Funny, that. ;)

Who told you that?

I highly doubt that's true but their actions since the mass resignation event certainly point in that direction.

It would be a shame to see the 611 just sit there as the calendar eats up her remaining 1472 day ticket time. IIRC she was carded out in 2015 which means she's now down to 4 years and counting.

If she's still sitting there idle a year from now we'll know the answer.

Time will tell. Ross Rowland

Not sure what to think of the rumor (or exaggerated truth) about the state of VA being told "no thanks, we'd rather keep the engine here on display", but that would seem like a pretty dumb move, even for an organization like VMT that has a track record of making bad decisions.

Add to it the fact that the engine is currently getting a significant amount of boiler work done would say that even if approached, one would wonder if the engine would even been in operating condition in 2025. Seems that some of the firing, banking and operational procedures took a toll on the engine in 2023.

The part about VMT not paying their ferry bill from a couple of years ago does sound very likely considering their track record. When the engine came back to NCTM for a lot of staybolt work in 2017-2018ish and attempts were made to reopen buying accounts at local supply houses, it was learned that VMT still owed money to a couple of them for the initial rebuild in 2014-2015. When this was relayed back to VMT, the message back from them was to let the suppliers know to write it off as a loss since they weren't going to pay it. This is well after personal credit cards were used in some instances for suppliers during the rebuild because VMT cards were maxed out. Like I mentioned, track record...

Like someone else asked, I'm curious as to why NS would be taking out switches to the two display tracks that aren't under the Claytor Pavillion. NS did a lot of trackwork in that area a few years ago and the switches in question come off the warehouse lead and not the mainline, so that rumor is questionable at best. Hopefully, they aren't losing any space or usable trackage as they need all they can get since the equipment that sat in the middle of yard in Roanoke is now on-site.

As Ross said, time will tell....

if* ( major focus on "if") all that is true about their lines of credit and not paying suppliers, I'd stay the hell away if I was a contractor etc. I've dealt with businesses like that and it's never worth it to deal with a company/person of any kind that just refuses to pay invoice, or makes excuses and kicks the can down the road in such a manner. If I was an employee I'd never use a personal card for them, since I'd be worried they wouldn't reimburse.

Seems like they need to have a hard look at their management and business practices if* all that's true. I've worked in supply chain and automotive vendor consulting and you cannot believe the shady players in both industries, typically that type of attitude with invoices and such comes from the top down, and firms get well known as being sketchy to pay etc. If that's how they are going to be, better for the state to work with a more professional group anyway, just stinks for fans of the 611 as it's a huge wasted potential.

To the readers of RYPN:

    1. The Shenandoah Valley Limited excursions of 2023 with N&W 611 were the result of a private contractual agreement between VMT and the Buckingham Branch RR. The Commonwealth of Virginia was not involved in these excursions. VMT has not refused any financial assistance from the Commonwealth.

2    Any charges from Norfolk Southern for ferry moves of 611 during 2023 were satisfied at the time of the completion of those movements.

   3.     The trackwork being conducted is to the former Norfolk & Western passenger main track for future use by Amtrak. The work does not affect VMT’s access to Norfolk Southern.

   4.  Mechanical work is continuing to ready 611 for future operational opportunities. Work in the firebox is addressing staybolt issues that have been traced back to installation procedures at the time of replacement of the crown sheet in 1991, as determined by a team with decades of experience in steam locomotives and locomotive boilers in particular.

Ted Krumreich
Member, N&W 611 Engine Crew
Member, Board of Directors, Virginia Museum of Transportation

It's good news to hear that the museum isn't losing any switches or access to display tracks as space is already tight. Hopefully, that is a piece of good news that bodes well for future operations with the engine.

That is very interesting news to hear on the staybolts and issues with the installation procedures. Considering the quality of work done in Birmingham by some very notable names (Yuill, Karhan, Dodd, Pate among otheres) and the magnitude of some of the projects that were completed (such as the 1218), I'd almost dare say it's shocking to hear now.

In the interest of preservation, will it be shared out as to what the issues of the installation were and how the issues were recently determined? Considering the work in question was done over 30 years ago and the engine finished up 3 years of the 'old' NS steam program along with the run time in its current 3rd life, it's curious as to how this just now came to light. Also, how was this determined now and not during the 2014 boiler survey that the engine went through before the latest rebuild?

This is certainly new that is very interesting regarding a locomotive that many of us are very familiar with. I have no doubt many of us are curious to learn more.

That might be the answer to your question. Dunno.

Disclaimer: I know enough about steam to get into a pant-load of trouble. Also, I'm not on either side of the fence here.

I think that after all the "he said - she saids" have settled and if the steam guys are gracious enough to provide progress reports, then, and only then, we may know what's going on. And that's if VMT deems it advantageous to explain, but not likely. As typical, a lot of the brouhaha here just may be slanted speculation. Who knows?

My two cents [ducks under the desk].

As is often the case in these situations.............thems that are talking don't know....and thems that know ain't talking.

Ross Rowland

Maybe if the issue was a sudden rash of broken bolts, then sure, time take a toll. Chances are, there have been some broken bolts to cause concern as everyone knows staybolts have life cycles and can fatigue over many heating and pressure cycles. But there was a reference to "incorrect installation procedures".

A wrong procedure is incorrect whether 30 days or 30 years later, which is why I asked if that info will be shared to the rest of the preservation community. Given how often the discussion of how to keep this going for the next generation or if the 'old heads' should be teaching the new blood how to do this stuff, it seems reasonable to share if it can help other organizations keep away from these incorrect procedures.

Perhaps I liken it to what came out about the UP program after a change in leadership...questionable work done by the prior team. I don't know anyone on either side of that deal but have known many that worked in Birmingham. To learn that were some incorrect procedures done with such an experienced group is a surprise and makes one curious.