Hello! I have just registered as a new member of the Interchange. This seems to be the best place on the web to discuss railroad preservation and I look forward to participating in your discussions. Below is a topic that I feel hasn't been addressed yet.The class 1 common carriers here in the United States have been recently replacing there older motive power with newer wide cab units from General Electric and General Motors. These railroads have in turn auctioned off these locomotives to regional and short line railroads around the country. I feel that these locomotives should become possible restoration canidates within the next decade.We are fortunate that great man such as Nelson Blount and George Hart saved equipment for museums such as Steamtown and the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania. The question I would like to ask is, When should we step in and save trains from today for the museums of tommorrow? When will F40PH's be displayed next to an F7 at a museum?I found a link to an excellent organization that has preserved such locomotives. They have an Amtrak F40PHR and SDP40F in operable condition. http://www.f40phr231.org/index.htmlLehigh<>George

To some extent this is already being addressed. We have, among other things, a PRR/Penn Central Metroliner cab car and a 1975 Amtrak GE E60CP preserved at the RR Museum of Pa., and Amtrak F40PH's saved at Portland's roundhouse (the aforementioned 231), the California State RR Museum, and the North Carolina Transportation Museum. In addition, a GP38 is at the B&O Museum in Baltimore (Trains Magazine's "All-American Diesel", B&O 3802/CSX 9699, selected in 1982 and preserved ca. 1998).At the moment we're up against preserving the first crew-cab diesels. Unfortunately, we lost out on the original Family Lines BQ23-7 locos of 1978--the last one has apparently been scrapped. Next in line would probably be a Canadian Comfort Cab loco such as the CN GP38-2's and M420's of the 1970s.Preservation of more modern rolling stock does present its own set of problems. One of them, and it's really serious, is public relations. Imagine the public reaction when they see the very same cars/loco that they commute to work behind already in a museum--for example, C&NW bilevels, in use at two museums that I know of. I understand that a passenger revolt against the introduction of ex-C&NW bilevels on one commuter line used as "evidence" the fact that similar cars were preserved in museums. No one, be it an Amtrak passenger, a freight shipper, or a dinner train customer, wants to feel they're shelling out perfectly good money to ride/ship on/behind "museum-vintage junk", no matter how sound the equipment may be.

It is. Welcome.The time to step in and preserve? Take a cue from Blount and others, and do it when your choice has reached the end of its economic life. It can be obtained most economically then, but just as importantly, you do not prematurely cut short its "history." That GP38 may be a more valuable artifact because of those last 10 years on short lines.Shortly after a Chevette is placed next to a Stutz Bearcat in an auto museum, or when Phyllis Diller joins Marilyn Monroe in the annals of iconic beauty.And now, having offended F40 fans everywhere, I remove my tongue from my cheek, duck, and run for cover.JAC

History continues and so should collections. How do you balance adding to the collection against care of your current collection? Ah, there's the tough part.

IRM uses ex-C&NW bilevels in occasional service and I have been surprised at how few people realize they're riding on virtually the exact same equipment they take into Chicago every weekday. The difference? IRM's cars are painted yellow and green and lettered C&NW. For most people, that's enough to convince them that they're much older than the bilevels currently in service. I had a long argument with an otherwise very astute man who was absolutely convinced that the bilevels at IRM had not lasted in service past the 1970's and that they had been replaced 20 years ago; I was unable to persuade him otherwise.

I believe that these are some excellent points on this topic. Its ashame that even in this day in age that we our still not able to save all that is left from the days gone by. An example would be the Lehigh Valley station in Delano, PA. This structure stood next to the railroad crossing up until a few years ago when it was demolished. I feel that interest has grown in the railway preservation community and that we should do our best to preserve as many locomotives from today before they reach the torch tomorrow. I realize that this will be awhile from now, but we should address this issue now since locomotives such as F40PH's and SD40-2's are being phased out on the Class 1's. Afterall, these locomotives have played a major roll in railroading in the United States throughout the last 3 decades.What guidlines should museums follow with preserving these locomotives when the time comes? Since all of these locomotives still exist, museums will be able to choose locomotives with more signifigance such as the first or last one ordered by a certain road. How will this affect their current collection and how should they introduce these pieces into the museum? I know that this won't happen within the next decade or so but I was just curious as to how other people from the community feel about this topic?As for the BQ23-7's, how come this model wasn't preserved?Thanks for the replys,Lehigh<>George

One reason is the low number of units built. IIRC, there were only 10 examples of the BQ23-7 built. None (that I know of) were sold to shortline operators, so the extended life we see for older sw's, geeps, Alcos and etc. that would have been gone decades ago was never an option for the BQ's.Second, because they were unpopular with crews, their useful service life was run out as "B" units on CSX with windows plated over (not that this should have prevented preservation). CSX sold the last examples to a scrap dealer who apparently believed he could get much more than scrap value for them. There was interest in preserving one, but the money was not available to do it. I suppose they have been cut up by now.I believe there was a discussion thread here about the BQ's, sometime in the last year or 2.

