Posted by Doug Lilly on December 16, 2015 
It's kind of sad to hear that she may be rebuilt to something that she never was. The 972 did have a history of being lettered for other railroads, including Cumberland Valley for excursions commemorating the 150th anniversary of the CV, and for the Philadelphia & Reading for that road's sesquicentennial, but a Belpaire firebox is beyond a coat of paint.
Posted by Michael Berry on December 16, 2015 
What a bizarre, Franksteinesque creation that would be if it ever comes to pass. I certainly don't agree with it.
Posted by Mitch Goldman on December 16, 2015 
There are 9 surviving CP 4-6-0's scattered through the US and Canada, some even operable, though not sure how many represent the same class. I'm sure that was considered before any such modifications were considered. It would not be the first locomotive to re-purposed.
Posted by Raymond Kennedy on December 16, 2015 
It is an absolute DISGRACE what Strasburg did to this locomotive. George Hart devoted himself to preservation historically accurate restoration and operation of steam locomotives including 972 which I helped him acquire when I worked for the CPR. When it needed major work he sent it to Strasburg. He paid, and paid and paid. There was always more to be done. They used modern techniques to do the work to perfection rather than put it on the road and run it as the CPR did for decades and hundreds of thousands of miles. There was always something more to be done. Poor old George simply ran out of money. DISGUSTING!
Posted by Jeff Sell on December 16, 2015 
In model railroading, they call combining parts together like this 'kitbashing'. While this would be an interesting project, I agree with Mr. Lilly's comments and hope they keep #972 true to her origins as a CP locomotive.
Posted by Mitch Goldman on December 17, 2015 
Hi Raymond

Sorry to hear your frustration with the Strasburg Rail Road. I'm personally a big fan and recognize what the railroad does and does very well. My guess is that it was perceived? that many CP 4-6-0's survive, a few? run and with all the Canadian steam in the US, particularly, in PA, it was decided to "sacrifice" #972 to provide Strasburg with a nostalgic PRR looking engine. That said, it is a sad situation, of course, as they may no longer be interested in performing the work, and going back looks expensive, to say the least. Hopefully, #972 will find a future at another tourist line pulling trains - as a unique piece or back to its CP heritage. As for always needing more money - well, George seemed to prove the old adage that goes - "If you want to make a small fortune with a steam engine, start with a large fortune."


Posted by Mitch Goldman on January 2, 2016 
Spoke to the staff of the railroad and was told the more this engine was evaluated, the more work it needed - extensive work, all needed to meet code, hence the skyrocketing costs and eventual sale to Strasburg. There are 9 total CP 4-6-0 engines preserved as of 2016. Six in Canada (one of which operated as late as 2006 (CP #1057 at the South Simcoe Railway, Tottenham, ON) and the remaining three in the US. Strasburg still has long term plans to restore #972 and operate her on their line, though several engines and other priorities will come first. The complete list of survivors is listed here:

CP1095 D10h 4-6-0 Chamber Of Commerce, Kingston, ON display
CP 894 D10g 4-6-0 Doon Pioneer Village, Kitchener, ON display
CP 926 D10g 4-6-0 National Museum of Science and Technology, Ottawa, ON display
CP1057 D10h 4-6-0 South Simcoe Railway, Tottenham, ON operational
CP 492 D4g 4-6-0 Canadian Railway Museum, Delson, QC display
CP 999 D10h 4-6-0 Canadian Railway Museum, Delson, QC display
CP 453 D4g 4-6-0 NYS&W Shops (near train store), Utica, NY display
CP1098 D10h 4-6-0 Reading & Northern, Port Clinton PA stored servicable
CP 972 D10j 4-6-0 Strasburg Railroad, Strasburg, PA stored servicable


Posted by TedS on January 2, 2016 
Would the modified locomotive be able to receive a certificate for operation? I thought this quandary was part of the issue with PRR K4 1361--the original thin backhead design is considered unsafe by current standards, and the modified design is without precedent, hence it remains inoperable. Would someone please explain?
- Post a Comment -