I heard there was a camelback locomotive surviving. I knew that 565 was at steamtown and sort of assumed if another Lackawanna locomotive survived it would be there as well. Can anyone provide more information?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
There is a DL&W steam locomotive, or what remains of it, at the Museum of Transport, in the St Louis area. A "group" has been trying to get the locomotive, whatever kind it is, returned to, say SteamTown, for restoration & display.
Her number is 952
Attachments
Images (1)
I wonder why it isn't in Steamtown. Besides the factor of money. Seems like a pretty good place for the engine.
RaritanRiverRailroadFan4 posted:I wonder why it isn't in Steamtown. Besides the factor of money. Seems like a pretty good place for the engine.
You might try a Google search for Lackawanna #952.
A few photos here too: http://www.rgusrail.com/moslmtsheds.html#dlw944952
Two different entities lay claim to its ownership. As I recall it went to court a few years ago and remains in St. Louis.
RaritanRiverRailroadFan4 posted:I wonder why it isn't in Steamtown.
The same reason the St Louis museum also has the only SP GS-6, a Milwaukee No-polar electric locomotive and a very rare NYC steam locomotive:
They cared about saving stuff when few others did, at least to the degree where they stepped up and saved stuff to build one of the most comprehensive collections in the country.
p51 posted:RaritanRiverRailroadFan4 posted:I wonder why it isn't in Steamtown.
The same reason the St Louis museum also has the only SP GS-6, a Milwaukee No-polar electric locomotive and a very rare NYC steam locomotive:
They cared about saving stuff when few others did, at least to the degree where they stepped up and saved stuff to build one of the most comprehensive collections in the country.
Actually, I believe that the engine was on loan from a Northeastern Pennsylvania railfan group, who had no place to properly display her at the time of acquisition. Although there was an agreement in place, St. Louis refused to give her up when the owners tried to retrieve her for display at SNHS. You would have to read some of the court docs to get the whole story but that's what I recall.
So it sounds like St. Louis basically said no to a deal that was already made and kept the engine there. Isn't that illegal? Of course if it wasn't a legal binding agreement with documents and all that then at the least it's unethical.
RaritanRiverRailroadFan4 posted:So it sounds like St. Louis basically said no to a deal that was already made and kept the engine there. Isn't that illegal? Of course if it wasn't a legal binding agreement with documents and all that then at the least it's unethical.
In today's world if you have enough money anything is legal. If this is interesting you should research how how 1218 ended up back in Roanoke from Nelson Blount's original Steamtown collection.
conrail5065 posted:RaritanRiverRailroadFan4 posted:So it sounds like St. Louis basically said no to a deal that was already made and kept the engine there. Isn't that illegal? Of course if it wasn't a legal binding agreement with documents and all that then at the least it's unethical.
In today's world if you have enough money anything is legal. If this is interesting you should research how how 1218 ended up back in Roanoke from Nelson Blount's original Steamtown collection.
Now I am not saying it didn't work out for the betterment of 1218.
I remember this story. St. Louis basically told the other group to go pound sand, it wasn't leaving.
The R&LHS was gifted the locomotive in 1939 with the concession that they could not sell it or give it away. It went to the MOT in 1952 on long term loan with conditions attached. Around 1995, the group tried to terminate the loan and retrieve the engine but were told that the museum would not give it up. This started some back and forth discussion as the R&LHS tried to figure out exactly how to handle the situation.
In 1999 the R&LHS transferred ownership to it's Lackawanna chapter, who wanted to take legal action to get the engine back. The case went to court with the Judge deciding that the group lost ownership on a technicality, that they should have filed suit within five years of MOT's first refusal to honor the agreement.
I do not know who the main drivers were behind this but there was a lot of talk of these gentlemen proposing to even purchase another loco and exchange it for the 952 but the MOT wouldn't budge. At one point the plan was to restore the station at the Delaware Water Gap and one of the backers was to cover the cost of operational restoration on the loco, independent of anything that SNHS was doing.
I would have to look it up but I believe the group went as far as they could legally and finally appealed to the Supreme Court, who refused to hear the case and that's where it died. If I am wrong on this please correct me but that's what's coming to mind.
