The "history of steam railroading" includes "why they are not there anymore."

[/quote]

If that's true they should get rid of all the diesels in the collection.[/quote].

While i understand what you are illustrating here, as a practical matter, there are two diesels on site that are NPS assets and neither is accessioned.

One is the former NKP 514, a GP-9 of the kind that drove the Berks into an early retirement. By not accessioning it, it serves as an operating asset that can be modified without regard to "original fabric" and it's recent rebuild included a a new block and 645 packs. Not only does it tell part of the story of steam-it is an incredibly useful engine (I think there was an ode to the GP9 in Trains by Ed King about 20 or so years ago.) You need some switching done? It'll get 'er done. Have a trick that involves a late mark off? Oh that's when you appreciate not having to bank the fire and fill the tank. It has run excursion trains as the only unit, the lead unit on the return leg of a steam trip and was cut in as second unit at times. It is the most useful engine.

The other is the SW that was formerly the TMSL 26 that is now being rebuilt at McHugh as a faux Lehigh Valley unit. It's getting a new prime mover to replace the original and the traction motors will be D-77's, not D-27's.

I'm not sure you could swap antiquated components if they were part of the collection.

The rest of the diesels there are the faux DL&W F-3's there on agreement, the Reading FP-7's that have sat idle for years (not sure if the rumored departure ever happened) and any number of DL's loaners.

I believe the putative reason for the agreement to host the F-3's was to have supplemental power of a historic nature. Unfortunately, they are seven decades old and have needed a lot of TLC, and quickly become a crutch that has produced a drought of road steam longer than the tornadic EF-5 drought that nobody minds.

I have personally heard interpretive rangers tell visitors asking why no steam that an F-3 is even more rare than steam. As creative an excu.. er response as that is-I don't recall the visitors in question being completely satisfied with it.

In an ideal world, Steamtown wouldn't have been a proxy for the Vento/McDade turf war and they would have concentrated on developing an operating museum, and procured new construction steam and rolling stock. Nobody would have cared if the engine had 26 air, the coaches had roller bearings, ABDXL's and Tight locks. (When I think about the procurement effort and additional maintenance on P's and UC's..)..

Unfortunately Congress did what it always did, passed a bill that was largely devoid of details, and left it up to the NPS and a few others to wax poetic on the "steam experience" and other aspects of fulfilling a rather nebulous legislative mandate.

Nonetheless, it is amusing to see the childlike faith the usual suspects have for regulation and government in general.

Yes, the Reading FP-7s not only departed, but now #902 is operating on the Woodstown Central Railroad, in southern New Jersey:

https://railpace.com/reading-company-90 ... n-central/

There are no diesels in the historic collection. We do have some useful pieces of equipment that serve us well.

That's always the question when it comes to "historic" railroad operations. Do you use radios? Do you put in a modern control stand in a historic diesel electric? LED bulbs?

No easy answers. And not "right or wrong" answers since either side can be justified.

From where I sit it's a pretty easy answer. We only change or add what we're required to to stay compliant with the applicable rules and laws or is relatively unavoidable or foolish not to. Epoxy-based paint to replace lead-based. 514 only got a 26 brake stand to facilitate the installation of an event recorder, which is a rule requirement to run above 25mph on the Pocono Mainline. The F3s both still have 24RL brakes, and both are out of service until the backordered rebuild valves become available (which could be a whole discussion itself.) Parts and materials are only updated when either the original is no longer available, or there's a significant safety or reliability advantage to the upgrade, and it will not lessen the visitor experience. (No one is going to know from the outside that 514 has 645 power assemblies, or that LV113 will have a 567C block instead of a 567A, or D77 traction motors instead of D27s.) On 26, the only modifications beyond the required radio are updates to various lubrication systems, such as a mechanical lubricator instead of a hydrostatic, and a bell air assist. (I'm not sure power reverse is original but I *think* it was added before she came here.) Bulbs are all original style, although I suspect there will be a future where LED bulbs replace the originals which are discontinued and only available due to a herculean effort to have a custom run made overseas (we bought some of those.)

Really it comes down to common sense.

I've been keeping an eye out for Susquehanna 142's long awaited return in Phillipsburg, NJ. Does the fact that it's a Chinese locomotive built in 1989 make it slightly less interesting than, say, Black River & Western #60 over in Ringoes? Maybe. Will that stop me from going out to see it and ride behind it? Absolutely not.

Years ago I rode both in the same day followed by the last departure at Strasburg. What a trio!

