On Monday I walked out to check on the 321 again. I usually climb a neighboring boxcar to view the top of the tarp, and also go inside. The tarp still appears to be fine, but this section of ceiling has come loose and part of the molding has fallen to the floor. This isn't the end of the world, by any means, but it's a symptom of the slow deterioration that takes place even when a car is tarped. There's trapped moisture and condensation, and the result is not good. The only long-term solution is building another barn. And we're getting close, but not close enough. We still need your help.
It's easy. We strongly suggest you donate to
the Indoor Storage funds for the department of your choice: Electric
Car, Freight Car, Passenger Car, Internal Combustion, or Steam. You can send a check to this address:
Illinois Railway Museum
Box 427
Union, IL 60180
or donate online through our secure website at this link. It's all tax-deductible, of course.
Any gift you can make will be greatly appreciated!
14 comments:
Randy,
maybe is is time to think about a new home for the car. Now that IRM has a whole flock of C,A & E Interurbans; maybe another museum might want the car.
Ted Miles
IRM Member
Ted: That's a very reasonable suggestion, and under other circumstances it might be something we would seriously consider. But I can try to explain why it probably won't happen in this case.
The car no longer has the correct trucks and traction motors, and we would not be able to offer usable trucks, traction motors, compressor, and so on to a museum that wanted a car to restore to operation -- we need them as spares for our own operating fleet. Once the next barn is built (hint, hint) the 321 will make a good static display, but only one side of it is presentable. So I doubt that any other operating museum would really be interested in what we have to offer, a rather decrepit carbody without the necessary mechanical parts.
And we are not likely to give it away to some other type of organization to have as a static display. If you're not in the railroad museum business, you're probably not familiar with all the work it takes to restore and maintain equipment like this. An Executive Director I happen to know refers to such people as "heathen". His point is that the heathen cannot be trusted to care for historic railroad equipment in the long run.
But that's a matter of opinion, and if anyone has a different opinion, I'd be glad to hear it.
Hi, Randy.
The 321 gives a great example and encouragement to finish funding (and building once funds are raised) Barn 14, and then starting the campaign for Barn 13, and the expansion of Barn 10 to the same size as Barns 11 and 14.
As to the continued fate of CA&E 321, I would be more interested in preserving it, and doing the needed detective work to find out what happened to the original 319 trucks, or as an alternative finding the correct trucks wherever we can legally get them.
The 321 is indeed slightly "bent," though perfectly safe if restored to operating condition again. While it doesn't APPEAR to be worth the great expense of replicating the missing parts, it is still far from dead if we should find the correct trucks in restorable condition. Having a good looking static display is also good. For that matter, if any other museum is willing to trade for something we REALLY want, that's good too. In short, we still have "options."
Having options is a good thing. Donating to the Barn 14 fund will keep our options open, and not just for CA&E 321.
Brian J. Patterson
IRM Member.
Brian: Thanks for your comments on the barn.
As for the trucks and motors, as usual, that's a long story. But there's no mystery as to what happened to the 319's trucks: they came with the car, but one motor was defective and another was needed to replace one in the 409. So the 319 was put on the 321's trucks. Thus we have the trucks from both the 318 and 319, but not enough good 254 motors. One set of trucks is still destined for a TM car, and the other set may be used for some other restoration.
I don't expect the 321 to be restored in the foreseeable future, but it's nonetheless worth putting back inside.
Randy,
I am a distant member so I was not aware that it might go into the new car barn. I am glad to hear that; even if it is just to store a lot of spare parts.
You are right about non-museums such as tourist railroads who just use cars up and throw them out in many cases.
Ted Miles
IRM Member
It is not correct to say the only other option to a tarp is indoor storage. Strasburg has been preserving wood project cars outside for years. It does cost money to cocoon a car they way they do it, but adding external sheathing, vents, and a rubber membrane roof is a long-term solution to outside storage which should allow for the car to not self destruct due to moisture accumulation or tarp failure.
Just saying...
Will 321 become another 966?
Artschwartz
No.
