Theoretically speaking, if I was an entrepreneuring billionaire and I wanted to bring back one of the great American passenger trains (Super Chief, California Zephyr, Panama Limited, Empire Builder, City of Los Angeles/San Francisco, 20th Century Limited, Broadway Limited, Powhatan Arrow, Coast Daylight, etc.) to run on a regular basis (let's put it at at least two times a month for a start), which option would be more feasible from an economic/technical/legal perspective?1. Acquire all of the surviving rolling stock (sleepers, dining cars, dome/observation cars, baggage cars, etc.) from the original consist from private owners, heritage railways, and museums, as well as matching surviving locomotives (can be from ones different railroads since thousands of functionally and aesthetically identical EMD F and E units were sold to all Class I railroads). Renovate them as necessary to make them FRA-compliant, obtain waivers wherever possible. Put them into service as a part-luxury train, part-mobile museum.2. Commission the construction of a replica consist. Building entirely new streamlined cars from scratch, designed to match the internal and external appearance of its original as much as possible, with changes only being made when it's literally required to make the car FRA-compliant/modern user friendly (updated wiring, HEP, power outlets at seats, WiFi support, replacing wooden paneling with MDF paneling etc.). Motive power consists of custom-built Siemens Chargers designed to resemble the original E and F units (streamlining, bulldog noses, matching paint schemes, etc.) as much as legally possible.1/2
>>2011902Cont.I figure both options have their pros and consOption 1 Pros:>using extant equipment is considerably cheaper>can be as a mobile museum of sorts and generate additional income with tours when the train isn't running>foamers will collectively cream their pantsOption 1 Cons:>most of the equipment is close to 80 years old and thus be more prone to mechanical problems>acquiring complete consists will be difficult since it will have to be bought off multiple owners and be in greatly varying states of disrepair>only a limited number of consists you can really assemble (one, maybe two at the most)>lack of spare partsOption 2 Pros:>building new equipment makes me the sole owner>can build as many consists as I can afford (preferably at least 5 or 6, that way you have multiple spares available at any given time)>guaranteed to have a multi-decade service lifeOption 2 Cons:>exponentially more expensive>will likely take years to finish>even the most minor differences from the original that were made purely for legal reasons will make foamers seethe uncontrollablyThoughts?2/2
>>2011903>Thoughts?Mix the ideas. Acquire the genuine when practical and run on a museum track, but for larger deployments you'll need something new (it'd better comply with modern safety requirements for starters). If you're doing a look that's been out of manufacture for decades, it will either be free or fairly cheap to acquire the rights.You could even have the occasional run of the original trains on something close to an original route for true foamer heaven, but don't let that interfere with running the rest of the business. Euro railways occasionally do this, and they're very very popular tourist attractions when they run.
>>2011989Interesting idea. Run an original consist at once or twice a year at double the price.Only problem would be the hassle of acquiring it from museums and then presumably returning them for the rest of the year.
>>2011902>Siemens Chargers designed to resemble the original E and F unitsWouldn't have compromise a lot the locomotive's safety features?
>>2011902EMD E and F units may be iconic, but they're among the ugliest locomotives ever produced
>>2013977u blind lil niga?
>>2011902>>2011903Mildly autistic foamer here. Opt. 1 of course as I want to cream my pants regularly.The cons of Opt.1 are manageable if you have a good machine workshop that can build custom spare parts, similar to restoring old automobiles.>But that's expensiveIn Opt. 2 you want to strongly modify new equipment in order to resemble the original which would require a ton of custom made parts (= will be expensive to build and replace). So "expensive" isn't really an argument.Opt. 2 is not viable also for other reasons: new locos have quiet EPA tier MCLXVII engines so even with heavy modification you would get only a tranny locomotive - looks fine but sounds shit. Something like when owners of an EV install the sound of a supercharged '69 Dodge to the rear speakers in order to emulate a real car in vice versa.Then there's the looks - modern equipment with all the strength requirements and crumple zones etc. could probably not be modified to 100% resemblance of the old stock. Again, you would build a tranny, wannabe the real thing but is only a artificial copy.Therefore my foamer opinion is that Opt. 2 is only viable if you do it like the Japs: a new, modern, luxury train. For having the real deal, Opt. 1 is the only way.
>>2011902Their are 5-7 E9 around the country in various states of disrepair - 3 at larrys electric truck scrap in ohio still in BN, green 2 were at the national rail shops in east Illinois in metra blues as of 2017, one in Chicago that is confused by youtubers as being 9912 and 9912 might be in a museum in Tennessee.Some possible Super Chief cars were for sale in Texas still with early amtrak interiors, midwest heritage rail acquired and are rebuilding union and southern pacific passenger cars. Plenty of other weird projects can get funded why not this? If the bank says no just start a new, shitcoin/nft/crowd source.
>>2015381Well never mind on the blue metra e8s already cut up, apparently they wanted $100,000 for them each more than double scrap value.The ohio ones are still therehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JqnCt29NR8
>>2015181>looks fine but sounds shit.Less than 1000 people in the country would care
>>2015181>new locos have quiet EPA tier MCLXVII engines so even with heavy modification you would get only a tranny locomotive - looks fine but sounds shit.The most audible thing about a train is its horn, so long as you had a replica of an original E-unit horn, most people wouldn't really be able to tell the difference.
>>2011902Honestly op 2 is basically what's happening with the PRR T1 Trust
>>2015967I don't think they're planning on resurrecting the Broadway Limited for the T1 project (as much as they should, plenty of retards richer than me would definitely shelf out 10k over an overnighter excursion on a T-1).One of the big issues I've had with the T1 as a whole is what the fuck that are they actually gonna do with the locomotive once it's actually completed. It's a little too big for use on most heritage railways. Definitely can't be pushed to its full potential unless it's running on mainlines that are crowded with Amtrak, Metra, MTA, and CSX trains.
>>2013977Disagree; as a Brit kiddo E and F's were wrapped up in my "idea" of the US and Canada, were beautiful to me then and still are.
>>2016991I thought they were going to run it on the high speed test track in AZ to set a new steam speed record.
>>2017102I meant once it enters revenue/excursion service, not a one-time test for bragging rights. Obviously fans of the T1 are gonna want to ride it when it's going the full 100 mph but there's very few places where you can realistically do that, especially with a locomotive of that size, and most certainly not on heritage railroads. Hell, the Acela Express only goes at its full speed on a single stretch of track from New York to Philadelphia.
>>2017437It would be limited to class 1 and 2 lines that allow for excursion services.It does happen norfolk and western 611 is not that much smaller and does just that, so did atsf 3751. But those trips are not always for the average person tickets are mostly high dollar fundraisers.But a railroad should have really come forward by now as a sponsor or partner.While they have no excursion service yet rail heritage of midwest has a dd40x running doing yard trip on occasion and are working on rebuilding a 4-6-6-4 and 2-10-2 all are comparable size and weight.
>>2013399>Siemens Chargers designed to resemble the original E and F unitsBro just buy a real one a 645 or 567 will outlast a cummins shitblock several times over.
>>2016991UP loves hosting steam excursions
