hello to anyone reading this, my name is Brit and i made a petition on change.org to bring out of storage and clean up and relocate Delaware & Hudson RF-16 class diesels numbers 1205 and 1216 to a railroad museum in the U.S. The petitionreads in part "...The engines have been kept in Munising since 1988, and are rusting and wearing away rapidly and may be scrapped before we know it. I propose that 1205 and 1216 be cleaned up and displayed in the Baltimore & Ohio (B&O) Railway museum in Baltimore, Maryland. I would like to see 1205 & 1216 restored because railfans like me love trains, plus there are no RF-16 class diesels in museums or on display anywhere in the Unites States at the moment..." I would like people to check out the petition and share it with others, if we get enough support, we can surely bring 1205 & 1216 back to the public. A number of people have had questions about the diesels and want to bring them back, but the private owner just won't let people near them. you can see the petition at https://www.change.org/p/escabana-lake-superior-railroad-restore-delaware-hudson-rf-16-s-1205-1216
I can almost assure you that the current owners of the two RF-16s will pay little if any heed to anything on change.org, and may in fact be incensed that 'someone else' is cranking up "railfan" action anew.
As pointed out on RyPN, people with a legitimate interest in seeing or studying the engines for a technical purpose can easily ask for (and be granted) access to the locomotives.
What a petition 'should be for' is to request -- civilly -- that some kind of hard 'succession management' be put in place for the two locomotives to ensure that they will go to an appropriate entity when and if they need to be moved or sold. My understanding is that such an understanding exists in principle but isn't legally formalized. Railfans don't need to know the timing or conditions of such an agreement; only that the future of the engines is in no doubt.
No 'support' to 'bring 1205 and 1215 back to the public' has any point without equally serious fundraising to accomplish the acquisition, any move, restoration, and appropriate display conditions in full. When arrangements to do that have been made, a petition or request like this will be taken more seriously.
What reason there is to display a couple of NYC locomotives in a B&O museum is unclear to me, and someone better be sure that the museum itself has the budget to restore and repaint the units and then display them under cover (in at least comparable storage conditions to what they enjoy now). In my opinion there are several items at Mount Clare that need to be fully stabilized before any project involving acquiring the RF16s is budgeted.
Well me old son, I appreciate your enthusiasm, and we'd all like to see those old Sharks in the light of day once more, but the fact remains they're private property, and as such the owner's to do with (or not) as he wishes.
Remember, the only reason they're locked out of view of anyone is some railfans who were allowed to visit them seriously abused the priviledge by stealing parts and other rail artifacts that were on site.
They'll come out of storage eventually. Trust me. You just have to be patient.
Flintlock76... some railfans who were allowed to visit them seriously abused the privilege by stealing parts and other rail artifacts that were on site.
As I recall, they were not 'allowed' or 'invited' -- they sneaked up or broke in, like any other vandal or burglar, and stole or damaged parts.
There are ample reasons why the "owner" doesn't like the typical foamer community with an interest in the locomotives now, and why people who 'show up' or do 'urban archaeology' or whatever are (probably brusquely, at best) turned away if they show up near the true location of the units. It isn't likely the owner (or any heir) will be interested in being told what he 'should' or 'must' do with them, especially when the demand is presumably, as here, made at their expense and inconvenience.
As I said, if you have a true interest in the locomotives or their history, you can easily request guided access to them.
Hmm. Several years ago there was a frequent poster on this Forum who was aquainted with the owner, and according to the poster there was never an issue with visitors until the thieves (who had permisson to visit) showed up. Not that it matters much, a thief is a thief, no matter how he gets to his target.
I don't remember who the poster was, he hasn't been around in a long time.
If you read the early 80's railfan press, they were very railfan friendly.
Too bad a few bad apples always try to spoil things.
i have contacted the B&O and a few other railroad museums but have not got gotten a reply from the B&O but the Henry Ford museum contacted me and said they would be interested in helping the petition.