For me, the 142 is much less interesting than the 60, but live steam is live steam. A Shay at Steamtown is even less interesting - but still steam is steam.

And I predicted the modernization of the 514 fifteen years ago-it was only half tongue in cheek. It seems strange that the ECO rebuilds that EMD then saw as a potential revenue source have had limited success.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29166&p=230006&hilit=22eco#p230006

If the world survives the next hundred years and there's an interest in railroads enough to create a market for operating preservation, steam will be far more authentic than any diesels. Even during their service life modern diesels are being repowered with AC and CSX is repowering old SD-40's with 6 cyl GEVOS.


No operating preservation effort is truly authentic. There will always be concessions to best practices, convenience, economics and technology. One of the best modifications Steamtown ever made was ditching those cantankerous stemwinder handbrakes (one which once slipped out of my hand only to fly back and hit another volunteer right smack in the middle of the chest-knocked the wind out of him as we tried to get it to release-and there was a collective sigh of relief when he got his breath back and said "I'm OK". Peacocks are not only more reliable but create far less exposure to injury.

Dr. Thomas Sowell is known for his adage that there are no solutions, only tradeoffs. If some authenticity is scarified and the return is greater safety-only a fool would deny that tradeoff.

What if a consortium could have made a bulk order of 50-100 SY's or JS's either at the end of construction or when they were being put out to pasture and assume that they could be acquired and brought to US specs at a significant saving from a historic restoration? Then you have more operating assets, similar in appearance, configuration and operation to historic domestic builds.

Call it a though experiment (at best) or daydreaming-but you could have had a lot more public exposure-plus training operations for the next group of operators.

That would save wear and tear on artifacts and be more cost effective than restoring the old locomotives, but part of the fun and enjoyment of watching these old engines operate is knowing this history and their back stories. Its great knowing that 2102 is the same engine that ran on the Reading 80 years ago, over some of the same tracks it runs over now, and ran on passenger excursions through Port Clinton over 60 years ago, just as it does today. Locomotives without history like #142 provide a great steam experience and are wonderful to enjoy today, but there is a big something missing compared to an engine like Black River # 60.

John

There are two blunt realities in the above posts:

1) Chinese agents TRIED to sell Chinese steam locomotives and parts to the North American market. Total sales amounted to about six (with one lost at sea).

2) The problem with keeping vintage steam alive is that they eventually wear out. You either replace the boiler, cylinders, pistons, and other parts, or you eventually reach a point where you can't run the "original artifact" anymore. That's how we "lost" PRR 7002 and 1223 in service. The day will eventually come also for such "stars" as SP 4449, Reading 2102, GM&N 425, MILW 261, Strasburg 90, CB&Q 4960, UP 844 and 4014, etc. In effect we've already hit this with PRR 1361 which needed a completely rebuilt firebox to meet new standards. The only reason we still have LNER 4472 and one or two of the LNER A4 Pacifics running now is because there were spare boilers kept in reserve and the British recognize swapping boilers was part of keeping steam alive decades ago. And note that in Britain this weekend, they're having "The Greatest Gathering," a static exhibition, not a parade of steam like they had in 1975 and 1981........

When the original John Bull was revived in 1981, people asked when they might see it run again; Jack white supposedly responded, "Ask us in 2031!" That's six years away now......

Steam locomotives were constantly modified and maintained throughout the working life of the locomotive.

And last time I was in the UK (in December of 2024) I saw and rode behind plenty of historic steam locomotives - they are alive and well!

You are missing the point. Of course steam was maintained and modified during its lifetime, other than something like the Baldwin 60000, none are "factory fresh".

However, the replacements that were made in the service life are the product of contemporaneous methods and materials.

It's an indefinite philosophical question, but at what point does your restoration become a replica?

There is a thought experiment. What if I told you I had George Washingtons hammer? What if I told you the handle broke and was replaced? Still "Washington's hammer"? What if I further told you that both the head and the handle were replaced? There is a (fallacious in my estimate) school of thought that says "yes this is still Washington's hammer, because it was always a "continuous unit". That's the issue.

For diesels, they are almost all going to tend towards replicas, because individual components (such as prime movers and traction motors) are both subject to active improvement, and economically impractical
for limited boutique rebuilds.

I'm not missing the point - I just disagree with the idea that historic locomotives should be stuffed and mounted. The idea of them being continually maintained and operated is part of the appeal.

I think we have all heard a version of the Washingon Hammer story 50 or so times. Certainly the locomotives at WDW have very little left - are they still 100 year old Baldwins? I don't know.