Re: 1744's sister... SP 1785, & poor 1727
Author: David Dewey
Date: 03-24-2020 - 14:24
Back in the 1980s we had a chance to remove the lagging, but now that would be a major operation, and very expensive. We also had, at that time, the offer of all the lumber to build a roof over the engine. Both offers were rebuffed.
The display of 1785 was always an example to live up to, though I think they had/have a larger population center for volunteers. What has happened to 1727 in the past ten years is disheartening. With Bruce Petty's passing, there was/is a movement to do work on 1727 in his memory. However, that group is not composed of railroad preservationists, and they have mostly ignored the advice given here, and by other preservationists. So far I do not see any numbers of people, nor money to do anything. They claim they have resources, but for the past 20 years the community hasn't been able to generate much interest in its preservation.
While it is true that it didn't, as best we can tell, ever see service in the Dunsmuir area, it has now sat on display there longer than it was in service. It holds little meaning to the current population other than it has sat there most of their lives. This will not likely improve with the passing of time.
Most park displayed locomotives should be at least under shelter and in a museum setting where they will be regularly cared for and can be interpreted to the new generations. Steam engines were never meant to be left out in the weather, that's why there were roundhouse and engine houses; the railroads protected these valuable assets. Diesel engines, by their designs, are much more weather-tight.