Folks,here is a thought for this thread from the National register of Historic Places. A structure does not become eligable (except in rare cases) unless it is 50 years old.This or some other time frame allows the other element of the Register to kick in. Is the structure significant?Every rail car that runs for a railroad is not Significant; but the one that carries the body of John F. Kennedy is.Every F unit is not significant; but the ones from the California Zypher, a well recognized long distance train may well be. Think about both elements when you consider adding some artifact to your collection. This thread is mainly about rolling stock; but also think small items. Railroad china is increasing in value every day. Does your museum have a set of it from the line you are interested in? I t may be impossible to get a set at an affordaoble price. Many patterns are selling in the hundreds of dollars for a common dinner plate!Ted Miles

At OERM, this topic has come up on numerous occassions. The consensus we seem to have built goes something like this: There is a generally accepted "golden age" of railroading, some might consider it drawing to a close with the end of steam. In any case, most would probably agree that there was an era in which railroads played a more significant role in American life that they do today.From within this era, we attempt to collect a comprehensive set of equipment, consistent with our regional focus. From outside this era, we collect selective representative pieces, still adhering to the regional focus. There would simply not be enough resources for us to maintain the size of collection that would result from attempting to comprehensively collect all the way into the modern era. I will readily admit, however, that having some representative pieces from the modern era is an excellent way to bring in the younger generation. People have great appreciation for things which are relevent to their own experience.http://www.oerm.org/pages/collection_policy.html

This discussion can go on forever, with no resolution. My personal preferences are that the end of interesting mainline railroading and music go together... Anything made after 1960 is not worth preserving...

John, well written and thoughtful.Thinking back 50 or more years to the early preservation efforts - Often the hat was passed and a car acquired with or without a site, and little planning or resources for the future.Yet where would preservation be today without those often heroic pioneering efforts? Think of the splendid collections and examples that have survived. AND think of the heartbreaks that have been witnessed where poorly organized efforts failed and equipment was lost. (Among the most infamous of course Dick Jensen's steam engine in Chicago cut up by Metra)Saving a piece of equipment from the scrappers torch is only the tip of the iceberg. Its long term preservation, restoration, and perhaps operation often represents a lifetime of work for the dedicated fan, manager, sponsor. There just AIN'T that many of us to go around - and - do we not have a responsibility to try to preserve and maintain those items that have once escaped the torch but remain with an uncertain future?It is a tough call to consider a new item in terms of history when it is often contemporary and in everyday use. But reality bites and for me, my plate is full!Bob Kutella

So, I guess the UP Centennial 6936 should be scrapped along with GN "Huscle Muscle" , along with the UP GP-30 and Western Pacific U30B at Portola? Surely you jest Bob.Brian

"Shortly after a Chevette is placed next to a Stutz Bearcat in an auto museum."As usual I'm not sure I recall things correctly, but I believe the Henry Ford has both a bland, metallic-blue Chevette and a gorgeous yellow-and-red Stutz Bearcat. Not next to each other, but close enough.In railroad terms, this translates as a CZ dome car and a 1960's TTX flat or bi-level, or a E-8 and a Airslide hopper.

I see we've now found the next generation of ranting, senile fools to carry on the torch from those who gave up on railroading after diesels replaced steam. They, of course, were the successors to those who decried articulated steam and/or electric locomotives as the Antichrist, and/or those who gave up on streetcars after the horses were retired.You might want to practice your Grampa Abe Simpson voice while you're at it: "Why, when *I* was your age, we fixed locomotives by taking them out of service and rewiring them the HARD way! None of that solid-state module replacing cr*p!!! ComPUTERS?!?!? You flipped through a greasy old manual to find out how to fix it!! And let me tell you......"In addition to the aforementioned examples, let me add some other things built after 1960:*China's massive 2-10-2 steamers, as well as its 2-8-2's*Japan's Shinkansen "bullet trains"--an early version of which has been preserved in Japan*France's TGV*Britain's HST*The ubiquitous SD40-2, probably the most successful loco design of the late 20th century*And under construction in Britain, replicas of the LNER A1 Pacific and a GWR "Saint" 4-6-0--largely incorporating new technologyI can offer a country where you would feel right at home with pre-1960's technology. Unfortunately, we Americans are still barred from Cuba.....Sheesh, Bob. Is your rocking chair on order? (^_^)Alexander D. Mitchell IV, part owner of four post-1960 British Rail 3300-hp 100-mph diesels--two of which passed each other at 100 mph each on excursions last year.........[/i]

Hello all,Ted Miles remarks about the National Register requirements are only a small part of the range of what can be considered significant enough to warrent addition to the register in one form or another. To fully understand National Register requirements, I reommend the following book:Assessing Site Significance: A Guide for Archaeologists and HistoriansSeries: Heritage Resource Management Series #3By Donald L. Hardesty, (University of Nevada, Reno) andBarbara J. Little,, (National Park Service)Foreword by Don FowlerAltamira PressIn short, there room for recongnition of recent artifacts of great significance. In terms of railroad preservation, I think the various test-beds and prototypes EMD used in developing AC locomotive design would warrent such attention - as well as early Dash-7 and Dash-8 locomotives - which significantly advanced the application of microprocessors in locomotive control. In terms of post-1960 sites/objects on the National Register that represent adavances in technology see this list: http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/01workshop/coldwar.htmTom Cornillie