I've always wanted to see 483 return to the rails,and I read where others share the same wish. Could the same successful project plan implemented to restore 268 be copied to restore D&RGW 483 or even 492, or 497? Can 483 become the me too 168? It is quite clear the politics, funding, motivation to succeed, and project plan timeline is working in favor of the restoration of 268. If you read multiple posts here on the NGDF, one notices that at one time the D&S in Durango gave some thought to acquiring 483 as the K36 locomotives are very valuable compared to the older K37 locomotives. This thought process has obviously changed now that 493 is being restored. Why do I not hear the same from the C&TS, that is, that 483 is valuable to the C&TS and not restoring it could lose a valuable source of power at some later date? After all we are talking about a one-of-a kind historical steam locomotive. I also notice comments about how old the parts are on a K36 or K37 and the comments leave one with the thought that old parts are an obstacle to restoration of a K36 or K37. The 168 is a heck of a lot older than 483 but the restoration of 168 is proceeding nicely. Can someone tell me if 483 is more worn out than 168? But when the topic of 168 comes up, 100 year old driver tires being replaced with new leaves one with the impression that despite the fact the tires are over 100 years old, the tires will be replaced with all involved accepting that fact it must be done to complete the project. That is what I refer to as a demonstration of motivation to get to the end goal of returning the 168 to the rails. Lastly the 168 belongs to the City of Colorado Springs, and not the joint state property of New Mexico and Colorado as 483 is. D&RGW 483 belongs to the people of the State I live in, and there is that belief that 483 is much a part of the D&RGW history and very much part of the more recent C&TS history. This is my reason to seek to understand if 483 could be considered a candidate for restoration and run once again on the C&TS.
Craig Miller
