Dear Hume,<p>First of all congratulations on you assistance to Metro North with their FL-9 project. I think lightning stripes will look great on them, even if NYC never owned an FL-9.<p>I remember when the Railway Museum of New England acquired their E-9. I am thrilled that they did, and kept her from certain scrapping, as she was (and is) the newest surviving E unit. Unfortunately, the last Eunit built, ex UP #914 went to scrap a few months before. #917 (I believe the number is correct)was from the last order, and I am delighted that she was saved. I have endured the NYC paint scheme and been thankful for her survival.<p>With her survival now certain, should she not be considred for a trade to a museum that will put her back in her proper UP colors? This is an open letter to her owner, and to the Danbury Railroad Museum, and I look forward to all your comments.<p>Have a good day,<p>Kevin<br>



kevingillespie@usa.net

Well, it was actually Howard Pincus who provided the support to Metro-North. Maybe I should work on the footnotes brief to make that clearer.<p>None-the-less, Bob Yarger, our missing and sorely missed chief editor (who I'm beginning to worry about), and the most keep it authentic and keep it where it belongs person I know, once told me he saw nothing wrong with taking an F-unit of non-Santa Fe origins and painting it in a warbonnet (which the Age of Steam is working on by the way). The point being F-units were fairly common and generic, and since there aren't any SF F-units left, outside of Sacremento anyhow, he thought it was a legitimate course of action.<p>I think you could extrapolate that thinking to the Danbury ex-UP now NYC E-9. But, I wouldn't have any problem with it going to a UP group and regaining its original livery, either, if a deal could be worked out.



Railway Preservation News
hkading@rypn.org

When the RNE group acquired the E-unit, and saved it from certain destruction, part of their rationale for painting it in NYC colors was because no NYC E unit was in existence. We have since learned that NJ Transit had several which have been dispersed. Maybe a three way trade can be worked out so that Danbury can get an actual NYC E-8 (they never had any E-9's). I'm speculating here of course, but I feel strongly about that unit because of her status as the newest surviving E.<p>In the case of AT&SF F-units, I can understand Bob Yarger's position. However, I have a different idea. What would it cost to convert a CF-7 or two back to an original AT&SF F unit complete with authentic red warbonnet? The powerplant and trucks are the same. Could the cab unit scaffolding be rebuit? I'm not enough of an engineer to know whther it could be done, but it sure would be nice. CF-7's are going to be around forever either. Hope Bob is ok. <br>



kevingillespie@usa.net

I once got involved with someone who had the idea of a CF7-to-F7 conversion. People who knew more than I did (by virtue of work on E8/E9's) said that too much of the carbody framing is gone on a CF7. Wouldn't the money be better spent on a surviving loco? Certainly, though, you could gut a CF7 for older engine/interior parts......<br>



LNER4472@gateway.net

I realize that the carbody framing is gone on a CF-7. The reason I am suggesting the idea is that there are only 2 Santa Fe F units left, both nonoperational in Sacramento. If framing could be found , maybe from one of LIRR's junk cab cars (several ex B&O and MILW F-7's in the lot), and mated to the frame and prime mover of a CF-7, at least in my opinion, you would once again have a Santa Fe F unit. I'm not a machinist, and I know it would cost money, but I think the idea is valid. <br>



kevingillespie@usa.net

So take a couple CF7's and transplant their guts to the Sacramento units. Geez, what's so hard about that? Do we really need the trouble of building another F7 from parts when there seem to be enough real units floating around not-quite-restored?<p>Not that I'll stop any enterpreneurs who badly want streamlined power for their dinner train or "authentic" power for the Grand Canyon RR, but....<br>



LNER4472@gateway.net

it would be much easier/economical to start with an exisitng non-sante fe F7 hulk than to even think about using a CF7. an F7's body is a monocoque design similar to the GE genesis units. the whole carbody/frame is one structural unit. when santa fe rebuilt the F7s into CF7s, they fabricated new frames and reattached the prime movers, generators, trucks, etc. i believe the early rebuilds even used part of the original carbody for the cab area. you can tell by the rounded roof line vs. the more angular sheet metal cabs of later rebuilds.<p>mike shirk<br>



mshirk@DELETEix.netcom.com

And let us not forget that at least one CF-7 has already been sacrificed (?) to resucitate an F-unit. A decade ago, the Anthracite Railroads Historical Society got an F-3 hulk from the Bangor & Aroostook and used the engine, generator, air compressor and traction motors from a CF-7 to make it into "CNJ 56."<br>



K4s1361@hotmail.com

Factoid:<p>The CF-7 used as the "organ donor" for the F-3 was the FIRST CF-7, the prototype unit for the CF-7 program.<br>

I remember reading about the first CF-7 being an "organ donor," and my thoughts remain then as now, how appropriate!<p>The CF-7's were efficient units, but they will never win a beauty contest. The thought that a couple more of them might be used to recussitate another F unit seems like poetic justice.<br>



kevingillespie@usa.net

No disrespect to Mr. Mitchell-but jeepers creepers<br>WHO in their right mind thinks they have the ability (skill AND financial resources) to<br>accomplish this sort of thing...<p>Most of the folks that hang around museums don't have even a modicum of technical skills,i.e.,able to read a schematic, know how a disele engine<br>works, etc.<p>Building a new carbody-without the drawings-yeah, right.<p>The largest problem with railway preservation-<br>TOO MANY DREAMERS !! <p>I would love to measure the average level of<br>technical skills of an EAA (experimental aircraft<br>association) member vs. the "average" museum<br>schlub. Who da ya think would "win?"<br><br>



0401project@netscape.net

Your average volunteer would not be able to attempt this "de-conversion". That is very true. Not every volunteer is average. If someone had the skill (and they are out there), the time, and could raise the funds, this project would get done (whether oir not this would be worth the considerable effort, I do not know). I have read enough aviation magazines and the NTSB reports where homebuilt aircraft have piled up because the builders did not have the necessary skills to build their aircraft or take the time to learn.<p>Volunteers are an essential part of our hobby and should not be bad-mouthed. While there are volunteers who can't scrape paint without getting into trouble, there are a fair number of real craftsmen out there.<p>Sincerely;<br>Paul K <br>



paulkattner@hotmail.com

may I add at this point our leading volunteer is an aerospace engineer? And that one should not shortchange the contributions of our blacksmith, for whom "pi" is a new concept, yet somehow he can build any darn thing you need? One also wonders about the average education level of the craftsmen of the 1850's who built the magnificent and still standing buildings we occupy. Give me a few thinkers, and a bunch of "schlubs", and I will move the world. And all involved will think they did something big, and be proud of it. <p>If you cannot learn something from any given man, it is you that have failed. <br>