Others are going to have to provide the info you are looking for as the museum only got the loco, along with letters about its donation, movement, etc. We sometimes also get drawings from the mechanical department and some details about its service history, but this is not very detailed. Looking in Trains magazine for this period I do see speculation about its use in Steam Rambles, but can only guess what the NYC thought of this. If they only had the one loco at this time instead of the several available to the Reading this may have been a factor in not trying to do it, as 100% availability for the only loco is just about impossible, even on weekends only trips. If anyone can tell us more about the history of #2933, including photos, the Museum of Transportation would love to get it

Museum of Transportation
rdgoldfede@aol.com

I know that some heavy-duty tenders, I believe from scrapped Mohawks, still existed on teh Central up into the late sixties. These were then torched as scrap, the locomotives having gone years ahead of them. Somebody posted a note in here that the Smithsonian actually requested a Hudson from the Central, but was officially turned down by the company's president, with the explanation that all that was left was unfit for display. This wasn't true, but it reflects heavily on the official attitude toward the NYC steam fleet. I find it particularly odd, when one considers how Lionel Trains "lionized" the NYC Hudson, and how the locomotive was the featured emblem/mascot of the great railroad. What engendered such hostility toward the steam locomotive from within the company remains a bit of a quandry.
Would MOT or the Elkhart group ever consider releasing their locos for operation if economics once again encouraged steam ops?

glueck@maine.edu

> I know that some heavy-duty tenders, I
> believe from scrapped Mohawks, still existed
> on teh Central up into the late sixties.
> These were then torched as scrap, the
> locomotives having gone years ahead of them.
> Somebody posted a note in here that the
> Smithsonian actually requested a Hudson from
> the Central, but was officially turned down
> by the company's president, with the
> explanation that all that was left was unfit
> for display. This wasn't true, but it
> reflects heavily on the official attitude
> toward the NYC steam fleet. I find it
> particularly odd, when one considers how
> Lionel Trains "lionized" the NYC
> Hudson, and how the locomotive was the
> featured emblem/mascot of the great
> railroad. What engendered such hostility
> toward the steam locomotive from within the
> company remains a bit of a quandry.
> Would MOT or the Elkhart group ever consider
> releasing their locos for operation if
> economics once again encouraged steam ops?

Richard- Not a quandary at all if you were around in those days.... Al Perlman, the CEO of New York Central when steam was being phased out... had been the General Manager of the D&RGW when they were trying to abandon the narrow gauge. He had had his fill of railfans and "antiquers" who always showed up at the abandonment proceedings to protest the service discontinuation. People like Robert W. Richardson- part owner of the Narrow Gauge Motel in Alamosa and, later- founder of the Colorado Railroad Museum in Golden (along with Cornelius Hauck of Cincinnati) were among his favorites. Several good books are available from the museum describing Bob's tribulations. Today he is among the handful of true heroes for his efforts and the truly amazing amount of ng railroad (Today's Cumbres and Toltec Scenic and Durango and Silverton) and locomotives/ rolling stock which were saved.
At any rate, Perlman was in no mood to cater to preservation efforts when he got to NYC. Even the scrap dealers were threatened not to resell locomotives or to sell parts from them. My understanding was the President of the Wabash RR was instrumental in getting the Mohawk for NMOT, and I presume the 3001 was saved (sold)as a result of the Texas and Pacific's President's request.
Perlman never did relent on running steam again until Ross Rowland's High Iron Company got approval for an NKP Berkshire #759 trip from Harmon to Niagara Falls in Fall '68 (which I rode) Hope it helps.

jjburke0918@aol.com

Will NYC 3001 at Elkhart ever run again? Back in the late 90's I recall hearing a story that the National NYC Museum had all the cash in hand to have Strasburg RR rebuild her but because SRR was busy with contract work the plan never came to pass. 3001 was supposed to be used in some sort of special Amtrak excursion in the NE. Can anybody elaborate further? Also is David Bird still Director of the museum?

