I'm hoping that we can have a civil discussion of this. First off, let me state that I do not propose doing this to any one-of-a-kind locomotive, so the PS-4, Cab-Forward, etc., are safe from my theoretical gas ax.

The impetus for my bringing this up is my recent trip to Europe. Among other places I went to were the Museum of Technology in Berlin and the National Museum of Transport and Communication in Lucerne, Switzerland. Those of you who have been to these museums probably know where I'm headed. I did a quick key-word search here for "cross-section" and "cut-open", and didn't really find much of a discussion there. So, hopefully I'm not about to plow really old ground here.

First, let me give you a link to about the only photo I could easily find of the Swiss rack railway tank engine that is the major reason for this post. After you have a look at it then we can proceed. (Click on Panorama 3) from the menu of photos. Link:

http://www.verkehrshaus.ch/index.cfm?sr ... &id=100430

Actually, the photo does not begin to do the display justice. I could not find any video of it either. (I did ask at the gift shop if they had any photo sets or CD or DVD of the displays for sale, and they did not). The engineer's side of the loco looks totally normal, fully restored to perfect and shiny. The fireman's side is cut open and color-coded (blue for water, red for fire, etc.) down to the cylinders and valves. The entire mechanism is motorized on rollers and operates several times a day. This is very visually dramatic, since this is a FOUR CYLINDER locomotive, and the rack cylinders operate separately from the adhesion gear. Seeing the entire mechanism operate at once looks to be the ultimate Rube Goldberg contraption.

This is not the only cross-sectioned locomotive in the museum. There are several examples of cross-sectioned electric locomotives on display. Now, let me ask, how many similar displays are there in U. S. railway museums? (Play crickets chirping here.)

As I said at the beginning. I'm not suggesting doing this to a one-of-a-kind preserved locomotive. However, there are 12 preserved C&O Kanawhas, 8 UP Big Boys, several Harriman Consolidations, 13 PRR GG-1's, and 3 or 4 GTW 0-8-0's among other preserved types with multiple examples. I realize that we are facing some really hard-times in preservation, but maybe a project like this might put some enthusiasm in a local museum operation. Really, I can think of at least a couple of those Kanawhas that are in more than rough-shape that might otherwise be cannibalized for parts, that would be an awesome display cross-sectioned on rollers.

This is probably pretty low on the priority list for museum projects, but it strikes me as a major gap in our museum displays, and something that should at least be seriously discussed. Overall, I would say that the quality of the museum in Lucerne, as well as the one in Berlin, are VASTLY superior to just about anything I have seen in the U. S., in terms of the number of displays, condition of the facilities, interpretation, use of models, etc. Just blew me away. And I haven't even touched on the quality of the Swiss NG I rode. Let's just say that all the members of the House and Senate Surface Transportation Subcommittees need to take a European junket to ride trains and transit. Acela rides like a buckboard on a rutted road compared to Swiss meter gauge. And I really would like to see the look on an Amtrak ticket agent's face if you suggested trying to connect to a train with only two minutes to spare!

The panoramic view is very cool. A number of GTW 0-8-0's have been cut up already so I'm sure one could have been spared. A cross sectioned GG-1 would be very interesting as would a diesel. I don't think there is anything that beats a living breathing steamer.

I've seen the one at Steamtown and it did not do much for me. With that in mind I already knew what the insides were like but maybe within the general public there would be a larger number of folks who would get a lot out of it.

There are so many ways the story of railroading could be told other than a stuffed and mounted locomotive. I think many museums here in the US have moved past that mentality. Finding the new and interesting ways to tell the stories of railroaders and their machines is a challenge.

Here are pics from Steamtown.

This gives me the same vibe as one of Gunther von Hagens Bodyworlds' exhibits, and I suspect for most steam enthusiasts it drums up the same moral and ethical issues.

Are Staybolts and tubes really THAT interesting. Once you start you can't really go back.

Joe

Also, I figure a photo can work just as well. If you all want to see what 6167's Smokebox looks like:

http://www.trainweb.org/j.dimech/journal/080419-1.html

See no cutting required!

I think I was only vaguely aware of the Steamtown locomotive. Thank you for reminding me. I'm fairly certain there are no "animated" examples of cross-sectioned locomotives in a U. S. museum. As for opening the smoke box door, a few displays over from the rack engine is a standard gauge four cylinder 2-10-0 that not only has the smoke box door open, but it also has a lighted pit under the engine you can walk through to examine the underside. The Technical Museum in Berlin has a similar display. Like I said, the whole place just blew me away, and I haven't even mentioned the HO model layout of the Gotthard Pass (part of a detailed exhibit on the construction of the pass and tunnel), or the marine, air and road exhibits, that include the motorized guts of a huge lake steamer, or the whole lake steamer being restored outside (like the Ticonderoga at the Shelburne Museum) , or the Convair 990 on stilts you can walk through, etc., etc., etc. All in one place. Oh, did I mention that most of it is interpreted in multiple languages? When was the last time you saw an understandable explanation of the difference between using 3-phase AC and single-phase AC in electric traction? Truly Disneyland for transportation freaks!

Yeah, when I heard about the one at Steamtown, I was pretty well mortified. I've concluded that it might be worth the educational/enthusiasm-generating value (just as that Thomas the Tank Engine rebuild is), but I sure wouldn't want to see a regular practice made of it.

Why not build a small cutaway model that kids can crank? That way, it doesn't destroy a historical piece of equipment, plus it's interactive. May not have quite the impact as seeing a full-size engine motorized, but at least you're not destroying something purely for educational benefit.

There must be other less-destructive ways to get people excited about steam.

My $0.02.

