With the help of my longtime friend Jack White and others I've assembled a list of SI's railroad vehicles collection. I've posted it for everyone to review, so that I haven't left anything out:

"John Bull" 4-2-0 1831 Camden & Amboy RR + tender;
No. 1401 Southern Railway class Ps-4 4-6-2 3/1926;
"Jupiter" Santa Cruz RR 4-4-0 Baldwin 8/1876;
"Olomana" 0-4-2T Baldwin 5/1883 (on loan to RRMPA);
"Pioneer" 2-2-2RT Cumberland Valley RR c.1851 (stored in Bethlehem, Pa.);
Alaska RR Alco RS-1 Diesel Locomotive (on loan to RRMPA);
Southern Pacific Ry Alco PA Diesel Loco (stored in Portland, OR?)
Camden & Amboy c.1836 Coach No. 3 (on loan to RRMPA);
Monongahela Ry steel caboose (on loan to RRMPA);
Capital Traction (DC) 303 and trailer 1512;

Other SI railroad-related vehicles for which little data is available:

Baltimore Coach Co. 12 (White TRC, 1917);
US Post Office bus (White 788, 1941);
TTX Truc-Trailer container with flat car;
San Francisco cable car?;

Deaccessioned SI railroad vehicles/cars:

Central RR of NJ "Belford" No. 99, Pullman private car 1926, ex-DL&W 99, ex-George F. Baker, Jr. private car 99

Many of the railroad vehicles (except No. 1401, "Jupiter" and "John Bull") recently have been placed on loan to other institutions or were placed in storage. Much of this activity is in preparation for the installation of the new integrated transportation history exhibition, "America on the Move," opening at NMAH in 2004--highlighting the social history of American transportation from 1876 through 2000. According to Bill Withuhn, it will be the first redesign of the transportation galleries since NMAH opened in 1964.

Any additions or corrections to this list of equipment? Please share.

K.R. Bell
RR Museum of PA


http://rrmuseumpa.org

> With the help of my longtime friend Jack
> White and others I've assembled a list of
> SI's railroad vehicles collection. I've
> posted it for everyone to review, so that I
> haven't left anything out:

> "John Bull" 4-2-0 1831 Camden
> & Amboy RR + tender;
> No. 1401 Southern Railway class Ps-4 4-6-2
> 3/1926;
> "Jupiter" Santa Cruz RR 4-4-0
> Baldwin 8/1876;
> "Olomana" 0-4-2T Baldwin 5/1883
> (on loan to RRMPA);
> "Pioneer" 2-2-2RT Cumberland
> Valley RR c.1851 (stored in Bethlehem, Pa.);
> Alaska RR Alco RS-1 Diesel Locomotive (on
> loan to RRMPA);
> Southern Pacific Ry Alco PA Diesel Loco
> (stored in Portland, OR?)
> Camden & Amboy c.1836 Coach No. 3 (on
> loan to RRMPA);
> Monongahela Ry steel caboose (on loan to
> RRMPA);
> Capital Traction (DC) 303 and trailer 1512;

> Other SI railroad-related vehicles for which
> little data is available:

> Baltimore Coach Co. 12 (White TRC, 1917);
> US Post Office bus (White 788, 1941);
> TTX Truc-Trailer container with flat car;
> San Francisco cable car?;

> Deaccessioned SI railroad vehicles/cars:

> Central RR of NJ "Belford" No. 99,
> Pullman private car 1926, ex-DL&W 99,
> ex-George F. Baker, Jr. private car 99

> Many of the railroad vehicles (except No.
> 1401, "Jupiter" and "John
> Bull") recently have been placed on
> loan to other institutions or were placed in
> storage. Much of this activity is in
> preparation for the installation of the new
> integrated transportation history
> exhibition, "America on the Move,"
> opening at NMAH in 2004--highlighting the
> social history of American transportation
> from 1876 through 2000. According to Bill
> Withuhn, it will be the first redesign of
> the transportation galleries since NMAH
> opened in 1964.

> Any additions or corrections to this list of
> equipment? Please share.

> K.R. Bell
> RR Museum of PA

K.R.: I'm not sure that this is what you are asking, but I still believe that SI's greatest omission (and one that could be corrected for the 2004 redesign) is the lack of a typical "freight hog", preferably a 2-8-0 Consolidation. It NEEDS to be added!