> Richard- Not a quandary at all if you were
> around in those days.... Al Perlman, the CEO
> of New York Central when steam was being
> phased out... had been the General Manager
> of the D&RGW when they were trying to
> abandon the narrow gauge. He had had his
> fill of railfans and "antiquers"
> who always showed up at the abandonment
> proceedings to protest the service
> discontinuation. People like Robert W.
> Richardson- part owner of the Narrow Gauge
> Motel in Alamosa and, later- founder of the
> Colorado Railroad Museum in Golden (along
> with Cornelius Hauck of Cincinnati) were
> among his favorites. Several good books are
> available from the museum describing Bob's
> tribulations. Today he is among the handful
> of true heroes for his efforts and the truly
> amazing amount of ng railroad (Today's
> Cumbres and Toltec Scenic and Durango and
> Silverton) and locomotives/ rolling stock
> which were saved.
> At any rate, Perlman was in no mood to cater
> to preservation efforts when he got to NYC.
> Even the scrap dealers were threatened not
> to resell locomotives or to sell parts from
> them. My understanding was the President of
> the Wabash RR was instrumental in getting
> the Mohawk for NMOT, and I presume the 3001
> was saved (sold)as a result of the Texas and
> Pacific's President's request.
> Perlman never did relent on running steam
> again until Ross Rowland's High Iron Company
> got approval for an NKP Berkshire #759 trip
> from Harmon to Niagara Falls in Fall '68
> (which I rode) Hope it helps.

This is by no way an "official" answer on the part of MOT, but there is no way #2933 will ever steam again with its present boiler. When Frisco #1522 was selected for return to operational condition all the locos of similar size and type were examined to determine their condition. All but the 1522 had been donated with normal insulation on the boilers, which had absorbed water over the years of being outdoors and their boilers were pitted and deteriorated to the point of needing replacement to ever safely hold steam again. Only the Frisco didn't insulate the boiler, using spacers between boiler and jacket for appearances. This meant any rain water just rolled off, instead of soaking into the insulation and causing damage. I can't see how #2933 could be made to run again unless someone had very deep pockets indeed, and that assumes there aren't other concealed problems as well. And that assumes MOT would be willing to have a loco that would come back with a welded boiler instead of its original, which is also unlikely.

rdgoldfede@aol.com

I seem to recall reading that the founder of MOT was a doctor for one of the railroads and that he knew everybody who was anybody in the industry.

Thus was able to get equipment donated even from the infamout Mr Perleman, who was from the D&RGW as mentioned above.

And yes, read Bob Richardson's Chasing Trains for his take on those years and the battles fought.

Ted miles

ted_miles@nps.gov

This is to clear up a statement by Ron about the insulation on the boilers of Frisco locomotives. The Frisco did use asbestos insulation, but as far as I know, all engines that were given away for display were completely cosmetically gone over and insulation removed, boiler jackets were renewed and the outside of the boiler shell painted before they were presented. In the 1522's case, it sat outside for 22 years with very little jacket deterioration. Spacers were welded to the boiler to take up the space the was occupied by the asbestos. When we rehabed the engine, every one of the welds had to be tested to be sure it had not affected the integrity of the shell.
Not to start a big bruhaha, but in my view, the 1522 in no longer a true 1500. It has all roller bearings except the drivers, 24RL brakes system instead of 6-ET, and a host of other changes (including chrome plated throttle lever reversing lever). I feel that it is no longer a true example of a 1500. Incidently, one of the reasons that the 1522 was selected was the fact that there are 6 of these engines remaining. > This is by no way an "official"
> answer on the part of MOT, but there is no
> way #2933 will ever steam again with its
> present boiler. When Frisco #1522 was
> selected for return to operational condition
> all the locos of similar size and type were
> examined to determine their condition. All
> but the 1522 had been donated with normal
> insulation on the boilers, which had
> absorbed water over the years of being
> outdoors and their boilers were pitted and
> deteriorated to the point of needing
> replacement to ever safely hold steam again.
> Only the Frisco didn't insulate the boiler,
> using spacers between boiler and jacket for
> appearances. This meant any rain water just
> rolled off, instead of soaking into the
> insulation and causing damage. I can't see
> how #2933 could be made to run again unless
> someone had very deep pockets indeed, and
> that assumes there aren't other concealed
> problems as well. And that assumes MOT would
> be willing to have a loco that would come
> back with a welded boiler instead of its
> original, which is also unlikely.


john_nansen@yahoo.com