As for the Strasburg cocooning system, I've seen how that works, and it's certainly better than tarping if that's the only alternative. But in their case, construction of a large carbarn like we're planning is not feasible. The Strasburg campus occupies a much smaller area, and I would imagine they have even more stringent zoning regulations than we do, being in an area that relies heavily on Amish tourism. Under those circumstances, cocooning would be the right thing to do.
But we believe that another barn is a much better solution for IRM, and that's why we're conducting this fundraising campaign. And the sooner construction can start, the better. Thanks!
I think the 321 would make a great control trailer. I'd ride it. It would add more seating capacity to the wood fleet at a lower price. Obviously I'd leave the balance of the electrical system intact in case the traction motors appear. Mate the 321 with 4 motor car(s) I agree that getting inside will make it possible to save the car for this or any other use.
Randy Stahl
The 321 has a long way to go before it could be a control trailer in service. I have ridden in the 321 when it was still in service. It has no seats, and not much interior to speak of. Plus, with 4 operable wood cars, its doubtful we would ever need the seating capacity. Long interurban trains are operated more for show, with 2 and very rarely 3 car trains the norm. The 321 is also identical to the 319, so we have a better representative in service now.
It is also important to note that the original donor of the 321 intended that it be used as parts for the TM interurbans. Those cars have a long way to go as well, maybe further than the 321. However, there are several members that remind people all the control equipment and motors from the 321 should eventually go to a TM car.
Preservation of the 321 is more about good stewardship of museum assets than significance to the collection.
Joe
HI Joe, I havn't seen any of the cars for s lot of years. I don't know a lot about them anymore. I do know that the plans to use the 321 as a parts car for the TM cars was made before the 318 got crushed. Bill Nedden said a while back that "now the TM cars won't need to eat the 321". I guess I'm going on OLD information. I do know that the TM cars are a huuuuge project, first a wooden car needs to be restored THEN a steel car needs to be restored over top of it. 60 years in the planning I would say that restoring the TM interurbans is a daunting task otherwise I'm certain it would have been attempted. As near as I remember the 321 was a sound carbody.. unlike the TM cars.
Dear Anonymous: You didn't identify yourself, but any friend of Bill Nedden is a friend of mine.
Be that as it may, Joe is correct. The 321 is no longer a sound carbody, and it would be a huuuge project to restore it to operating condition. It would need a complete rebuilding of the roof, replacement of several body posts, the #1 bulkhead, and so on. And that's why I was eager to acquire the 319, so I wouldn't have to restore the 321. It will make a nice static display of the 1930's paint scheme, though.
And if we have the resources to commit to a complete restoration, frankly I would rather see the TM cars get the treatment. The 1129 and 1135 are the only TM interurban cars in existence, and as such, they are really more interesting and historically significant. But right now, we're working on projects that can be accomplished much more quickly, such the 36 and the 757. And building the next barn will insure that the longer-term projects are preserved for future restoration. So all of you out there in internet land, keep those contributions coming! Thanks.
Sorry about that.. My name is Randy Stahl- Mgr locomotives Q/A DSLE on the MMA railroad. Bill Nedden was a good friend to me and my family for many years. Bill was the one who introduced me to IRM in 1975 (I was 11 years old). I sincerely miss him
Concerning Norm Krental. I'll share my impression of meeting him in 1976 as a 12 year old. I thought Norm fit the profile of a 70s rock band, he had that look , I saw him as a bass player for Steppenwolf. After spending a good deal of time with Dave Shore who taught me in ins and outs of IRM I spent a bit of time with Norm. Imagine, a inquisitive little kid, full of questions and Norm Krental. Norm was a most gracious host and proudly showed me the body of the Michigan car out in the field. I never forgot that. That was 36 years ago !! I don't think any of us really understand the impact we can all have on another person, I was listening to what you old timers were saying. It was guys like Norm, Bill Nedden and many others that set me on my career path and now I am nearing my retirement, I have about 26 years on the railroad, 4 years to go for my 30 !
Randy Stahl
Post a Comment