I stand corrected - I suppose I have not gotten sophisticated enough to know about Californian fusion cuisine (probably never will at this stage of life). The pasta salads I know from Pennsylvania, Colorado, and most of the south are more obviously saladish, and some are even served hot.

Still thought it was really bland, though - or is that also intentional? Might be a sign of quality I don't recognise, sort of like subtle flavors in a Pinot Noir. I'd rather have a big earthy Temperanillo or Rioja any day!

De gustibus non disputandum.

How about a Pennsylvania Dutch banquet next year in Harrisburg?

dave

Thanks again to Dave for his comprehensive updates.
I'm confident that next years gathering in Penna. Dutch country will be rich in good 'ole fashioned meat&tatters with a minimum of "foo-foo" food, lets hope that for the industrys sake some serious time&effort are devoted to the "meat&tatter" issues of boiler safety/crew training and attracting new blood-both of which are critical if we're to have a successful future!
IMHO-Ross Rowland

What...no fans of sushi here??? ;-)

But seriously, thanks Dave -- very much enjoyed and appreciated your reports!

[raises chopsticks and wasabi-shrimp roll in affirmation]

Somewhere out there there's a photo of me in a photo line scarfing down take-out sushi in a Stewartstown RR excursion photo line while the train was backing up........

While I certainly concur that the McKeen car project is worthy of the award, for some of us in the streetcar/traction museum community it was clear that the timing and venue of the award predisposed that the winner would be from the west coast/intermountain area and be railroad oriented.

Of course, Trains being the magazine of railroading, I would expect that the bulk of the awards would go to railroad projects. Not particularly wanting to go thru my back issues, I believe that only one streetcar museum has received the award (wasn't it Railways to Yesterday early-on in the awards?). I understand that historic significance should clearly be a deciding factor in the selection process and the McKeen car was certainly rare. But shouldn't need also be a part of the equation? Wouldn't it have been nice for a non-state supported museum made up of mostly volunteers to receive the award as a token gesture to this small but vital segment of the historic preservation industry?

Full disclosure. Our Museum submitted an application for the award. I heard at the banquet that 40 applications were submitted. So, 39 museums, MSM included, came away from the process disappointed. Sour grapes? Perhaps. But seeing the trend leads me to believe that submitting a proposal for the award is simply not worth the effort when the predisposition in selecting the awardee is obvious.

Thanks!

Jim,

The location of the presentation had nothing to do with the award. The criteria is very broad out of desire for flexibility, but Rob McGonigal, editor of Classic Trains, Publisher Kevin Keefe, and I saw national significance in this project and, best of all, the chance to help push it over the top toward completion. 50 applications were received.

Cheers!

Jim Wrinn

Had a great time in Sac. Learned a lot. The question that comes to mind is when is the next joint ARM/TRAIN meeting?

Jim, I don't think many of us are doing this for recognition. Still, it is nice to put these things in grant applications, etc.

Seems to me the whole awards things has the potential for a serious amount of "bogosity" as Click and Clack would say. While a lot of good work goes on and deserves serious peer recognition, only a fraction of that is recognised with a formal award. Political interests intervene - I have seen an award given to a contractor who badly mangled a very costly overhaul but is highly connected politically. What happens during those years that nothing much of consequence is actually done? Awards are given anyhow for less than consequential projects just so they can be given, the gods forbid we have a plaque left over.

I'd be willing to arm wrestle anybody who suggests that the greatest contribution to railroad preservation in 2006 was made by anybody other than Henry Posner, and that even the greatest efforts of the rest of us aren't near as worthy as his QJ project. Henry wasn't even in the running so far as I know, although I did cut out early. Probably the second place runner ups should have been John Rimmasch for his execution of the D&S study (although i don't yet have my copy I did scan through the one he had at TRAIN / ARM), and Nigel Day for retofit work done at Grand Canyon, and Mt Washington Cog. This stuff isn't just excellent work, it is innovation.

So I wouldn't take it too seriously Jim. I'm up for least popular attendee next year, and would appreciate your support, however.

dave

Hey Dave:

In the overall scheme of things the true practicioners of railroad preservation like yourself most often practice their craft in the background--quiety going about the "business" of preserving our rail heritage with no formal recognition. (What Churchill called in one of his WW II radio speeches the unknown warrior.) But those of us who do have a fair knowledge of who is doing what, where know who these people are. And you deserve our thanks. The awards handed out at the banquet were well-deserved. As for me, I would gladly put you in the top tier of rail preservationists. You have my vote.

As for the Trains magazine award, recognition is fine. But we didn't submit the application for recognition. Just the opposite. We really could have used that $10,000 to build a truck for our single-truck St. Louis Car Company streetcar that we are currently restoring here at MSM.

Appreciate the sentiments, Jim. If they ever offer an award for the most compromises made to get the greatest number of seriously underfunded startups barely born for the most clueless individuals in charge, I'd be in the running. Apart from that, many more deserving people are hard at work out there.

dave

Actually, if the D&S study did get a runner-up award, it should go to Matt Janssen, not John (and I'm certain John would agree with me in this.) Matt put that whole project together and made it work. John, Dave Griner, and I simply helped out where needed.

Matt was supposed to be with us during the convention, but had more important matters to take care of. I'm sure he would have loved to be there and talk more about the project.

Also, just to let everyone know, the D&S study can now be found on the Wasatch Railroad Contractors website under our new File Library. Simply point your browsers to files.wasatch-rr-contractors.com. Both the long and short versions of the report are available.


- Mike Lewis
WRC

Thanks Mr. Wrinn, for your PS and explanatory note. I know that many preservation efforts make an application for this award every year. While very generous, the amount is beginning to have less and less significance in today's economy. And with a stipulation that it can complete a job.

So in a practical sense the request for the award must necessarily be for a small project, or only a small part of a full restoration. As an example, repair of a traction motor for an already restored and operating electric car can run to $20,000 for the bill from a motor shop only.

Thanks to TRAINS and Jim Wrinn for their part in continuing preservation awards.

Bob Kutella

Amen, Bob
The latest car restoration T-21 grant that the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum has received is for $376,000 for the restoration of West Penn Curveside car 832. The restoration that we are now completing was funded by a $250,000 T-21 grant and we had to ask for a $42,000 supplement to complete the project. In addition, a large quantity of volunteer labor goes into these restoration projects, in addition to the cost of materials, outside work such as motor rebuilding and wheel work, and our very talented in-house restoration contractor.

Bob's comment about the cost of rebuilding a traction motor reminds me of the present day cost of rebuilding turbochargers. I wonder how many preserved turbocharged EMD's will ever be operated when the cost of a basic teardown is around $20,000 and the cost of rebuilding an EMD turbo after a catastrophic failure is close to $50,000. And if you don't do a good job of cleaning up the engine after a turbo failure and identifying and correcting problems that contributed to the failure, you can have the next one fail in very short order. This is the primary reason for the popularity of roots blower EMD's on shortlines. Those kinds of costs are hard enough for a regional railroad with a reasonable cash flow to absorb, they would be prohibitive for many museums or historical societies. Consequently the first turbo failure on a restored EMD would most likely be the last, the locomotive would become a static display.

If I heard right, the next joint conference will be at Tennesee Valley RR in 2011. Of course each organization will have its individual annual meetings in the mean time. ARM 2007 will be at Pennsylvania Trolley Museum.