I need a GE C-21 controller for a restoration project at IRM. I would prefer to trade another controller or other parts for it. This type has a distinctive circular ratchet design on the controller top. I need it to replace one that was destroyed in a wreck (not at IRM, I hasten to add!) If you have such a thing, or know where I might look, please email me. Thanks!

Randall dot Hicks at eacemr dot com
Illinois Railway Museum

What car/motor will this be used for?



rrhistorian@hotmail.com

> What car/motor will this be used for?

CA&E #321. We decided C-21's are correct for the period we're restoring it to (1939). They were later replaced by C-6's, which it has now and which are electrically compatible.

You have one???

Hi Randall;

You might try contacting our friends at Bendigo who met some of your IRM asociates in Spencer. They seem to have a lot to offer us hardware-poor operators up over.

Regards to Frank.

Dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

> CA&E #321. We decided C-21's are correct
> for the period we're restoring it to (1939).
> They were later replaced by C-6's

Why are you backdating this machine? Aren't you erasing several decades of its history? Is such a thing ethical?

Actually, you raise an interesting point that was discussed in previous posts about another piece of equipment at the IRM, an ex Milwaukee Road FM H-10-44. Yes, I would agree that backdating would be correct, unless the backdating takes away too much of the historical fabric of the artifact that you are restoring. If one thinks that backdating is unethical, than one has some problems. First, since a trolly car spent several decades as a chicken coop, or a Pullman car spent a lot of time as a MoW car, than by the idea that backdating would be erasing "several decades of history," then you could never return them to their original state. Moreover, if you have multiple duplicate, or similar pieces, it would be a good idea to restore one to represent an earlier era of appearance.
With this particular piece of equipment, I would have to say that in the first post, Mr. Hicks mentioned that it would be in a damaged part of the car, meaning the replacement controller was severely damaged, or missing. Since this provides the opportunity to return the car to a previous state, then this should be done. Overall, backdating isn't a sin, as long as the backdating doesn't destroy the historical integrity of the equipment, or that the backdating is misrepresenting the artifact (ala, "Wild West" balloon stacks, etc). As long as the proper documentation exits, than go for it.

wilkidm@wku.edu

Unfortunately I am not literate enough to know a C-21 controller. Do you have a photo or perhaps I could send you a photo?

David Farlow

> I need a GE C-21 controller for a
> restoration project at IRM. I would prefer
> to trade another controller or other parts
> for it. This type has a distinctive circular
> ratchet design on the controller top. I need
> it to replace one that was destroyed in a
> wreck (not at IRM, I hasten to add!) If you
> have such a thing, or know where I might
> look, please email me. Thanks!

> Randall dot Hicks at eacemr dot com
> Illinois Railway Museum


hudson.industries@worldnet.att.net

> Actually, you raise an interesting point
> that was discussed in previous posts about
> another piece of equipment at the IRM, an ex
> Milwaukee Road FM H-10-44. Yes, I would
> agree that backdating would be correct,
> unless the backdating takes away too much of
> the historical fabric of the artifact that
> you are restoring. If one thinks that
> backdating is unethical, than one has some
> problems. First, since a trolly car spent
> several decades as a chicken coop, or a
> Pullman car spent a lot of time as a MoW
> car, than by the idea that backdating would
> be erasing "several decades of
> history," then you could never return
> them to their original state. Moreover, if
> you have multiple duplicate, or similar
> pieces, it would be a good idea to restore
> one to represent an earlier era of
> appearance.
> With this particular piece of equipment, I
> would have to say that in the first post,
> Mr. Hicks mentioned that it would be in a
> damaged part of the car, meaning the
> replacement controller was severely damaged,
> or missing. Since this provides the
> opportunity to return the car to a previous
> state, then this should be done. Overall,
> backdating isn't a sin, as long as the
> backdating doesn't destroy the historical
> integrity of the equipment, or that the
> backdating is misrepresenting the artifact
> (ala, "Wild West" balloon stacks,
> etc). As long as the proper documentation
> exits, than go for it.

This subject deserves its own thread. For now I'll just second Mr. Wilkins' comments, and point out that nearly every museum has done this type of backdating. Who'd want an Eagle-Picher decapod, or a Dansville & Mount Morris 2-6-2?

Raising asbestos shield....

backdating or Restoration as most of us call it is a good thing because it tells the glory years of a given artifact. The passenger car was on the crack train of the line, a freight car introduces a new improved freight delivery system etc.

While I suppose someone may want to tell the story of track gangs lining in old retired passenger cars; I don't think many of the public will be interested.

Having said that; documentation is the key. What you do today may want to be done again later.

I have twice re-restored parts of the ships at my museum because new and better information has turned up. Lately a long sought photo turned up, every museum has that elusive image out there. Restore yes, but write up and photograph what you do to the artifact. TM

ted_miles@NPS.gov