As a side effect of all of this, the 952 did receive cosmetic restoration and was brought under roof, so at least she was saved for future generations, although the MOT's future is currently in flux. Who knows, maybe a deal can be made but I have no idea if those who paid for what must have been an obscene legal bill still have any interest at this point in time.
I did see one at the Strasburg years ago but don't remember who, what, when.
Montclaire posted:The R&LHS was gifted the locomotive in 1939 with the concession that they could not sell it or give it away. It went to the MOT in 1952 on long term loan with conditions attached. Around 1995, the group tried to terminate the loan and retrieve the engine but were told that the museum would not give it up. This started some back and forth discussion as the R&LHS tried to figure out exactly how to handle the situation.
In 1999 the R&LHS transferred ownership to it's Lackawanna chapter, who wanted to take legal action to get the engine back. The case went to court with the Judge deciding that the group lost ownership on a technicality, that they should have filed suit within five years of MOT's first refusal to honor the agreement.
Oh yeah, I had forgotten all about that, but now that I read this, I remember it now.
Possession is indeed 9/10 of the law and 'long term' loans is a clever way to saying you GAVE it to them, for the most part. Even if they'd said yes, would the other group been able to get the locomotive moved? We all know what a nightmare that is, to have something that big moved any distance.
I know of a guy who loaned a small non-RR-related item to a museum (won't go into the particulars as I have a very strong opinion on this) and had very good documentation to back up that he only had to give them 30 days notice that he was coming to pick it up (it was something a man could pick up and walk off with). One day he wanted it back, did everything right by sending notice via certified mail. They never responded. With signed receipt in hand, he showed up on the appointed day and was literally thrown out by security guards. He called the cops who wouldn't do anything.
Lawyers were retained on both sides, and he prevailed in court (even being awarded his legal fees).
He came back with his lawyer and they wereboth thrown out and the legal fees were never paid in spite of a court order. Every time, he dealt with someone who claimed not to have a clue about what was going on, so he wasn't getting it back without word from higher. Word that never came, of course.
They didn't count on his brother being a Federal Marshall, though. the final chapter got very ugly, with hands resting on pistols in holsters and handcuffs being pulled out, ready for use. He had to lawyer up again to get his legal fees awarded and was awarded the second legal fees, too. You can't bring up the guy's name in that museum to this day.
All because he wanted his loaned item back.
I have a few military items I've been asked to loan museums over the years. I've told them all to pound sand for this reason.
It should also be noted that 952 languished for years outdoors, and the MOT only showed interest and care once the R&LHS started asking to get their equipment back.
The amazing thing is that this was not between two private individuals or based on a hand shake. There was a legitimate agreement in place between an organized group and a government run facility. One just decided that they would not comply, and the other got caught in a technicality because, as reasonable people, they looked at litigation against a rail museum as a last resort.
The court case is sickening. I suspect there is a "missing piece". Other things being equal the engine should have been returned. I believe if there had been an appeal to a higher court the ruling would have been reversed, but that would have cost a lot of money.
It was appealed and was unsuccessful. There was even legislation passed in PA and NJ demanding its return which the MOT ignored. The R&LHS owns the engine but the MOT has the right to keep it.
The lesson that everyone should take from this is do not use a museum as a closet. If you want something, keep it. If you ask someone to take care of it, consider it no longer yours. We all know of friendships that are ended over "loaned" items such as ladders and power tools. This story is the same; just on a much larger scale.
p51 posted:Montclaire posted:The R&LHS was gifted the locomotive in 1939 with the concession that they could not sell it or give it away. It went to the MOT in 1952 on long term loan with conditions attached. Around 1995, the group tried to terminate the loan and retrieve the engine but were told that the museum would not give it up. This started some back and forth discussion as the R&LHS tried to figure out exactly how to handle the situation.
In 1999 the R&LHS transferred ownership to it's Lackawanna chapter, who wanted to take legal action to get the engine back. The case went to court with the Judge deciding that the group lost ownership on a technicality, that they should have filed suit within five years of MOT's first refusal to honor the agreement.
Oh yeah, I had forgotten all about that, but now that I read this, I remember it now.
Possession is indeed 9/10 of the law and 'long term' loans is a clever way to saying you GAVE it to them, for the most part. Even if they'd said yes, would the other group been able to get the locomotive moved? We all know what a nightmare that is, to have something that big moved any distance.
