No one has mentioned the “General Pershing” in St. Louis?
It may not have any of the Zephyr cars with it, but unlike other Zephyr trains, this unit uses standard couplers, rather than the shared-truck/drawbar system. Meaning it could power any excursion set.
The Pershing’s engine is also operational, although the traction motors, brakes, and electrical systems all need work. Not the end of the world, but it could be worse, like the “Mark Twain”. The important thing is the diesel engine doesn’t need (much) work.
For work needed, and compatibility with other equipment, I’d say the Pershing would make the best choice for mainline excursion service, although it has no train set of it’s own. But that is just my opinion.
54Light, one of those Junkers J-1 recon aircraft is on display up in your neck of the woods at the Canadian Air and Space Museum in Ottowa. I’ve seen photos, it’s in rough shape, but it looks like it’s mostly all there.
By the way, ever seen that movie “Battle of Britain?” I saw the film in 1969 when it was released here in the US, and when that JU-52 showed up during the opening titles (with that magnificent “Ace High March” playing in the background) you could tell who the aviation fans in the theater were. There was a loud “GASP!” from quite a few people in the audience, myself included. You should have heard the background chatter…
“It’s a JU-52!”
“WHERE’D they find it?”
“I didn’t think they were around anymore!”
Critics didn’t care for the film, but every aviation fan I know loves it! Anyway, the REAL stars of any aviation film are the airplanes, not the actors.
At least until recently when they started computer generating the flight scenes. It’s just not the same.
Firelock, I have seen the Junkers in the Ottawa museum. It’s not perfect but there it is. I remember reading about Martin Caidin who wrote the story “The six million dollar man” and the article said that he owned a JU-52 with more modern engines. I think Lufthansa has one that they will charter just as Air Canada has a Lockheed Electra that they will charter. I won a 30 minute ride on it about 6 years ago and it was awesome! The interior was modernized, sort of like a King Air, but boy was it great! What sweet music those engines made!
I saw “The Battle of Britain” when it came out and it was written about extensivley in my old man’s various aviation magazines. They used most of the Spanish air force to make that picture,I think. Something else- if you ride the Croydon tramlink in London, at the end of one line there is a bus to Biggin Hill!
You’re right about the modern movies and CGI. I saw the movie “Red Baron” not long ago and yes the planes look authentic, the rotary engines were spinning but it was all fake. I recently saw “The Blue Max” starring George Peppard and Ursula Andress’ you-know-whats and while they may have been fakes (the planes, not Ursula’s) they were real aircraft.
Ya know, I’ve always had a soft spot for “The Blue Max.” There’s a lot of things I could nit-pick about the film, such as the pilots are too old (most World War One aviators were in their mid-twenties), the camoflage and markings on a lot of the planes were incorrect, George Peppard’s character’s wearing a cavalrymans uniform when he came from the infantry and so forth, but I really have to give the film-makers a big “A” for effort for reproducing all those World War One aircraft. The flying was first-rate, and that Jerry Goldsmith score couldn’t have been better.
And James Mason had the best line in the film…
“All right Stachel you can take her up now. And let’s see some REAL flying!”
You should have heard all the snickering and nervous laughter in the theater, me included!
There is also one of the most under-rated flying movies ever made, “Darling Lili” with 5/8? scale SE-5s, As I recall they were called “Currie Wots” for some reason. These were also written up in flying mags back then. Many years later I saw one of those aircraft disassembled on a trailer on I-84 in New York. You couldn’t mistake the shape of the radiator.
Howard Hughes “Hell’s Angels” uses authentic aircraft as well. No CGI back in 1930, I guess. Funny thing about that picture. They’re supposed to be flying over battlefields but it sure looks like California farmland to me.
That airplane that Stachel flies is a Heinkel 50, I’m pretty sure. Wasn’t produced for another 10 years or so. He should have been flying a Fokker D-8, I would think.
About time and money making all things possible, I have restored my share of old cars. Figure out how much it will cost, quadruple it and you will still come up short. Same goes for how long it will take.
Oh yeah, Howard Hughes’ “Hells Angels.” I’ve seen it, dumb-dumb-dumb storyline but absolutely fantastic flying! Real SE-5a’s, some real Fokker D-7’s with some Travel Air Fokker look-alikes to flesh things out a bit, a real Sikorsky biplane bomber (the Army Air Corps wasn’t interested so Hughes bought it to use in the film, then wrecked it! I wonder what ol’ Igor thought about it?), and some special effects that were absolutely amazing considering the film was make in 1930.
The “experimental monoplane” Stachel flys was actually a French Morane from the 1920’s. I don’t know if it was supposed to be the Fokker D-8 but it hardly matters. The really surprising thing is George Peppard did some of his own flying in the film. The really on-the-edge stunts, no, but when you see the shots of George in the cockpit of a flying aircraft he’s really flying it.
Like I said, a really good film. Better than the novel, by the way.
I’ve only seen the beginning of “Darling Lili” where Julie Andrews leads the people in the theater in a medley of World War One songs, very inspiring if you’re a World War One buff like I am. If the flying’s as good as you say it is I’ll have to watch the whole thing when I get a chance.
