First of all, let me say that anyone can do anything that they want with their own money. That being said, is restoring a large steam locomotive to operation fiscally wasteful? With it being so hard to get a Class 1 to let anyone else’s locomotive to operate on their track, why bother? How many cosmetic restorations of other locomotives could be done for the price of one operating?
There is nothing like a living, breathing smokem up steam engine in actual operation. In reality, a full to operation restoration does more to save a locomotive long run than the typical stuff and mount seen so often. The immense popular excitement of seeing a large engine in operation also stimulates more interest in our history. The steam engine helped build this country and should not be forgotten. Sure, many Cl1 roads do not allow operation, but the groups who have worked with those roads and LISTENED to the experts so as to not tick off those needed to allow a run has a lot to do with whether they can ever run or not. It isn’t the locomotive most of the time. It is the group.
Other roads like UP are in house. Others allow foreign operators, but again their road, thei rules. It is unbelieveable the logistics to operate, plus insurance, etc, which makes it so hard to accomplish. but, it does happen. I’ll take a running engine anyday.
Class 1’s might not want then groups, but then you have plenty of regional railroads that have the capability of allowing a large steam locomotive to run on their lines that are quite willing to do so(even if the majority are owned by only 2 companies) or you have in areas close to the big cities, government run transit agencies that aren’t against it either.
It all depends on the locomotive owner and the host railroad. BNSF has no problem letting MILW 261 operate(and without a protection diesel tucked in behind the tender). Next door, CP does not want anything to do with the engine. Last weekend 261 operated several trips on TC&W - Go Figure…
In my book even short runs like the 25 mile (50 there and back) CVSR trip I took a couple of weeks ago are infinately more impressive than a rusting hulk in a cramped museum. These beasts belong running free in the wild! [:D] OK, I know that’s hokey…
Penny your spot on. One of the best run excursion in the east. It’s hard to explain or interrupt s steamer that is not operational.
It’s so hard to believe that steam town still lacks an operational main line steam locomotive. The round house and turn table are just great start.
It’s only wasteful if the restorers don’t plan ahead as to where they’re going to run it, kind of like a guy who builds a boat in his back yard and then can’t get it out past the house.
Not even wasteful then … unless the restorers’ business model for doing the work involves running it somewhere it turns out they can’t.
A number of aircraft have recently been restored to full flyable condition. Assuredly no one is going to take them into the air, let alone run regular trips with them. Was it a waste to put the thing back in full original condition?
The same is true for a number of automobile restorations, where actually putting gas and oil in the thing and starting it would destroy some of the 100-point concours value. I don’t consider all the work needed in the ‘hidden’ areas of things like engine, differential, and dashboard to be wasteful… others might.
There is another side to this discussion, too, which finds its extreme case in locomotives like RDG 2100 on its little trip to the Pacific Northwest, or the productions of the Golden Rock shops. That is where you build or modify the thing to run it in steam (or some facsimile thereof, as with that Cloquet Terminal fiasco) without restoring it with any regard to historical accuracy or completeness. Naturally it’s wasteful to do that stuff if you can’t actually run it afterward (or, as in the case of 2100, no one can run it well enough to do what you modified it for) but was it reprehensible to try that way?
There is a big difference (beyond cost). If I restore a car, I can drive it almost anywhere, even if it is an antique. Ditto with an aircraft as long as it passes inspections, etc. Not such a sur
The point I am making here is a little different: it is that very large sums of money were expended specifically to make a vehicle fully operable, with the full understanding that it will never actually be operated. It would only be a waste to spend such care and attention on a steam locomotive – by direct comparison – if it were necessary, or expected, for the engine to actually run in service to justify the restoration, and that were not possible (for one of the reasons mentioned so far, or any other.)
Personally, while I’m delighted to see big steam running, I’m almost as happy to know that (1) the physical locomotive is preserved, and (2) it is in full operable condition. That’s part of the point about the T1 Trust that is doing 5550: it’s the existence of the locomotive, not seeing it run 120mph or see regular service of some kind, that is the point of the effort. (As with ATSF 2626: everything more they might do with that locomotive after getting it in full running shape is gravy, and yes, I do love any amount of gravy when I get it … but I’m just fine with the roast beef and mashed potatoes otherwise…)
I’d love to see someone restore an Eastern Airlines 727 and fly excursions with it! [:D] That’s the first plane I ever flew on and it would be great to recreate the experience! [:D]
Back to ground transportation, here are 2 of several I saw today. Reading 2100 and GTW 4070:
I understand that and agree with it, but I doubt that most people would agree or see the point of building or rebuilding a fully operational locomotive with no intention of operating it. Most would see the non-opertional locomotive as a compromise or less than perfect compared to an operating locomotive. And with that compromise, would come the expectation that the locomotive is partly cosmetic and not necessarily fully functional and capable of operation.
So I am wondering how you would explain the justification for restoring a machine to perfect operating condition with no intenion of operating it as you cite with your examples of automobile and aircraft restorations.
