Apology accepted and I do enjoy a good discussion even with folks who don't see it the way I do. I just do not like name calling and that is when I usually pick up my marbles and go home. I try to make my comments non-personal. I have said the train looks like a circus train to me. I don't think that was calling anyone a name, just an observation from a person with a very strong interest in the D&RGW narrow gauge that goes back to 1945.
I have never advocated the C&TS should stay the way it was in 68. I was in Vietnam when the equipment was moved, but I came to Chama in April of 71 and saw it before there was a C&TS. It was in horrible shape with lots of rust and peeling paint.
But the D&RGW narrow gauge did not always look that way. If you look at Beam photos of the narrow gauge in the mid to late 20s when most of the the K locomotives were new, new or rebuilt cars, a right-of-way that looked like the Pennsy main line. The D&RGW narrow gauge was first class. As one who was fortunate to have ridden the real D&RGW narrow gauge (1945 when I was 5 years old), I would much prefer to see freshly painted, well maintained equipment rather than the 60s look that some remember and many model. To me that was not the D&RGW at its best the way it was in the late 20s to the late 40s.
As I said, my opinion is just that an opinion and we all have them. I strongly believe that you can have a high level of historical accuracy and still have riders. Many have said that the tourists do not care about how it is painted or lettered and I think that is correct. Then the question has to be: why not do it correctly?
I think we have beat this to death and I am sure we will never agree. So let's just agree to disagree and move on. I have three D&RGW books to finish and that is a lot more fun than this.
Jerry Day
)