Sorry. Although of course most Ju 52s used BMW engines, the Deutsche Lufthansa Berlin-Stiftung aircraft was built with P&Ws. Specifically, in its original configuration, designated the Ju 52/1m, (1 motor) it was a single-engined aircraft, powered by either a BMW or Junkers liquid-cooled engine. However, the single-engine model was underpowered, and after seven prototypes had been completed, all subsequent Ju 52s were built with three radial engines as the Ju 52/3m (3 motoren — “three engines”). Originally powered by three P&W R-1690 S1 H1G Hornet radials 550-600 hp, later production models mainly received 574 kW (770 hp) BMW 132
Firelock, I did not know that about the plane being a Morane. I always thought it was a Heinkel as I saw a picture of one in a mag. Maybe they were built under license? I sure didn’t know that George flew in that film, I wouldn’t think the insurers would allow it. I guarantee you will like “Darling Lili”- I haven’t seen it in years. Story is totally bogus, but there are some great flying scenes. The Red Baron shows up in his DR-1 triplane in some parts.
Getting back to the main point of the thread, my understanding is that the Winton was replaced by a 600HP EMD several years before the train was finally taken out of service, so restoration would not require a Winton but something more serviceable today.
Back to airplanes for a minute. This morning while walking down the street, I hear a familiar sound and I look up and it’s a DC-3 flying byat a low altitude! What a fine way to start the day! Sweet music!
With respect to the Winton engine, I had read that the 567 was a true revolution in reliability, that the pre-war Winton engined streamliners had a guy in the engine room to make repairs as they were rolling along, just like with engine room staff on a submarine.
What could you even repair on a Diesel with either the engine running or the engine stopped (the E-unit had two) but with the train rolling?
The Winton 201A 600 hp diesel engine was regarded as unreliable, true, but it still managed to stay in active service from 1934-1960. But unlikely it could ever be put into running shape even if the Museum of Science and Industry agreed. http://utahrails.net/loconotes/pcook-winton.php
I thought that the Pioneer Zephyr doesn’t have a Winton. It was my understanding that she was repowered during her career with a 567?
The Flying Yankee is still had her Winton and it was coming very close to being operational in the early 2000’s before a change in mindset decided to go a different direction, before things stalled out completely.
Edit: I must be wrong about the Pioneer Zephyr. Can’t find any references to her having been repowered. If it had, it surely would be mentioned somewhere like this link below.
I have personally restored many interal combustion engines of the 1920s. From Packard V-12 automotive engines to early high tech marine engines. These historic vehicles are fantasticly well designed and so beautiful to run.
Crankshafts for all antique vehicles from airplanes to tractors can be easily custom made by companies like Detroit Crankshaft and others. Custom connecting rods or pistons custom cast or forged by a number of businesses. Custom engine gaskets of copper clad design to steel embossed also are widely available. Custom electrical winding and repair of all electro magnetic devices from generators to motors is also nationally WIDELY available. Most antique engine castings - no matter how old - can be EASILY repaired with modern welding practice. Bushings to ball bearings all used in 1920s machinery are ALSO still widely sold and available today throughout the world.
JUST WHAT IS IT YOU THINK CANNOT BE RECREATED BETTER TODAY - I CANNOT THINK OF IT.
The restoration of early internal combustion engines is no different than that of early steam locomotives. These antiques functioned quite well within the engineering parameters of their design, it is only in comparison to the technology of today that followed them that their obvious deficiencies so boldly stand out.
Pre Second World War technology is surprising. Did you know that many threaded fastners (nuts and bolts) were not standardized until WWII - for the war effort. That there are American Standard Threads, Metric Threads, and British Whitworth Threads, ACME threads as well as a host of others. Also, for example there were no permant magnets used in machinery of the 1920s. The ALNICO magnet we all take for granted or even the RARE EARTH magnets of modern engineering are but recent developments that also first came out of wartime necessity. 1920’s ignition motor and generator
While I am willing to concede that it is possible to manufacture, re-manufacture or machine just about any part of a Winton engine, another factor that needs to be considered is cost. There is a fair-sized market for replacement parts of all sorts for pre-WW2 automobiles, so production runs are of reasonable length, making for reasonable production costs. The market for replacement parts for pre-WW2 marine and railroad-size diesel engines is going to be thin to almost non-existent, so the manufacture of said parts will virtually be custom jobs, with the attached high production costs for a small specialized job. Most museums and preservation groups don’t have unlimited budgets so expensive replacement parts can be a problem.
Many Winton-powered switchers were re-powered with 567’s or 244’s (RI) so the practice is not unheard of. Repowering the “Flying Yankee” with a 6-567 engine would not be a travesty since there is precedent for similar re-powerings and it would allow the train to be operated at a reasonable cost.
I would ask the doctor what he would do about NYC&HR 999. It was re-boilered and re-drivered by NYC in order to make it a more practical locomotive. Would he attempt to undo NYC’s work in order to restore it to its “original” appearance??
Cost, it seems, is always the big factor – perhaps the biggest – in historic preservation. And in preserving, which period or phase in the life of the object do we re-create …
But, for any given piece being considered, be it an engine or an entire locomotive (or passenger car or roundhouse or anything else), if not now, then when? It will be neither cheaper nor easier tomorrow, as compared to today. And if not done today, nor tomorrow, will we soon again hear the familiar refrains, “Why didn’t they save one of those?” “Exactly how did they do that?” “No one knows how to do that anymore.”
Even something as modern as the UAC TurboTrain, scrapped only some 30 years ago, generates such questions.
What are we willing to give up and let go of, and what are we going to mourn if we do?