I know of a guy who loaned a small non-RR-related item to a museum (won't go into the particulars as I have a very strong opinion on this) and had very good documentation to back up that he only had to give them 30 days notice that he was coming to pick it up (it was something a man could pick up and walk off with). One day he wanted it back, did everything right by sending notice via certified mail. They never responded. With signed receipt in hand, he showed up on the appointed day and was literally thrown out by security guards. He called the cops who wouldn't do anything.
Lawyers were retained on both sides, and he prevailed in court (even being awarded his legal fees).
He came back with his lawyer and they wereboth thrown out and the legal fees were never paid in spite of a court order. Every time, he dealt with someone who claimed not to have a clue about what was going on, so he wasn't getting it back without word from higher. Word that never came, of course.
They didn't count on his brother being a Federal Marshall, though. the final chapter got very ugly, with hands resting on pistols in holsters and handcuffs being pulled out, ready for use. He had to lawyer up again to get his legal fees awarded and was awarded the second legal fees, too. You can't bring up the guy's name in that museum to this day.
All because he wanted his loaned item back.
I have a few military items I've been asked to loan museums over the years. I've told them all to pound sand for this reason.
And that's exactly why I won't donate anything to a museum. The museum at JB ripped me off, and the item is long gone.
Tim O'Malley posted:The lesson that everyone should take from this is do not use a museum as a closet. If you want something, keep it. If you ask someone to take care of it, consider it no longer yours.
I agree fully with this.
Imagine the response to this: "Thanks for keeping this massive chunk of inert metal in one place, keeping it clean and safe and repainting it every now and then. Now, open the gates because I'm taking it home with me..."
I have always wondered if the R&LHS even had the capability to have the locomotive moved somewhere even if the MoT had agreed. They'd have needed flats, huge cranes and all the expensive stuff that comes with moving something that big and heavy.
My understanding was that an anonymous individual had a specific tie to that particular engine and deep pockets to match, so take it with a grain of salt but I don't think they would have pursued it so heavily if the funds were not in place to get it moved.
Montclaire posted:My understanding was that an anonymous individual had a specific tie to that particular engine and deep pockets to match, so take it with a grain of salt but I don't think they would have pursued it so heavily if the funds were not in place to get it moved.
You could be right but I wouldn't be shocked if there was no means to move it at all.
I'm reminded of a similar case many years ago where someone was wanting to have their (multi-engine) antique airplane out of the museum where it'd been on longterm loan. The museum representative asked the owner how he planned on taking the plane apart and moving it out so as not to harm the museum building and property. The owner just stared at the museum guy with a blank expression and said, "Uh, you don't do that for me?"
p51 posted:RaritanRiverRailroadFan4 posted:I wonder why it isn't in Steamtown.
The same reason the St Louis museum also has the only SP GS-6, a Milwaukee No-polar electric locomotive and a very rare NYC steam locomotive:
They cared about saving stuff when few others did, at least to the degree where they stepped up and saved stuff to build one of the most comprehensive collections in the country.
I hear much of the equipment is basically rotting away due to outside storage and no upkeep for decades.
Kerrigan posted:I hear much of the equipment is basically rotting away due to outside storage and no upkeep for decades.
I've been there twice (though not in recent years) and though not everything is restored to pristine condition, it didn't look any worse than any other RR museum I've ever seen. Sure, there was a line of stuff that didn't look that great but what museum doesn't have that?
Besides, anything is better turning locomotives into razor blades.
I believe this is the story that you are looking for: http://thetimes-tribune.com/ne...otive-fight-1.831549 While the result may be disappointing, it does sound like the court made the correct ruling. I regularly tell clients that "law" and "justice" are not the same thing, and if you are going to wait around in hopes the other side will do the right thing, you are likely to be disappointed.
I also think Tim has given some very good advice.
So the R&LHS owns 952 and yet they can't retrieve it so it would go to a better place alongside 565? That's a shame.
RaritanRiverRailroadFan4 posted:So the R&LHS owns 952 and yet they can't retrieve it so it would go to a better place alongside 565? That's a shame.
Just goes to show when loaning something to a museum you can't care for or don't have room for, to:
- Have the means to go get it if you think things aren't working out
- Check that fine print!