You know, you've got the drive, you've got the passion (and I admire passion) and if you've got a powerful ally (maybe) in the Henry Ford, then by all means go for it! If you push at a wall long enough and hard enough you can move it but remember, some walls are easier to move than others.
Just remember the old saying about how banging your head on the wall only feels good when it stops.
Did you even read what anyone above has posted, you are wasting your time and only going to aggravate the current owner even more so. While your enthusiasm is great, how you can gather that two engines that are stored indoors and deteriorating and rusting away is beyond me, unless you've seen them first hand and have knowledge of industrial decay.
Read the second response again and change your petition to be more along the lines of what that poster said and you might garner more support.
thatweirdwriterdude i have contacted the B&O and a few other railroad museums but have not got gotten a reply from the B&O but the Henry Ford museum contacted me and said they would be interested in helping the petition.
"Dude" Therein this thread is some pretty sound ADVICE!
Not to mention that you might go back and re-read the postings by Overmod, Flintlock and G.McFarlane.
That the 'Sharks' have been sequestered for all the interveaning years; have been one of those topics that rise in interest, and fall because of the 'storage' of those units. As has been mentioned thay are 'in private ownership', and thus are protected by their owner. Said owner most likely, has a very good idea that there is interest in the two RF-16s. They will emerge on that owner's own schedule. It is a shame that because of the thoughtless actions of some person or persons they must be kept locked away.
As for your petition, you might have a better chance, if you had ample cash, and the ability to approach the current units' owner about buying them...
Otherwise, you might just be whistling past the cemetery.
OR as the old Chinese laundryman was often heard to say:
"...No tickee, No Laundry..."
thatweirdwriterdude... the Henry Ford museum contacted me and said they would be interested in helping the petition.
If they are interested in preserving the engines, they have the 'standing and clout' to work with the owner. That is the route I think you should pursue.
I suspect they may help you change the wording of the petition to better allow that dialogue to be set up and continue. There is now a logical link between those engines and Michigan; I believe they've been in that state for more years of the entire period of their long service lives...
Overmod I can almost assure you that the current owners of the two RF-16s will pay little if any heed to anything on change.org, and may in fact be incensed that 'someone else' is cranking up "railfan" action anew. As pointed out on RyPN, people with a legitimate interest in seeing or studying the engines for a technical purpose can easily ask for (and be granted) access to the locomotives. What a petition 'should be for' is to request -- civilly -- that some kind of hard 'succession management' be put in place for the two locomotives to ensure that they will go to an appropriate entity when and if they need to be moved or sold. My understanding is that such an understanding exists in principle but isn't legally formalized. Railfans don't need to know the timing or conditions of such an agreement; only that the future of the engines is in no doubt. No 'support' to 'bring 1205 and 1215 back to the public' has any point without equally serious fundraising to accomplish the acquisition, any move, restoration, and appropriate display conditions in full. When arrangements to do that have been made, a petition or request like this will be taken more seriously. What reason there is to display a couple of NYC locomotives in a B&O museum is unclear to me, and someone better be sure that the museum itself has the budget to restore and repaint the units and then display them under cover (in at least comparable storage conditions to what they enjoy now). In my opinion there are several items at Mount Clare that need to be fully stabilized before any project involving acquiring the RF16s is budgeted.
Why do you refer to these D&H units as "NYC locomotives?" Were they Central units before going to the D&H?
If these engines are in fact ever in a museum, it would seem like the Railroad Museum if Pennsylvania would be a good location for one. Are both of these units A-units? (Did Baldwin build shark B-units?)
Lithonia OperatorWhy do you refer to these D&H units as "NYC locomotives?" Were they Central units before going to the D&H?
Of course they were -- they still have their NYC numbers after all these years. As I recall they went to the Monongahela in the late '60s, were retired in the early '70s, and as I recall they were not purchased but 'swapped' by the scrap dealer who had them (who as I also recall wouldn't take "money" for engines that had been sold for scrap -- that in a nutshell is why we don't have a preserved EL PA) in return for an equal value of 'old metal' -- I don't know the breakdown. D&H got a bargain; I'm only sorry that a deal to repatriate the famous converted B unit shell in northeast Pennsylvania never quite came off. (Ironically, part of that was that the unit had been 'too modernized'; it was famously one of the very expensive somewhat Beep-like Alco conversions that essentially replaced everything above the deck and inside the shell with an RS-18...)
