The other excuse for the DD1: built in the PRR Juniata Shops at Altoona.

This "logic" extends to a Virginia & Truckee steamer built in Pennsylvania as well.

Mind you, I like the thought of another piece of Erie rolling stock (indeed, any non-PRR stock) at the RRMusPa. But unless that car was built in Pa. or operated there, it's tough to make a case for it.

Realize that no matter what is said here if the URHS comes up with the money ORM will sell them the 5012. With that being said, the reason URHS comes in for bashing is not because of the losing battle for a state transportation museum. The reason is because they routinely violate the generally accepted standards for preservation. Just some examples:

Painting locomotives in schemes that are personal favorites of the URHS officers. In the case of two E8's windows and doors added and altered to Erie standards. No attempt made to document these changes or to tell the public these diesels are not "real" when on display.

Spending $750,000+ ( of TEA money) for the NYC Hickory Creek, which never ran in the state, yet is proclaimed to be the "centerpiece" of the planned NJ State Transportation Museum.

While "restoring" the Hickory Creek the bedroom layout was altered to put in a kitchen, thus significantly changing the floor plan of the car. This was done to make the car more marketable for Amtrak charter service, but it is no longer an accurate restoration.

Over $500,000 (again of TEA money) was spent to renovate ex-GN coaches last used in commuter service on the North Jersey Coast Line in the mid-1980's. The cars were painted into a fantasy scheme, with each car now named for a railroad that ran in the state. They were "restored" so URHS could run excursions with them, but they were only used 2 or 3 times (due to diminishing numbers of riders) before being leased or stored.

While this was going on, truely historic pieces were allowed to rot, including CNJ open window coaches, 2 Alco locomotives, an Erie Stillwell, and several Lackawanna MUs. Two of these MUs were Parlor-subscription cars that were built in the teens (predating DL&W electricification) and featured inlaid mohogany interiors that were fully intact when donated to URHS. Their condition became so bad that there was an attempt to donate one of the cars to another group and have it gutted to represent an NYO&W trout stocking car!

A NYC Tavern Lounge car was restored and named for a politician who it was hoped would get them more money. The car never ran in the state of NJ until it was gutted for commuter use in the late 1970's.

This is just the record on equipment. A small book could be written on their horrible attempts at political lobbying that several times made the front page of the state's largest newspaper. They are also involved with the effort to sue the MOT in St. Louis to get Lackawanna 952.

Yes this group is supposedly representing many (but not all) of the state's railroad groups, but in reality the same five or six people have been running it since the beginning with almost no control from the represented groups.

With this record that is why I bash URHS and wish someone else had stepped forward to save the 5012.

Here's a different angle. What standards, if any, is Ohio Railway Museum selecting for the recipient organization? That is, would they turn away cash dollars from an organization with a poor record of care and conservation of its collections? Or require a conservation plan as part of the buyer's proposal?

Wesley

I too have heard the stories about URHS, but that does not help the current situation here or any other museum in the country which has an over abundant collection. Rather than bash, lets look forward. As stated, no one else stepped forward to take the 5012.

Within this thread some good ideas came up. There's the merits of private ownership, low cost paint jobs to help preserve a car or locomotive, cocooning passenger cars, etc.

Rather than bash URHS, which appears to be the only group interested in the 5012, lets help them out. Provide funding, provide man power, provide ideas. Once its moved, stay attached to this project, fight for it, raise money for it, be its champion, clean and paint it, care for it. Shoot, an option might be to have an individual(s) just buy it. Heck its cheaper than a decent Aster gauge 1 live steamer. There are a couple of people who have responded on this thread who have done just that.

Isn't the URHS the group trying to retore the yard in Boonton?

Later!
Mr. Ed

Mr. Ed,

They aren't trying to rebuild the yard, its actually being done.

Tom,

As far as the RRPA getting the car (if they wanted it), once restored where would it be kept? What historically significant piece of equipment would you chose to move outside the confines and safety of the building? What monies would be diverted from the present collection to take on restoration of this artifact?

Everyone;

If the Erie unit is purchased by the URHS wouldn't that allow the URHS to possibly sell some other item that is not as significant to NJ RR history? I understand your's and other's critisism of the URHS but those 5 or 6 people running it are the ones with the time and drive to do it. They also are the people that can get the NJ grants. In my mind this is THE most important task of any group. These same people are also stuck with the task of trying to (re)obtain NJ equipment to better reflect our history. Hence this current case. I am sure the URHS would have prefered the Pheobe Snow observation car, but until MN decides to sell, the Hickory Creek may have been the best alternative. And at least the URHS is looking at restoring or refurbishing equipment that can earn it some financial return, through leases or excursion service. To my knowledge most other groups don't do that.

