the material ignites the damage is often limited to the oil house. The United States Lighthouse Service learned this early on when kerosene was introduced as a fuel for the lamps installed in most lighthouse towers in the late 1800s. Due to the volatile nature of kerosene, they built oil houses for the storage of kerosene and never allowed those structures to be placed in close proximity to other light station buildings.

awalker2002@comcast.net

> Another consideration for fire prevention is
> to store flammable chemicals and materials
> in separate buildings (oil houses) from
> sheds where rolling stock or machinery is
> stored. It's expensive and can be
> inconvienant, but if the material ignites
> the damage is often limited to the oil
> house. The United States Lighthouse Service
> learned this early on when kerosene was
> introduced as a fuel for the lamps installed
> in most lighthouse towers in the late 1800s.
> Due to the volatile nature of kerosene, they
> built oil houses for the storage of kerosene
> and never allowed those structures to be
> placed in close proximity to other light
> station buildings.

At the West Coast Railway Heritage Park in Squamish our sprinker systems are constantly monitored by a phone line connected to a flow swithch on the sprinkler valves which sends a signal to the monitoring company and the fire department if a head should go off. This is amandatory requirement under the codes in Canada. We also have a regular yearly test of the systems by a certified angency and we also have a yearly inspection by the Fire Department. The monitoring and testing are a small cost to pay each year to ensure everything works and the inspections by the Fire Department have resulted in a very good working relationship that is beneficial to all parties. One thing about the Fire Department inspections that is of benefit is that if there is a fire, they are already familiar with the facility and usually know exactly how to best fight the fire. We worked out a system of fire lanes around the site that provides fire truck access to all cars and buildings. The Fire Depatment is a wonderful ally and one that every museum should cultivate.


http://www.wcra.org
gandmferguson@shaw.ca

PLEASE SAVE THE 1053!

> As much as this is a tragedy, and I see it
> as such, I just hope that this somehow was
> related to the electrical storm at the time,
> and not the result of arson or vandalism.
> Some things are harder to take than others,
> I can accept natural disasters more easily
> than I can the idea that someone would
> deliberately torch someone else's years of
> hard work.Photo by Erik Ledbetter


sbs5cats@kc.rr.com

The Western Railway Museum is designing a new Car Barn. The building is going to cost less than the fire prevention system that goes with it. Water containment tants, piping and a generator to power the pumps will cost a chunk of money.

But remember, without our collections where would
we all be?

I am sorry to hear about the loss of 8 historic street cars!What a loss!

At my own museum we now have a sprinkler system on the Northwestern Pacific RR ferry Eureka which is like a 300 foot long wooden barn that happens to float. There is a back up generator that will kick in if the shore power goes down and it can also use salt water if the city water pressure drops.

Ted Miles

Ted Miles

ted_miles@nps.gov

> One thing about
> the Fire Department inspections that is of
> benefit is that if there is a fire, they are
> already familiar with the facility and
> usually know exactly how to best fight the
> fire. We worked out a system of fire lanes
> around the site that provides fire truck
> access to all cars and buildings. The Fire
> Depatment is a wonderful ally and one that
> every museum should cultivate.

Even if you do not have a sprinkler system have the local emergency response agencies visit your site and become familar with your site and the access. This includes not only fire, but also police and EMT services.

This was one of several recommendations made by the NTSB after its investigation of a head-on collision at National Capital back in October 1987.

These recommendations were published by ARM in its Spring, 1989, issue of "Report to You."

"Therefore, the National Transportation Safety Board recommends that the Association of Railway Museums and the Tourist Railway Association, Inc.:

"Establish general safety guidelines and standard operating procedures for antique rail operations.

"Encourage each member organization to establish specific safety guidelines and standard operating procedures for their respective operations.

"Encourage each member organization to equipment each rail vehicle used for public rides and excursions with a first aid kit and operable fire extinguisher.

"Encourage each member organization to equip rail vehicles and trains used for public rides and excursions with radio capability for summoning emergency services through an operator, dispatcher, or controller, or by direct link with local emergency services.

"Encourage each member organization to prepare and maintain and maintain a current emergency response plan in cooperation with the local emergency response services."

Several good points that are still pertinent today.

Brian Norden

bnorden49@earthlink.net