Will Gant Wrote:
=======================================================
> I've seen it said a few times here, and am curious
> on everyone's opinion.
For what it is worth, here is my opinion on the points you raise. (I have put them in bold, not because I think that my responses are more important, just looking for a way that folks could clearly see who wrote what)
Several people have stated
> the museum "Destroyed" historic cars by converting
> them to Rider cars for events.
The only cars that I have said the Museum destroyed are RPO 6 and Outfit car 04999/04988 which no longer exist in any form, and the three gondolas (1423 included) that have been de trucked and turned into storage platforms. I count them as "destroyed" as it is highly unlikely that they will ever be put back as rail cars. A not insignificant amount of money has been spent to make them into platforms and that use has caused, and is continuing to cause significant structural damage to the cars (as pointed out be several other posters aside from myself). Converting the flatcars into rider cars in no way "destroys" them and I have never isinuated as much. That said, the decision to modify one of a kind cars in the Museum's collection into special event rider cars certainly underscores the perception (and I would say fact) that the Museum's focus has shifted from preservation to special events.
I find this an
> intersting statement at the least, because unlike
> so places, Chama, the Loop, which uses High Side
> Gons, Pipe GOns, and Boxcars for rider equipment,
> the museum has chosen to use flat cars. I believe
> Flat Cars are the perfect rider car, they have
> nothing on the deck already, and have stake
> pockets, simply insert a stake, add some siding
> and seats, and presto, you have a rider car. They
> are also steel framed (at least one is).
>
> The beauty of this, is by simply removing the
> stakes, sides, and seats, you have an instant flat
> car, no permanent damage caused. The bright side,
> is instead of rotting as they were before, these
> flat cars have received new decks and other
> repairs.
>
Good points. It is absolutely true that converting the flatcars into rider cars can be done in a manner that causes no long term harm. I am not opposed to this, just used it as an example of the Museum's shift in focus. As a side note, neither of the flats was really rotting, the idler flat had be completely rebuilt by the museum in the past and was in overall good shape.
As to why the C&TS et all did not use flatcars, I would postulate as follows;
When the C&TS got its start, speed was of the essence and boxcars were plentiful and much quicker to make into covered rider cars that flatcars. As the C&TS progressed, they did construct passenger cars out of the steel flats that were on hand. The boxcar coaches were retired and some have even been put back to boxcar configuration.
When the Georgetown Loop (and its in someways predecessor the Colorado Central) were getting started, Lindsey Ashby had his choice of cars from the scrapper in Alamosa. As I see it, the available flatcars had the following strikes against them; the steel cars were steel and thus more expensive when purchased as scrap, they are much heavier and longer than high side gondolas (definite concerns on a line with tight curves and steep grades), the idler flats were a notoriously weak design (as evidenced by how many the Rio Grande folded in half). Many of the available flats also used wheels, trucks and brake beams that were specific to them and thus not readily available. High side gons on the other hand were robustly built, plentiful and used the same wheels, trucks, etc as the box and stock cars. As an added bonus, the floor height was the same as the ex "Fair Gons" that the Colorado Central had acquired from the Black Hills Central.
As far as the "new" (2005 on) Georgetown Loop used drop bottom gons, many of the factors mentioned above came into play; they were available in quantity (from the Durango & Silverton) at the time they were needed, they had parts interchangeability with other D&RGW cars and their steel /wood composite frames meant they were in much better structural shape than most of the other available cars. Boxcars were used as the initial coverd / boarding cars as they were all that was available.
> How many boxcars were converted on the C&TS?
> Granted of the 750 3000 series boxcars built, I'd
> venture a few hundred have to still exist, those
> cars are everywhere, but the conversion did far
> more damage to the boxcars then converting a flat
> car. How Many Pipe gons were converted, high sided
> gons. I'm actually shocked no D&RGW Refrigerator
> cars got turned into rider cars, from a
> maintenance standpoint, I like the design of the
> trucks much more, with truck hung brakes verse
> body hung, no need to remove a brake beam, or lift
> the car high enough to clear the brakes. just take
> out one pin and slide the truck out.
The thing to remember here is that the C&TS was created as a tourist railroad and it bought much of the equipment it possesses for that purpose. The 3000 series boxcars it made into rider cars were acquired for that sole reason. The Museum acquired, or was given, the cars it has either destroyed (as described above) or converted into rider cars for the sole purpose of preserving them for future generations.
Cars for the Museum's collection were acquired based on their historic importance and, in most cases, the Museum has only one of each type or subtype of car in its collection. Most Railroad Museums that run excursions and such have their collection divided into two categories, the "permanent collection" and non-accessioned equipment that is meant to be used up as needed. Permanent collection cars are there for preservation purposes and are not to be non-historically modified, destroyed, scrapped or used in a manner that will damage them or require modification. Non-accessioned cars are those that were purchased for a specific use, rider car, parts source, storage, etc and are not considered part of the "collection" and are not managed as such. In the past, the CRRM had only one category "permanent collection". Operations were such that equipment from the permanent collection could be used without modification or damage to give visitors an idea of what it was like to ride a narrow gauge mixed train and show how the equipment was used in a historical context. As of late, operations have increased to the point that cars from the "permanent collection" are being modified and used up so that more people can be carried.
As too the use of reefers as rider cars, they are longer and heavier than gons or boxcars and also use "non standard" trucks and brake beams. There were also relatively few of them available and most folks starting a tourist railroad in Colorado in the early 1970's were preservation minded. Also, their double wall, horsehair insulated construction would have required a lot more work to make into a rider car that a boxcar (not to mention the ice bunkers at each end)
>
> I guess what I am trying to say, the D&RGW did
> leave a lot of cars when it abandoned in 1968.
> More then most other railroads did. I can count
> the number of known C&S freight cars, which
> honestly are a far superior design of car, more
> modern with steel frames. But almost all of them
> are gone, a few sit in Alaska, a few in Colorado.
> We should all be happy that you have as much as
> you do of your favorite railroad, yes, the problem
> with having so much left is its a lot to maintain,
> and it all costs money, hundreds of these cars are
> left out to rot, and because of their numbers, we
> cannot simply save every one.
Agreed. However, the CRRM's recent equipment acquisitions indicate that money is not the issue. The money spent on acquiring steel, standard gauge cars would have more than covered the expense needed to stabilize the three gondolas.
>
> I'm not saying anyone should actively destroy
> cars, but if by chance, they are too far gone, we
> should not crucify those who made the call to let
> it go.
Again true. However a museum that is buying ever more equipment and constructing new buildings and track clearly has the resources to prevent cars in its collection from getting to the point of getting too far gone. It is a matter of priorities. It is OK for priorities to change, however a Museum has a duty to offer items from its collection to others who will preserve them before destroying them.
Jason Midyette
