I think it is a bit hard to see what is going on in this case. The group that has been caring for the locomotive has offered to purchase it in the past, and has also made plans for the project known as Queens Crossing which will feature #5000 as well as other railroad displays. In order to evaluate the prospect of selling the engine to the caretaker group, and to be fair to the public, the City publically offered the engine for sale. I believe the City had the caretake group in mind as being the most qualified to take over ownership, but they had to be fair to any other interested parties.
But the caretaker group seems to have been offended by the City’s public offering, and thus refused to respond to the City’s Request For Proposals. I believe the City was intending to give the caretaker group everything they wanted, but went through the proper formality of a public offer to sell. There were many factors that were necessary for a group to qualify as a buyer, so it was not just a matter of a buyer offering an acceptable price.
Maybe they have worked this out over the last few weeks, but where I last looked at it, it seemed like there had been an unfortunate misundersanding that ruffled some feathers on both sides.
I think it would be incorrect to interpret this matter as the City wanting to get rid of the locomotive as it was first widely assumed when the RFP was put out.
They wanted to transfer ownership to the group that has been caring for it for the last several years, but in my opinion, this intent was misunderstood. I explained this in the thread below on this topic. The City’s basic intention seems to be to keep the locomotive in Amarlio and give it the best home possible.
The group (Santa Fe Artifact Preservation Society, as I recall) did not respond to the last Request for Proposals that the City published. The City officials were puuzzled by that. The City is asking for an offer to purchase, but considering the other conditions they impose on the sale, I would not be surprised if they are willing to accept a very low price. I suspect they would be willing to sell for what the group is able to pay.
If there is any Santa Fe locomotive that is in jeopardy because it is not wanted by the City to which it was donated, it is #3463 in Topeka. That one is in danger of not only being removed from its home in Topeka, but also of being used as a steam science experiment and never returned to its original condition.
Look up the history of the Sustainable Rail International/Coalition for Sustainable Rail “Project 130”. There have been a number of technical discussions on the proposed modifications of the locomotive here, on RyPN, and in some interesting technical notes produced by CSR for the Web.
When I read that “But the way the RFP (request for proposals) is written, there’s no way we can even submit a bid for it.” phrase on http://amarillo.com/news/2016-07-22/amarillo-officials-plan-sell-historic-madam-queen I knew immediately that Madam Queen will never run again. The conditions to bring her back to operation are simply too unfortunate. It would be a big surprise for me if SF 5000 would have been restored to operational condition rather than T&P 610, because T&P 610 certainly is in better condition as it is stored inside a shed and therefore being protected from weather and also being regularily moved out of the shed and back inside, which all isn´t the case with SF 5000 which is rusting away outside being steadily exposed to the weather and having no movement at all. It would be so nice to see a Texas type back in excursion service again, and SF 5000 certainly is an impressive engine. But in my opinion T&P 610 deserves to be reactivated as it already was used in excursion service before and therefore deserves to be again the only Texas type in excursion service in the USA. And since we´re talking about Texas, T&P 610 should be the right choice anyway as it was built for the road that first used this wheel arrangement and christened it with the states name.
This pro and con chatter is interesting but is probably moot: I just tried to follow the link at the beginning of this thread and got a message that the page couldn’t be found. Had a neat ATSF herald on it though.
I don’t know anything about the earlier plans at the start of this thread, but I did look into the plans anounced in the link to the article posted above from a month or two ago. I was told by a representive from the City that they feel that the City’s request for proposals was very misrepresented by the article. They were not trying to sell the engine out from under the Santa Fe 5000 Artifact Preservation Society, as has been portrayed.
On the contrary, they were trying to clear the way for the Society to legally acquire the locomotive. But something apparently was lost in the translation of the intent. What would be interesting to learn is excactly where this stands today.
Here is one thing I do not understand: The Society seems to claim an interest in the locomotive due to all the volunteer work they have done on the locomotive, plus a considerable amount of money spent on it. How could any of this gone forward without some type of written agreement with the City that actually owns the locomotive?
Without knowing this, it is impossible to understand the context of the City’s request for propsal and the Society’s feeling that they were left out somehow.
Another thing that I wonder about is the project proposed by the Society called, Queens Crossing. It seems incredibly ambitious, and I wonder where the funding is expected to come from. From what I understand the ATSF #5000 will be the centerpiece of Queens Crossing. Can anybody offer some details?
and it may be possible to navigate from there to any current discussion of the city’s bids to outsource the preservation. (And I think it has been firmly established that it is the preservation of the artifact, not its scrapping, that is the point of what the city is doing.)
You know, other than 4014 and 3985 for UP, and maaaaybe 1218 someday, the odds of something as big as 5000 returning to steam seem to be somewhat on the low side. They are just so large and expensive to operate compared to more modest power.
If you look at Mr. Jacobson’s and Mr. Muller’s most-frequently-operated units, they are light 4-6-2 Pacifics - 1293 and 425, respectively. Down in Chattanooga the TVRM utilizes 4501 and 630 frequently, with 4501 as a 2-8-2 being somewhat the freight version in size of a 4-6-2. And there are ubiquitous 2-8-0 units all over the US. These are all units large enough to pull a decent consist at 35-40 MPH, while being light of foot and nimble enough to handle various lines that might not be 286K compliant.
Of course, right now the biggest units are the 4-8-4 Northerns in all their glory, but their operation tends to not be as frequent as the smaller units, and for the most part they seem to operate on the high iron, and with rare exception do not trek on to lightly railed branch lines (the 261 foray this past weekend on the Minneapolis & St. Louis to Winthrop MN being an obvious rare exception).
Just an opinion for conversation sake, but if one were going to do a Santa Fe museum that had a frequent operating component, acquisition and operation of a 3400-class 4-6-2, or an ATSF 2-8-0, would potentially be more financially viable from an operating cost standpoint (with the occasional visit from 2926).
I know, I know, easier said than done. But I am just throwing the thought out there for conversation of the pros and cons. Thanks!