As far as the DL&W 952, I visited her last week. While I am happy to see her preserved and somewhat protected under a roof, I personally do not think that the engine is particularly "significant" to the Saint Louis collection. 99.9% of the visitors there see it as another steam engine. They don't even know what it is or how significant it is and most people could care less since its from an East coast RR that never ran in or near Saint Louis. The local fans want to see the local engines and those engines have much more prominent display locations, just as they should. The 952 was pinned in between a bunch of other equipment with its front end facing a walkway in the shed. The headlight and class lights were lit up. You could not see the cab layout nor could you walk between the equipment along its flanks. With so many steam engines in one location the significance of any specific one is lost.

I don't like that there is ongoing litigation over the unit, this is just plain silly to me and a collosal waste of money which could be used to restore equipment. But I guess a decision needs to be made, and unfortunately the courts will make that decision. My vote is to have it return to New Jersey or dare I say, placed on display at Steamtown where its significance would be much more appreciated.

Chris in NJ

Let's forget my very strong DL&W interest for a moment...

Why does no one understand or remember the 952 is significant to St. Louis? As a camelback, as a 4-4-0, and as a steam engine. MOT is not a regionally focused museum like the CSRRM or the RRMPA. Their collection is items with a national interest. That's why they have 4-8-4 from CA, or a 4-8-8-4 from CO/WY etc. The issue is not signifance, its ownership/care.

And sorry Chris, but I don't like "the best alternative" argument for the Hickory Creek. I wonder how much money has been made on the HC thus far?

Does the URHS have a collections/acquisition policy? I'd love to see it.

JKB

The above is one of the more sensible comments in this whole discussion. I am not an apologist for URHS - but they do not have a monopoly on outdoor storage problems. I cannot think of any of our colleagues in the business who have oodles of indoor space to spare, let alone the cash to mount a major restoration for this car.

If the car goes anywhere, it will continue to remain outdoors. Heck, the Smithsonian could claim it, and it still would likely remain outdoors. So maybe we're lucky and the new owner springs for an expensive tarp. But the artifact is still stored outdoors subject to continued decay.

I say we call the question on this thread.

Wesley

And in another forward direction, what if it was not considered primarily as an artifact, but was restored as an operating car for a tourist railway, sort of a large Edwards car, and used in revenue service?

I'd rather see it in use by anybody than left a rusting hulk by the "most logical" preservation entity, whoever that may be, lacking the resources or will to do a real preservation job on it. Since no preservationists have opted to take it on, slow motion scrapping seems its most likely fate otherwise.

dave

Personally, I think that the way that URHS conducts business does everything to not only undermine their own credibility, but the credibility of the entire railroad preservation movement.

If a group considers itself a 'museum', there is absolutely no rationale for devoting internal resources (along with TEA grants) to pieces of equipment outside the scope of collection under the guise of creating "income generators." That thought process is pure garbage.

I say this from the perspective of witnessing a certain group go through the search for a home-up close and personal. After two wiffs, as the saying goes- the third time was indeed the charm. In the case of this group:

The most obvious manifestation of the first year of operation (which was only a fall foliage operation) was this: The group was able to draw from an existing roster of restored equipment and put together a a good looking 50's era train that folks PAID money to ride. Hell, the locomotive that pulled the train actually worked the line while under railroad ownership.

Once there was an actual operation, a professional railroader put together a qualification program to generate FRA qualified train crews. While this took some time ( which was to be expected), the net result was the ability to run more trains without 'burning out' the small crew roster that got the thing off the ground in the first place.

After that, some more possibilities opened up-in the form of 'specials', i.e., promotions outside the regular schedule. Sufficed to say, gross income has (probably) grown several orders of magnitude over the last fifteen years.

As of late, the completion of the long anticipated 'restoration shop' is now within sight-not to mention a whole new (and younger) cadre of regular volunteers.

See what having an actual home can do for a railroad museum group ? As someone far wiser tha myself used to say "money comes to money."

That said, my suspicion about URHS is that they are stuck in a certain mindset. They are still fixed on a location in Northern NJ as a home, which is where I suspect many of them live. Well, they need to change that mindset and move on. There is about as much chance of siting a railroad museum in NNJ as there is of of siting one in NYC. Damn near close to zero.