A perhaps no-longer-well-known story is that the D&H was 'sold' on the warbonnet-clone paint scheme by being shown painted HO scale models. One of the guys who did the original alternative(s) realized that an appropriate variant of the NYC lightning-stripe theme would be better (which in my opinion, it is) but dragged his feet just that critical little bit finding a unit factory-painted that way and getting up to Sterzing's office or wherever. He was just hours late: the decision had been made to do the warbonnet stripe, and there you have it. (I believe, adding insult to injury, the general consensus of those concerned was that the lightning stripe would have been a better choice...)
i have heard that the sharks will be out of storage when the owner dies, then i don't know what will happed, but i have contacted the owner and am waiting for a response. i have plenty of money from drug dealing and other sources, so money shouldn't be an issue, but i have contacted the owner.
I'll tell you, having seen photos of those D&H Sharks in the modfied "Warbonnet" scheme I think it was a good choice. The D&H scheme looked good on any locomotive it was applied to. Personally I like it better than the more famous Santa Fe "Warbonnet."
Now, does anyone really know what in what kind of condition those Sharks are in? "Rusting and rotting" seems to be an extreme description of two locomotives that have been under cover for years. Granted, "Rust never sleeps" but at least they weren't stored outside in the weather. Things could have been worse.
A personal note, I passed on a set of Williams O gauge D&H Sharks a year ago at a local train show. I'm not losing any sleep over it but in retrospect I think I made a big mistake on that one, they looked good!
thatweirdwriterdude i have heard that the sharks will be out of storage when the owner dies, then i don't know what will happed, but i have contacted the owner and am waiting for a response. i have plenty of money from drug dealing and other sources, so money shouldn't be an issue, but i have contacted the owner.
The Sharks were reasonably fine about 8 years ago and I doubt they are measurably degraded since then.
The big issue is mechanical. One of the two has a spun main bearing. A 608 has a very heavy engine with a VERY substantial crankshaft which was made like a piece of jewelry (you have to see one out, adjacent to the locomotive for scale, to appreciate how big and difficult to work it is) and fixing the issues would be enormously difficult without either a humongous amount of essentially hand work or access to very heavy and probably somewhat specialized machine-tool equipment. That was a death sentence for operation on a road like MN.
Perhaps SMS or a historic-display-only organization could arrange an engine 'swap' to get that locomotive running but the crane and transport capacity for the engine alone is substantially in the 'whole engine specialty move' category, and likely cost, unless someone at a company like Silk Road is a Shark aficionado ... and let's face it, who among us isn't? ... and is willing to 'donate' some percentage of the cost to the Cause.
thatweirdwriterdudeI have heard that the sharks will be out of storage when the owner dies, then i don't know what will happen, but i have contacted the owner and am waiting for a response ... money shouldn't be an issue.
General consensus on sources I have heard is that the owner will be attentive to legitimate cash offers. Those from 'railfans' will likely be subject to balance inquiries or escrow, so do NOT make any sort of feeler or offer if you do not, in fact, have the present ability to provide liquid funds.
My impression, which may be outdated or faulty, was that the owner would entertain a lower price for 'legitimate museums' (perhaps 501(c)(3) or similar, and yes, perhaps at least in part for tax advantages) than for private individuals. There is also a potentially hellish cost in moving and storing the locomotives if you do buy them; there are some tragic horror stories even for fairly large museum operations that did not make proper anticipatory plans for this. In particular, be sure you OWN the land or facilities where the engines will go.
My initial guess, not knowing the organizational relationships or politics involved, is that a letter from the Henry Ford stating that they have interest in providing a long-term, stable 'home' for the engines including a codicil or covenant agreeing never to deaconess them would be invaluable in ensuring your efforts are perceived as legitimate.