12" to 15" gauge steam loco boilers make great cut-away exhibits. They're big enough to be good teaching tools, and small enough to not punch through the floor. Most Cagney etc boilers of early 1900s vintage have been patched ad infinitum, are long overdue for replacement.

- Doug Debs

Since other types of locomotive have also been mentioned in the postings above, I will just note that EMD produced a number of their locomotives equipped with removable side panels for open display at public events or for training use. These included E-units, F-units, and GP locomotives, the most recent one being the GP35 that was displayed at the New York World's Fair in the 1960s (Overland Models produced a very accurate HO scale model of this locomotive a few years ago). When their "season" on display ended, they were all converted back to functional locomotives and sold.

PC

[quote="joe6167"]This gives me the same vibe as on of Gunther von Hagens Bodyworlds' exhibits, and I suspect for most steam enthusiasts it drums up the same moral and ethical issues.

Are Staybolts and tubes really THAT interesting. Once you start you can't really go back.

Joe[/quote]

Joe,

What "moral and ethical issues" are involved in creating a sectioned steam locomotive display, other than avoiding doing so to something that is both rare and significant? "Ellerman Lines" at the NRM-York (one of about ten surviving Merchant Navy-class pacifics) and the generic Baldwin industrial 0-6-0 at Steamtown do not fall into both categories, and a derelict C&O Kanahwa or one of the GTW 0-8-0s are no different.

Is it distinguishable on "moral" or "ethical" grounds to cut off and throw away half of an 80-year old firebox for sectioned display purposes, and to do the same thing to make way for welding in new plates as part of a "restoration"? There were photos posted recently of a Southern Pacific steam locomotive with a seriously-broken cylinder which will probably require a new casting. Operating these artifacts runs that risk every day. What's the difference if you cut a cylinder in half as part of a sectioned display? The idea that irreparable harm has been done is belied by numerous operational restorations both here and abroad in which there has been no choice but to cast one or more new ones.

Do these "moral" and "ethical" rules apply to rolling stock as well? Does converting to roller bearings, removal of dead steam heat systems or, (as Strasburg does) using plywood under the car siding condemn the perpetrator to purgatory? Exceptions must be made, again, for items that are both rare and significant.

Of course, this is "Railway Preservation News," a subject which certainly encompasses education. "Steam Enthusist News" might look at the subject differently, and hence my question: what are the "moral and ethical issues" you refer to, and what authority would you consult to resolve them?

- GJC

I prefer to see my steam locomotives externally intact. I understand the display value of sectioning. However, I for one felt a feeling of nausea when I saw Ellerman Lines at the National Railway Museum 10 years ago. It is the only Merchant Navy class I have ever seen. I thoroughly enjoyed my day there otherwise, and hope to get back again.

The B&O Museum has the best answer IMHO. They have a sectioned brass model of the "President Washington" sitting next to the prototype (another sole survivor). Now I understand that not every museum is lucky enough to have a George Klein among its volunteers. But perhaps other such models could be purchased, thus leaving the static display population untouched.

I'm now donning my asbestos suit, as I suspect a couple of you would like to turn your torches on me!

One significant issue, most of our North American railroad museums are enthusiast based organizations rather than “Professional” museums (this is not meant to insult, and I acknowledge the professional museum practices and philosophies that many have adopted).

By this I mean a museum professional is much more likely to look at interpretive message and then design a display to communicate that message, while the enthusiast is more likely to take the artifact first and find a way to display it.

It is not a surprise that the identified North American sectioned locomotive is at Steamtown. As a National Park, they would look to the message first, and a logical way to explain a steam engine or any complicated machine is to section it. I could see the same at the Smithsonian or the California State Railroad Museum, or maybe at the B&O.

On the other hand, an enthusiast (even if a trained museum professional) is more likely to have an unquestioning love of all things railroad, therefore sees each and every steam loco as special, almost alive, and therefore would not consider such a project.

Having lived most of my life within about 50 miles of the museum at York, I saw Ellerman Lines quite a few times, and my thoughts on it are somewhat similar. I seem to recall one time when I was probably around ten years old, seeing it after not having visited for a few years - perhaps it had been moved, or I had entered from a different direction. I remember being impressed by it - when looking at the un-sectioned side, and then being thoroughly disappointed by the sectioned side. It just seemed WRONG to do that to a loco, and I suspect the current approach for a national/international level museum would not be to section an loco in that way. If it was to be done, I suspect most museums of that caliber would do it in a reversible way - i.e. take a locomotive and make a mock-up sectioned boiler, mock up sectioned cylinders etc, and retain the original components in storage.

I can see the attraction, but I don’t like the idea. To me it comes across as kind of arrogant, tacky, and disrespectful, and at the same time appealing to a sort of juvenile, instant gratification need to rip it open just to see what is inside. But that’s just my opinion. To each his own.

Why not just display a full-size wall mural with a dramatic color illustration in cutaway form? Whether you do that or cut open an engine, the result is only visual. For that matter, the mural approach offers more freedom to graphically express the subject than does a dissection of the actual article, which is limited by selecting specific cutting planes.

A mechanical designer could paint the mural. Another way to produce it would be to model the locomotive in SolidWorks, and output the files through a render program to achieve unlimited graphic potential. Then you could try out different illustration designs, whereas the direct mural design painting produces only one result. So it would need to be very well planned before the final work is performed.

I would display the engine intact, and display the graphic mural nearby.

George, I was playing on the Bodyworlds analogy. Some of the more enthusiastic enthusiasts may have the same reaction to both a sectioned Human Body, and a sectioned Steam Locomotive.

Of course if one has the money to burn, one can do what ever the hell one wants!

Joe