Minute Maid (formerly Enron) Park's "General" locomotive. Is this larger than life-size? Anyone know much about its construction? Interesting replica.

http://www.photohome.com/photos/texas-pictures/houston/minute-maid-train-1.html
ryarger@rypn.org

I believe it was built by the same contractor that built the sliding roof, but I could be wrong. Also, the locomotive is on a 5 foot or larger gauge track. Looks just like W&ARR #3 though, save for the size, the paint, and the Fox Sports Net logo on the tender. I wonder how many oranges they get per mile.....

david.wilkins@bardstown.com

From the Houstonarchitecture.info website:

The building was constructed on the grounds of an old rail yard. As part of the project, the Union Station (Missouri Pacific Railroad) building was renovated and included in the ballpark design. It holds ticketing facilities, restaurants, and gift shops. From the roof of Union Station people can peer into the stadium to watch the game. Even when the roof is closed, it's possible to look through the stadium's 50,000 square foot glass wall to see the action. In another bow to the stadium's railroading history, there is a very small railway along left field. It's actually an 800-foot stretch of track on top of the left field wall. When the Astros hit a home run a 57-foot-long locomotive blows its whistle and chugs from one side to the other at 10 MPH. Astros Field may be the only stadium with its own railroad engineer to drive the train. The locomotive itself weighs 48,000 pounds and is actually 25% larger than a real train so it can be better seen by more of the audience, and on occasion it is hit by a home run ball.

The train was designed by Uni-systems and built by SMI & Hydraulics, which also provided the transporters for the retractable roof.



SJHussar@aol.com

From what I understand (or at least what my Texas-native Rice Graduate, advisor told me) Houston at one time had a locomotive on its city seal. Do they still? I know from looking at old documents that in the 1850s and 1860s the official seal for Louisville also had a locomotive on it.

david.wilkins@bardstown.com

> From what I understand (or at least what my
> Texas-native Rice Graduate, advisor told me)
> Houston at one time had a locomotive on its
> city seal. Do they still? I know from
> looking at old documents that in the 1850s
> and 1860s the official seal for Louisville
> also had a locomotive on it.

The city seal does indeed still have a locomotive on it.......

kbcotton@flash.net

It should also be noted that Western and Atlantic Railroad of the State of Georgia locomotive No. 3, "General" was part of the design of the official seal of the City of Chattanooga, Tennessee. After Chattanooga lost possession of the locomotive, the seal was replaced with the current one.

awalker1829@yahoo.com

> After Chattanooga lost possession of the
> locomotive, the seal was replaced with the
> current one.

Alan, not to be picky, but the city of Chattanooga never owned the W&A 3. For those of you who don't know, the N.C.&St.L. displayed the locomotive in the depot for a number of years, until after the L&N merger. The L&N literally pulled her out in the middle of the night and sent the locomotive to Louisville for restoration. Several years later, when plans were underfoot to place The General on display in Georga, the mayor of Chattanooga and the local police stopped the L & N freigh train carrying the locomotive and initiated a long series of court challenges to the L & N's claim of onwership. Chattanooga could never really claim legal title to the locomotive, and after the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, the L & N took the General to Georgia, this time through Knoxville. The court's upheld that the General was technically property of the State of Georgia which still owned the Western and Atlantic Railroad, which the state leased to the N.C.&St. L. in 1892. Therefore, the state or the leasee could do what they wished to the locomotive, and thus the General returned to Georgia.

david.wilkins@bardstown.com

The other fact to be considered was that neither the Nashville, Chattanooga and St. Louis Railway nor the Louisville and Nashville Railroad ever had full title to the locomotive. Even if the NC&StL had promised the locomotive to Chattanooga (alledged but never conclusively proven) it had not legal right to do so. In the mid-1960s, the State of Georgia offered to give the L&N full title to the locomotive. Had the railroad accepted that, the state would have relinquished all claim to the locomotive.

awalker1829@yahoo.com

Right, and in the end, I remember reading that the Georgia Legislature made the return of The General a major point in the late 1960s when the W&A lease was up for renewal. The L & N was afraid that Southern would attempt to acquire the lease, thus shutting L & N out of Atlanta.

david.wilkins@bardstown.com

Actually, from what I understand Georgia didn't make much of the locomotive until the L&N offered to return it to Georgia if asked. L&N did concede to the subsequent Georgia request mostly due to political motivation concerning the expiration of the lease (they had refused a similar request by the state a few years earlier, saying it was not in their best interest to return the locomotive then). They had very good reason to fear that Southern would bid on the Western and Atlantic Railroad of the State of Georgia and in fact lost to the Southern. All that saved the L&N is that the state realized that if Southern took possession of the W&A, there would be no rail competition in the Atlanta market. There was legislative action taken and the original bids were both thrown out. During the second round of bidding, the L&N won the lease.

awalker1829@yahoo.com