Les Beckman (HVRM)

midlandblb@cs.com

There is one car that the Smithsonian owns but has yet to enter the District. Chicago Transit Authority #6719 was built by the St. Louis Car Company in 1959, its construction reusing quite a few parts from Chicago PCC streetcars built in the 1940's. It was part of a "married-pair" rapid transit set, and was semi-permanently coupled to another identical car (#6720) with a drawbar. The car ran until the 1990's, and in 1999 #6719 was separated from #6720 and sold to the Smithsonian (#6720 was later scrapped). It was stored for a few years at Steamtown (where it stood out like a sore thumb!), but has recently been spotted at a rail car construction facility being refurbished. The Smithsonian plans on using the car as part of a mockup of a Chicago "L" station.

Does anyone know if Capital Traction #303 has been put in storage, and whether it will be displayed in the rebuilt railroad hall? Now there's an historic streetcar!

Frank Hicks

Below is a photo taken of #6720 at Steamtown. #S475 was its work car number.


fullparallel@wideopenwest.com

> Kurt,

Thanks for the list. You might want to note the narrow gauge engines: Jupiter and Olima fromm Hawaii. Others?

The Smithsonian does not have much; I doubt that they will acquire anything more, but I hope that some freight cars, street cars and maybe a private car can be borrowed for the new display.

The cable car is from Seattle not San Francisco. It used to be displayed with the grip visible under the car. My information says the car was built in 1888 for the Yesler Way cable line. Seattle was the second to last City to use cable traction. There is another Seattle cable car in the collection of the Museum of History and Industry (Univ of Washington) but it is not on display. Since 1948 it has just been SF where Haliday invented the system in 1873. And as the system is now a National Historic Landmark and protected by the City Charter I think they will be around a while. The MUNI Ry is about to put a brand new California line cablecar into service, to be numbered 62.



ted_miles@nps.gov

The PA was originally AT&SF, formerly D&H #16, and most recently from Mexico. I'd be surprised to see it restored by 2004.

> There is one car that the Smithsonian owns
> but has yet to enter the District. Chicago
> Transit Authority #6719 was built by the St.
> Louis Car Company in 1959, its construction
> reusing quite a few parts from Chicago PCC
> streetcars built in the 1940's. It was part
> of a "married-pair" rapid transit
> set, and was semi-permanently coupled to
> another identical car (#6720) with a
> drawbar. The car ran until the 1990's, and
> in 1999 #6719 was separated from #6720 and
> sold to the Smithsonian (#6720 was later
> scrapped). It was stored for a few years at
> Steamtown (where it stood out like a sore
> thumb!), but has recently been spotted at a
> rail car construction facility being
> refurbished. The Smithsonian plans on using
> the car as part of a mockup of a Chicago
> "L" station.

> Does anyone know if Capital Traction #303
> has been put in storage, and whether it will
> be displayed in the rebuilt railroad hall?
> Now there's an historic streetcar!

> Frank Hicks

> Below is a photo taken of #6720 at
> Steamtown. #S475 was its work car number.


davew833@yahoo.com

>Dear Kurt:
I still list the Smithsonian as owner of former Potomac Electric Power #1, 0-4-0F (Heisler c/n 43) in storage at Silver Hill, MD. Am I in error?
J. David


jdconrad@snet.net

Currently, all signage at the Smithsonian's Museum of American History in DC, say that the new exhibit will be opening "late fall of 2003".

SJHussar@aol.com

Having visited and enjoyed SI's air and space museum, I have often wondered why the "nation's attic" does not hold more rail vehicles. Since the 1820s, railroads have had a far-reaching effect on US economy and society and deserve an interpretive exhibit equal to, if not greater than, the section devoted to aviation. Perhaps Steamtown was meant to serve this purpose. Steamtown has done a good job, but Scranton is not Washington - it will never be a tourist magnet to rival the national capitol.

Flight has a magical appeal to visitors of all ages, and of course the military and NASA are part of the same government that runs the museum, making acquisitions simple. But the bottom line is: Trains are not as sexy as planes. They don't generate the type of excitement that translates into funding for exhibits. The California State Railroad Museum demonstrates that railroads can be interpreted in a way that is fresh and appealing. It works in Sacramento; why not in Washington?

tr2manz@hotmail.com

I am pretty sure that the original Winton engine that was installed in Burlington's Pioneer Zephyr is there on display...

