Jerry474 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> 2. I do agree that if the D&SNG doesn't want to
> make a go of the 42--and clearly she's not so
> important to their museum that they're not willing
> to park her outside under a tarp--it would be
> awesome if it could be available for another
> group, even if on static display at her home in
> Ridgway.
>
> The D&S is rebuilding 493 which takes two stalls,
> they are doing shop work on several engines and
> have reserved a stall for Southern Pacific 18. It
> was a stupid statement that the museum did not
> care about RGS 42 and it typical of the negative
> attitude toward the D&S that is repeatedly posted
> here by the same individuals. RGS 42 was placed in
> a secure location and protected from the elements.
> So the comment that they do not care is just dead
> wrong.
>
I don't think my comment was "stupid." That one of the K-36s (sans tender) took her place in the museum is what prompted me to say that. It suggests merely that RGS 42 isn't so key to their collection that it couldn't be spared. At least that's the perception I took from it. That's not indicative of a negative attitude toward the railroad as a whole. Listen, I don't live in Durango and I don't get out there as often as I'd like but I do
not have a negative attitude toward the D&SNG. If you recall I was one of the most vocally
supportive of the D&SNG during the whole flap about the diesel purchase. I really appreciate your knowledge, experience, and professional photography but this
is a discussion board, so discussion will ensue. It's worth checking a member's post history before accusing a member of having a "negative attitude" toward the D&SNG. I was one of the voices calling for everyone to chill out about the diesels and about how I'd sooner ride an all-diesel D&SNG before I'd see a rail trail to Silverton. So I call foul on this comment.
I didn't suggest that the Ridgway museum was "owed" the 42, nor did I suggest that they would have had the money or even the space to purchase and maintain it. As a die-hard RGS fan, of
course I'd want to see the 42 at home in Ridgway. That's different than suggesting that it's an easy deal. I never suggested that. Seeing how much narrow gauge locomotive restoration has happened over the last few years
is, however, reason to hope that the 42's chances are somewhat better than they were when the D&SNG first acquired her. I agree 100% that an operating 42 doesn't really fit well with the D&SNG's needs or plans (remember how little run time she had in her last decade on the RGS), and so
if she's to have a second life (well, really, third life), it's not likely to be on the D&SNG.
I'd appreciate my comments not being called "stupid." We're all on the same team here...our common love for narrow gauge railroading. I think we all want the same things, and we all understand that nothing happens for free or just to make us happy. We're all very passionate about this interest of ours but there's no reason to be so mean to one another.
EDIT: I do want to point out that Jerry has contributed several orders of magnitude more value to this forum than I ever have (or probably ever will) so Jerry, I don't want to see you leaving over this. I'd sooner leave and go back to being a lurker before that happens. But I do hope we can have our disagreement, shake it off, then drive on. It does no good to dwell on negatives.
___________
Dave Vollmer
Rio Grande Southern in HOn3
Colorado Midland in N scale
Colorado Springs, CO
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 10/25/2018 08:40AM by Dave Vollmer.