Lots of luck even finding one. The short B727-025s all went to the scrappers. The freight / pass QCs ( quick change ) went to Fed Ex and believe they are gone as well, The streach B-727-225s have either been scrapped or went to freight conversions and probably scrapped. The few B-727-225As ( the larger PW JT8D-17A enginess ) were also converted to freighter until a few years ago but ??? Unfortunately the freight conversions changed the floor loading schedule by changing the stringers and adding a cargo door. That would almost preclude any conversion back to passenger configuration.
Current freighters are B757, B767, B737-700/800/900, A-300, a few DC-8s, B747 and a spattering of other makes including the Russian colossos AN 124-200s which can load international containers.
The reason for scrapping 727s was a matter of fuel consumption. A B-767 freighter can carry twice the freight with a total fuel consumption less than a 727. a 757 freighter can carry three more igloos with a lower fuel consumption. (727 11-12)
Kinda like steam locomotives. Some airliners should be saved. Maybe this too will become an era for restoration, preservation and operation societies.
I doubt if the UK or Germany would have so many restored, operable steam locos (even some new ones in the UK) if they could only sit in a museum and never run.
I think it is important to restore cars, trucks, tractors, trains, planes, boats, buildings and what not because it preserves history, technology and sometimes lost skills. All of these things are beautiful in 3 dimensions but if you have the werewithall, skills and place to operate them then you have moving art. The fourth dimension as it were. Spending time and money on restoring the unseen insides of a piece of equipment is just as important as the outside because again, it preserves history and skills. If it has the chance to operate then it is a real piece of living breathing art. sights, sounds, feelings, even smells. I don’t think too many will want to taste, but you never know. The other thing tat operating these things does is give young and old people an opportunity to see what the shops or offices people used to work in were like. The conditions people had to operate, work and live in. How hard or skilled the jobs were. How many people it took to do a job compared to today. It should inspire wonder, thanks and new ideas. It should insprire respect for what has been accomplished by those before us and those who have restored and operate them today. No more throw away society please. Now I go back to helping restore a 1914 Davenport 0-4-0 and a variety of WW2 aircraft along with my sacred MG’s.
And let’s not forget that locomotives that have been “stuffed and mounted” and are now on public display should be brought indoors.
This would be a very cost effective step as it would prevent further deterioration and possibly allow for a full restoration at a later date.
Kevin
It almost causes me pain to see something like an old car, locomotive or aircraft sitting outdoors rotting, exposed to the weather. A few years ago there was a fairly nice 280SL Mercedes sitting in a parking lot. I’d stop and look at it and a lady came out of the nearby house and she would say that it wasn’t for sale. I said, “please, if it’s not for sale at least put it in a garage.” She did, finally. Same goes for locomotives sitting in parks, sitting there rotting, being stripped of the gauges or anything made of brass. Old machines that have any sort of historical value should not be left outdoors! One thing my father who was a pilot, said that the worst thing you can do to an airplane is to not fly it. Restore an airplane, fly it! Same with a car or locomotive. Use it, that’s what it was made for.
54light15 et.al,
Occasionally I have a chance to attend the meetings of the French Canadian Historical Society here in Michigan. Many of this group can trace their heritage back to the settlers who came with Cadillac and founded the city of Detroit in the 17th Century early America aka New France. They are a primary historical research group.
The Timothy J. Kent family I know, are of the French “Voyageur” tradition whose ancestors routinely paddled birch bark canoes and traded in the American and Canadian wilderness.
Remarkably this family has recently published several books on the “Voyageur” (traveler) tradition of colonial America - after spending 20 or 30 years learning the craft of this form of ancient travel.
You see they took up again the lifestyle of their great great grandparents - built and researched birch bark canoes then developed again the procedure for maintaining them. The spent the last 20 years paddling from Winnipeg, Manitoba to Montreal, Quebec. This journey of many summers took them over 2000 miles by canoe - living in period buckskin clothes - cooking traditional ways with flint and steel lit campfires.
How to patch and repair a birch bark canoes with natural pine gum resin - how to load them for the journey - so as not to damage the canoe. How to beach them - lay them on their side and erect tents over them for sleeping. How to travel in heat storm and rain - all in period costume also.
Now why would modern people waste their time in this fashion? - because they are people expressing an interest in that part of life and the heritage that they love.
Recently publishing a third book - The rediscovery of the portage by canoe travel across the lower peninsula of Michigan. From
There are lots of interesting comments here. I am part of an organization that formed 5 years ago to save our local railroad display in the public park. Briefly, we have restored a caboose (B&O 1939) and have started painting a steam locomotive C&O Kanawa #2776. Our efforts at least prevented the scrapping of entire display which was a serious discussion in our community as it had become such an eyesore.
The reason I mention this is because of all the talk of making locomotives operational again or at least getting them inside a building. For our small organization the idea of erecting something as straight forward as a pole building / shelter house type structure is financially out of sight for us. I have no intention of selling cakes and holding raffles to get it done either.
I find we get lots of advice of what we should try to accomplish yet it is the same half a dozen guys who show up on a Saturday morning willing to actually work.
In closing I must point out that we have had some generous donations from the community and some success with local grants, but nowhere near what it would take to build a structure over the display.