Turboliners Move

Report of 3 lite engines out of Bear, sans Turboliners. Technical difficulties?

Just got off the phone with a very good source, police training the the scrappers torch. Never liked those train sets anyway.

I'll never understand the perverse joy some people seem to get from the thought of scrapping these unique pieces of history. Shame to see the same mistake made that was made with the UA Turbos, when not a single one was preserved.

Matt Johnson wrote:

liftedjeep wrote:KP crew doubling up the Turboliner sets at Bear at 19:00. 30mph restriction on the NEC with them.
Ben

Report of 3 lite engines out of Bear, sans Turboliners. Technical difficulties?

Air hose burst coming out of Bear.... Move cancelled.
Ben

Matt Johnson wrote:I'll never understand the perverse joy some people seem to get from the thought of scrapping these unique pieces of history. Shame to see the same mistake made that was made with the UA Turbos, when not a single one was preserved.

Now’s your chance to steal one! (Or at least try to get a builder’s plate.)

Matt Johnson wrote:I'll never understand the perverse joy some people seem to get from the thought of scrapping these unique pieces of history. Shame to see the same mistake made that was made with the UA Turbos, when not a single one was preserved.

Fully and completely agree, good sir.

Like them or not, they are part of railroad history in American. I don't really like the more modern diesel designs, but I would never want to see any of them scrapped before any group who wanted one had one.

At today's fuel prices and factoring in all of the probable rehab costs, any hopes of seeing these in revenue service again are pie-in-the-sky on a good day. However, with equipment being in short supply system-wide , it would be a shame to scrap these when an argument could probably be made to reuse coupled together (longer) groups of the already rebuilt units (the ones NYDOT already rebuilt [quite nicely IMHO] and used with decent success IIRC) perhaps as unpowered trailers minus the cab cars or as powered units as originally intended on higher capacity corridors.

Moderators, I beg of thee thine pardon. Hopefully, the polite tone of my post won't reignite that age old debate or cause the BanHammer2000 to fall upon my skull with great force.

Like them or not, as many of them should be in museums as possible. We shouldn't tailor future people's access to history based on the whims of railfans. Revisionism in history leads to the sort of nonsense we now witness every day, where certain groups of people, when the pace of change frightens them, when liberals do X or conservatives do Y, so (like the petulant children they are) choose their own politically tainted fact tunnels to navigate. Our political history is badly damaged enough by these idiots, let us not allow such stupidity ("I don't like it because it used too much fuel...so let's all pretend really hard that it never happened and viola [d'oh, that's French! Cheese eating surrender monkeys!])..like any 8 year old can tell you: now it never happened!

There have been a lot of good locomotives and cars that today are no longer around for various reasons. There have been a good number of locomotives over the years that an example should have been preserved but it was not. I don't think any of these animated tooth paste tubes warrant preservation. None of them matched the performances of the diesels or electrics of their periods, I know, I ran them (the UAC trains that is). Unfortunately government money often goes for the wrong things for the wrong reasons, the stuff in question here is a prime example of government waste on the part of New York State. TOO BAD!!! If they had spent those funds on something that had been proven in performance, they might have had something to show for their dollars today.
Noel Weaver

I regret that I lack the money and resources to secure one for preservation. But lacking that, I'm glad I was able to capture them in photos. Hopefully other rail nerds will capture a few more shots of the now derelict sets if they ever get 'em out of Bear.

Want to save them? Convince a railroad museum to take them.... oh and raise the millions of dollars to preserve them.

It all comes down to money.

Matt Johnson wrote:I regret that I lack the money and resources to secure one for preservation. But lacking that, I'm glad I was able to capture them in photos. Hopefully other rail nerds will capture a few more shots of the now derelict sets if they ever get 'em out of Bear.

I shot one of the mothballed Turboliner sets in Bear back in 2014, from outside of the property. Not the best pic, but one none the less. Hopefully another opportunity presents itself with this upcoming move.

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3920086" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ben

How cool that my beloved trainsets are on the move again! These cats have nine lives.

mtuandrew wrote: Now’s your chance to steal one! (Or at least try to get a builder’s plate.)

Ha, pulling off the train version of this scene would be quite the challenge! If I ever get Elon Musk level wealth though, forget about hyperloop, I'll be spearheading an effort to build a fleet of RTL-IIIs!

https://youtu.be/RedV7vhVKHY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From viewing Mr. Kranefeld's photo, amazing what eleven years of "non-use" can do to equipment. Now the ante is pushing fifteen.

Wonder how the Talgos stored at Beech Grove are fairing?

As a moderator, the reason we disallowed discussion of future use:

1. The non-rebuilds are utterly thrased.
2. The rebuilds were the worst poster boy for gov't rolling stock procurement disasters. It's not just one thing that doesn't work, it's many many things, including HVAC, which means passengers aren't comfortable unless HVAC is completely rebuilt, a tremendous undertaking.
3. Per Mr. Norman's comments, these have now sat for 10+ years which is quite detrimental. Bearings seize, gaskets rot, birds and rodents nest...

It's not that the admins hate turboliners, it's that the concept is just not feasible and a few guys kept bringing it up. There could've been a thread on the shoe size of the first train conductor in Kazahkstan, next thing you know, someone's gabbing about returning the turbos to NYC service because people wear shoes on the turbos, too.

Ergo the rule stands, and the rule stands so the members can enjoy discussions on-topic. Thread hijacks are what really wrecks a place.

Please note, however, that historical discussion, hospital train moves, et al... are perfectly fine. If you've got old photos you want to share or an experience you want to share, PLEASE DO!

Enjoy your 2018.

Noel Weaver wrote:There have been a lot of good locomotives and cars that today are no longer around for various reasons. There have been a good number of locomotives over the years that an example should have been preserved but it was not. I don't think any of these animated tooth paste tubes warrant preservation. None of them matched the performances of the diesels or electrics of their periods, I know, I ran them (the UAC trains that is). Unfortunately government money often goes for the wrong things for the wrong reasons, the stuff in question here is a prime example of government waste on the part of New York State. TOO BAD!!! If they had spent those funds on something that had been proven in performance, they might have had something to show for their dollars today.
Noel Weaver

Noel, as they were before my time , what was wrong performance wise? Obviously, Turbines a Fuel Hungry beasts (which is why I'm assuming the BBD Jet train got no takers), but what else was wrong with them? Did you ever drive a LRC, when they were leased out?