Regards from San Diego,
Burlington John



Burlington Route Historical Society
BurlingtonJohn@trainorders.com

That's actually related to something that's been bothering me lately. When we say air museums, we usualy mean military aircraft. And the lions share of air and space is, if memory serves, military. A big carrier hanger, some other stuff. Railroading, by contrast, is a rleatively peacefull moccupation. Sure, railroads have been used to ship troops and supplies, and people have even used railway guns, but they haven't got the versatility required by the "modern" battlefield in any way but logistics. (Which is important mind you.) The're a strategic asset, not a tactical asset. Now, I enjoy military memorabilia. I've been an enthusisatic visitor to several military air museums. (The main ones from each major branch.) I've visited warships. This "unsexy" problem, however, is suffered by aircraft, and ships as well. The S.S. America hasn't the draw of the U.S.S. Alabama, even though it's probably a more important ship. The DC-3 doesn't incite the same excitement that the F-4U does, even though it's impact was much wider. How do we make peace and construction as vivid and meangingfull to people as war and destruction? Ironicaly, people really enjoy watching buildings getting torn down to, when I think this is fundamentaly sickening and disheartening, if occasionaly unavoidable, and even necessary. Please pardon my undirected rant. And I mean no disrespect to any veterans among us. It is the worship of violence and destruction that I dislike, not the proper respect paid to those who risked, and sometimes gave, everything that they had to make our lives better.

Sincerely,
David Ackerman

david_ackerman@yahoo.com

> Does anyone know if Capital Traction #303
> has been put in storage, and whether it will
> be displayed in the rebuilt railroad hall?
> Now there's an historic streetcar!

Capital Traction 303 will be part of the new exhibit. It will be moved upstairs to the area of the present auto exhibit.

The California State Railroad
> Museum demonstrates that railroads can be
> interpreted in a way that is fresh and
> appealing. It works in Sacramento; why not
> in Washington?

This is rather simplistic, but here it is. The major corporations that still need government contracts in order to survive build airplanes, and not railroad equipment. The Air and Space Museum is literally in the shadow of the Capitol. The big receptions when a new exhibit opens, the sponsoring of halls, etc. all happen in front of our legislators. A lot of this happens on a matching grant basis. It really is another form of advertising and lobbying.

Meanwhile, those corporations who might seem to be the ones to sponsor sexy railroad museums do not have the need to wine, dine, and impress Congress.

I do not think that it works in Sactamento as well as you might think on first glance. The reason Sacramento is as good as it is is because the State put the money up front. Since the original funding of the Museum, however, it has struggled to make any more forward progress. How many new exhibits have been restored since opening? Have they been able to do anything with the Santa Fe historical equipment collection? They have been struggling for over ten years to develop the Museum of Railroad Technology (MORT). Their demonstration railroad runs through the will of volunteers, mainly. The railroads and the railroad support industries do not see the need to fund projects there like aviation does in Washington, because they do not get the same "bang for buck" as aviation gets.

I have friends at the CSRM, so please do not take this analysis the wrong way. I enjoy their museum and am glad that we have it. I just wish we could have more of it.

Steve



SZuidervee@aol.com

Kurt,

I thought the Smith owned PRR GG-1 #4882 The "Washington Union" engine.

Rob

PS: I had no idea they owned CNJ #99. Wish they kept it!!!

trains@robertjohndavis.com

My thoughts exactly, Steve. Very well articulated.

K.R. Bell

> The California State Railroad

> This is rather simplistic, but here it is.
> The major corporations that still need
> government contracts in order to survive
> build airplanes, and not railroad equipment.
> The Air and Space Museum is literally in the
> shadow of the Capitol. The big receptions
> when a new exhibit opens, the sponsoring of
> halls, etc. all happen in front of our
> legislators. A lot of this happens on a
> matching grant basis. It really is another
> form of advertising and lobbying.

> Meanwhile, those corporations who might seem
> to be the ones to sponsor sexy railroad
> museums do not have the need to wine, dine,
> and impress Congress.

> I do not think that it works in Sactamento
> as well as you might think on first glance.
> The reason Sacramento is as good as it is is
> because the State put the money up front.
> Since the original funding of the Museum,
> however, it has struggled to make any more
> forward progress. How many new exhibits have
> been restored since opening? Have they been
> able to do anything with the Santa Fe
> historical equipment collection? They have
> been struggling for over ten years to
> develop the Museum of Railroad Technology
> (MORT). Their demonstration railroad runs
> through the will of volunteers, mainly. The
> railroads and the railroad support
> industries do not see the need to fund
> projects there like aviation does in
> Washington, because they do not get the same
> "bang for buck" as aviation gets.

> I have friends at the CSRM, so please do not
> take this analysis the wrong way. I enjoy
> their museum and am glad that we have it. I
> just wish we could have more of it.

> Steve


http://rrmuseumpa.org

I don't know--do they? I'll probably send the finished, corrected list to Jack White, Bill Withuhn and Sue Tolbert for verification. Their ownership of a GG-1 is a new one to me.

K.R. Bell

> Kurt,

> I thought the Smith owned PRR GG-1 #4882 The
> "Washington Union" engine.

> Rob

> PS: I had no idea they owned CNJ #99. Wish
> they kept it!!!


http://rrmuseumpa.org