A poll was taken to help the decision on the matter of paint scheme. It was decided that the RMPA has a G5s in the older, striped scheme, while the E6s served for years in the more modern design. One has to take into account, the Lindbergh films were only one day in the locomotive's career. I think they made the correct decision, but like Overmod said, it's strictly personal.

Friends,

I can speak on behalf of the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania and can shed some light on our intentions in restoring PRR E6s No. 460.

At heart our aim is preservation and we do indeed define "original fabric" as being that material which the PRR itself installed on No. 460 over the course of its operational life. We are not opposed to the concept of back-dating in principle, but there has to be a compelling need and an accurate result has to be realistically achievable. The museum conducted a study of No. 460's material history, comparing what we were learning as we disassembled the locomotive against the PRR's own equipment records to chart how the locomotive evolved over the course of its lifetime. We also identified several periods of interpretive interest from the locomotive's service - as-built (1914), the Lindbergh run (1927), WW2, etc., and then determined what would be required to restore or backdate the locomotive accordingly. The 1927 period was naturally of prime interest to us given that it was the fame of No. 460's Lindbergh exploits that led to its preservation. In the end, however, the many alterations made to No. 460 after 1927, some of which were quite substantial, rendered an accurate 1927-era restoration impractical.

No. 460 underwent its last major shop period in 1951-52, emerging in good repair and excellent appearance but still displaying the evidence of several decades of use, repair and modification. Few changes were made to No. 460 between 1952 and its retirement in 1955. No. 460 remained in its as-retired configuration when moved to the Railroad Museum in 1970. Our desire to produce the most accurate restoration possible led to our decision to restore the locomotive to its 1952-1955 appearance. We are confident we will have done proper justice to this historically significant locomotive when our restoration is complete.

The restoration of No. 460 is on schedule to be completed in concert with the construction of the museum's new roundhouse. No. 460 will take pride of place in the new roundhouse but we do plan to bring the various roundhouse residents outdoors from time to time for special programs. Regular updates on the restoration can be found on the museum's Facebook page and in the museum's Milepost magazine - shop tours at the museum are also offered and an update for the museum's regular website is being prepared. Thank you very much for your interest and support!

Best regards,

Charlie Fox

Charlie, Thank you for taking the time for the well worded informative response. Very much appreciated. Sounds good.

Amen.

The multitude of origins of the parts in this locomotive bring up thoughts of the Johnny Cash song, One Piece at a Time. As a side comment, my first thought on seeing the subject line was that it was about EMD two-engine passenger units.

Today's operators of steam still use this practice to keep their locomotives operational. The first example that comes to mind is the Union Pacific, with both the 844 and the 3985 using parts taken from other surviving engines. The 844 has numerous parts from inactive stablemate 838, while the 3985 has parts from sister 3977 (many of these were added to the 3985 during her conversion to oil burning) and from Cheyenne's Big Boy 4004.



You're not the only one! "Wait, what E6 covered wagons? Rock Island 630 or L&N 770?"

Funny thing: the first thing I thought of was PRR, the "E6s" being so perfectly a PRR designation... to my East Coast PRR-steam-oriented state of awareness. (Although I also thought this involved an EMD passenger cab until I saw the little 's' clearly...)

Never occurred to me that the non-greengrocer'd plural of E6 would be E6s. Good catch.

Thanks, Charlie -- good explanation, good call, and from a pure preservation-integrity standpoint, more correct than my opinion. (We have pictures of the historical state of the engine in mid-1927, and that can do perfectly well to show that part of what is indeed her much longer history...)

And here we have, indeed, the reason that David P. Morgan and others bucked what is normally considered "proper English language style/usage" with regard to the pluralization of acronyms and/or technical names.

If we read the various English style manuals (Strunk & White, Fowler, The Oatmeal, etc.), we find that the plural for the E6 diesel model should be "E6s"; the plural for more than one of the ultimate PRR 4-4-2 class would be "E6ss"; the plural for "SD50" is "SD50s", and the plural for "SD50S" (yes, there was such a model designation) would be "SD50Ss".

Now you see why, even though it's defined as incorrect by those style books, many rail writers use apostrophes in the locomotive class plural designations--"SD40-2's" or "Ps-4's"

I have a more informal book on English usage and writing that strongly chastises writers who use an apostrophe in a plural where there's no intent to indicate possession. The reference to "greengrocer" brought to mind the sign on a vegetable display, "Artichoke's three for $1.00". But some would argue that in some cases, that forbidden apostrophe (or lack of same) would make the meaning clearer, and clarity is of greater importance than absolute correctness.

Hi,

Plurals

I was taught that like most of us, adding an s or es was the plural. I also recall the exceptions of for instance goose and geese.

What I recall is that the if the word ends in an "S", that the plural is designated with an apostrophe. For instance PS4 would become PS4s but a E6s would become E6s'. Neither possessive nor adding an "S".

With Microsoft's products, Window is singular, Windows is singular on computers and plural on cabeese (or cabooses), Windows' is plural, and Windows's is singular possessive when talking about Microsoft.

But what can I say. I was in eight different schools in grades 1-8 in 6 different areas in 5 different cities.

AND I learned y'all is both singular and plural. <GRIN>

Doug vV

How I wish they could run them all through this type of serious restoration. I understand 4800 "Rivets" is to go in next. At the least, get the others under a roof - please!
RMPA, you've done a superb job, and thank you!

Great job by RRMPA. She looks absolutely stunning.

Agreed. If you are talking about more than one E6s, it is E6s' . Note the apostrophe after the "s".

Doug vV

Y'all are mixing up your plural with your possessive.

The plural of "E6s" and the plural of 'bus' are likely to follow the same plural rule, which is to add vowel 'e' to separate the esses. No one has any trouble recognizing that Bennett Levin has E8s, and if there were still more than one E6s they would be E6ses.

An apostrophe between the two esses might be justified as an elision, the same process that gives us contractions like "can't" or "couldn't". But how do you then propose to distinguish that tormented construction from the possessive, as in 'The E6s's boiler might suffer the same design compromise as the K4s's did.'

Hi,



Good point. I was living in Charleston WV in about 5th grade when I learned the plural was -s' and not -ses. I have been using that as rule of thumb from some 50 years and I could very well been using it wrong.

The English language is a language full of rules and exceptions to those rules.

I do believe that I'll use the -ses for plural...and I might get into trouble again.

FWIW, I'm reading a book that the character's last name in "Selleres" with an e (from a section of the text) and not "Sellers". <GRIN>

Doug vV