To cop the Southern Railways' old slogan "Look South-Look Southern"-NJ, that is.

Dave-whose ride to support the group in question has never been less that 1.5 hours one way

BTW, having lived near Boonton for some 15 years, I am completely unaware of the existence of a yard. I can only wonder what the locals will say when the 'junk collection' finally gets evicted from Morristown and moved to Boonton.

Maybe I'm reading more into Dave's post, just above, than I should, but things are not exactly rosy in parts of Southern New Jersey. Fires and vandalism seem to be the order of the day. That's why I'm looking for better homes for my equipment, all of which was operable before the kids got to it.

EMD, I happen to know the particulars of which you speak, which were related to me by a mutual friend. What a bloody shame !!!

I have also heard that CSRM has suffered the same type of vandalism.

The only solution that comes to mind is a defensive perimeter-a fence.
On top of that, how about hiring a firm that will set 'guard dogs' inside the fence once nightfall hits and retrieve them in the morning.

Having seen soldiers in NY-Penn this morning, it appears that 'security' has become an omnipresent and required element of our daily existence.


Dave

The opinion that the New Jersey Museum should be located in a southern region of the state doesn't hold a lot of water. As Mr. EDM has stated, and was reported to this board a while back, there have been acts of vandalism to equipment stored in the southern portion of the state, particularly the CMSS, and cars stored in Rio Grande. (Cars co-incidentally owned by the URHS stored there.) Equipment owned by our group have been vandalized in four different states. These types of acts know no boundaries.

I think Ross Rowland covered the museum issue quite well on this board when he stated that it should have been located in Liberty State Park. The simple fact that millions of people visit the attractions currently located there is justification enough. But that didn't happen.

Now back to the original post here: Despite the opinions made, some of which are true, there are only two options, and it seems to be a "you can't have it both ways" issue. This piece can be at the very least moved back to where it operated, or it can continue to languish where it is. There doesn't appear to be anyone else out there having the intent to do anything, and it doesn't appear that the people in Ohio have any other criteria than taking anyone's money to get it out of there. We can probably (and accurately) speculate that it too, will languish here in New Jersey, but maybe we should look at it as taking "one step at a time".


Thanks for listening.

RBJO

As has been discussed here previously, the fatal error made by the NJMuseum of Transportation Commission(of which I served as a member 1995-99) was when they opted to site the proposed facility in Phillipsburg vs. Liberty State Park. The only real hope of ever putting together the estimated $40-50 million needed to build the facility was to generate a substantial portion of those funds from Corporate sponsorships. Had it been sited in LSP there was a fighting chance of getting that kind of Corporate interest while in P'Burg there was zero chance. The faction in favor of P'Burg was essentially made up of the same folks who have led the URHS for many years and very sadly they were able to convince Assemblyman Alex DeCroce (the Chairman and our champion in the Legislature)that they could make P'burg work. Its death took another 8 years but was inevitable. The Commission is now gone, the State is essentially bankrupt and any chance of establishing a State facility of any magnitude is minus zero.
As to the wisdom of the URHS gaining control of the piece in question-who knows-they have proven effective in garnering TEA monies so maybe they'll get another grant to fix this old gal up???
I tried unsucessfully to get them to purchase the 614 in 1999(at a very attractive price) and use TEA money to bring her current with the then new FRA regs. so they could have at least one live "headliner" piece in the collection and a piece that could get out occassionally as a good will ambassador, but they opted to instead put the money into the NYC obs. car.
As the old saying goes........you can lead 'em to water...................
Ross Rowland

I attempted to do a deal for the 5012 back in 1990 (or so). Had I been successful, the 5012 would have been brought to NJ and onto a shortline that supported the idea. My problem was that there were at least three people at ORM at the time claiming to be in charge and each gave me different conflicting terms. The final blow was when they sabotaged a visit by NS to look at the car to set the conditions for movement.

Now 15+ years later and there is an effort to move the 5012 to NJ. The shortline is no longer pro-passenger (at least in NJ). A project like this comes down to passion. Obviously URHS had the passion to find the money and rebuild the Hickory Creek. We can question the wisdom of it, but they made it happen. If they have a similar passion about 5012 then perhaps this is a good choice. The plan right now seems to be to buy it and move it. Is the plan to operate it or display it? If you operate it I assume you would remove the Winton engine and repower it. If it is to be displayed, then where?

If there is a plan it has not be publicly stated.