Be aware that there are very young people who have accomplished astounding things in preservation -- see Guillemot's (sp?) effort with one of the Constitution Liners -- and you should make contact with them both for advice and potential 'amicus curiae' support.
Thanks Mod-man!
"...a VERY substantial crankshaft which was made like a piece of jewelry..."
Sounds like the crankshaft of the Daimler-Benz DB 605A-1 engine that powered the Messerschmitt BF109G. Pilots flying restored examples are told to be VERY careful, if they ground-loop the airplane on landing (or takeoff) causing engine damage that's "all she wrote" for the crankshaft, there's no way to fix it or reproduce it.
That also explains why the Luftwaffe started using laminated wood propellers. In case of a ground-loop or belly landing the propeller would shatter and not transmit any shock to the engine, saving the crankshaft and other components.
OK, back to the Sharks.
Not jewelry in any sense of delicacy; jewelry in the sense of careful and precise machining, detailing, and surface finish.
I don't know how many times you could machine those journals for wear or corrosion, but it should be a lot (with corresponding fitting of new main liners as is done in a wide range of other IC engines).
The catch is that setting up to fix the spun-bearing issue on something this size and weight can be prohibitive. Cutting and dressing the journal requires a large lathe with very tight control of runout and high slide precision. If the spun shell has damaged the block (which I think is likely) you' have to line-bore, perhaps using some additive method like metal spraying, to establish the necessary seat for the replacement shell. This isn't really 'worth it' for an engine that only produces relatively low horsepower and has a slew of other proprietary and ancient unobtanium parts. Except in preservation, with volunteer labor, donated expertise and skill, and no requirement for profitability or showing best ROI...
the Henry Ford said that they have sufficient space to house the engines on their property and that they have storage facilities on site to keep the engines during winter. The museum's Curator of Transportation Matt Anderson said they would be in contact with the private owner, Mr. John P. Kunzie, Matt didn't mention anything about money or anything though.
thatweirdwriterdudeThe museum's Curator of Transportation Matt Anderson said they would be in contact with the private owner, Mr. John P. Kunzie, Matt didn't mention anything about money or anything though.
The general consensus on RyPN is that it's best for someone like Mr. Anderson to conduct all the dealings and negotiations with an owner as strictly in private as possible. The only word to feed back to the railfan base is that 'the engines will be safe' and that 'arrangements are proceeding in good faith'. There are at least two recent and painful examples where railfan meddling screwed up a carefully-arranged save plan, and there's little reason to create more opportunity, especially when something as significant as a Shark is involved.
What you ought to be doing, in my opinion, is setting up general fundraising around the save effort, in appropriate ways that don't repeat some of the strategic 'mistakes' of the past, and directing railfan interest into ways that will facilitate whatever arrangements the museum can arrive at. Ideally the locomotives will be donated (probably for tax advantage as well as goodwill) but there will still be a cost to move them and at least 'cocoon' them upon delivery; then another cost to renovate them even for static display. I'm not sure the museum has, or would have a priority to allocate, their own internal endowment or operating funds for those things. And they are critical to assure.
Why not set up a 'friends of the Sharks' organization (see the effective ones for a number of steam locomotives, plus the model for the Iron Horse Society at Steamtown, for things to note or watch for) and then make Matt Anderson one of the permanent board members? The single greatest thing that converted the T1 Trust from a bunch of railfans to what it is now was the bringing on board of a wide range of competent and 'known' people who could be convinced of both the desirability and the feasibility of the project. I advise that you do that with the 'friends' organization with all deliberate speed.
I think you may have already achieved, or are reasonably close to being able to achieve, the most important part of all this, which is credible communication between a real museum and the owner leading up to a true letter of interest in acquiring the 'assets'. Even if this only results in the owner discussing his 'alternate method' of preservation or donation after he dies, it will have accomplished the key 'railfan' goal of dispelling uncertainty over the potential fate of the locomotives.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.