Re: Dorrigo 19th Century Treasures

["Trevor Edmonds" <trevor_edmonds@dingoblue.net.au>]

James Brook wrote...

>
> I'll take that comment back as I thought you said it. Anyway, you do
> have a small amount of resources if you take into account the size of
> your collection and the fact you rely on volunteer labour at weekends. I
> don't know of any group that has restored all of their items, and they
> have much smaller collections than you.

We do not rely entirely on weekend labour. We have people workeng every day
of the week. Of course, most of our active membership are only available on
weekends.

> > We beleive we have adequate resources to conserve what be are buying.
> >
>
> Even if you can put it all undercover, will you be able to restore most
> of your collection?

I said conserve, not restore. You are missing an important point here. Our
short term aim is to maintain the rolling stock in its current condition,
which we seem to be achieving by weatherproofing, blackoiling etc. Once it
is under cover, we will start restoration of those pieces which are needed
in the short term. Many will not be restored for many many years, but
provided we can keep them weateherproofed, they will be available for
restoration when resources become available.

> > Preservation does not make good business sense. None of us are in this
to
> > get rich.
> >
>
> Every preservation group has to at least reach the break even point at
> some stage. You can't simply rely on government funding to solve all
> your problems. If you use a certain degreee of good business sense, you
> will have a much better chance of reaching the break even point.

Our Government funding is $0, and we are not anticipating a change any time
soon. What I am saying is that we will continue to rely on our membership
for at least some of the money and much of the labour, even after we open to
the public. I am sure John Kerley would be happy to confirm Puffing Billy is
still in this position.

> >
> > Maybe you shoul have a look at our collection before you make these
> > statements.
> >
>
> When I say manage properly, I mean put most of it undercover, restore it
> and display it to the public in a way that they can properly understand
> what it is. It is very easy to simply collect items.

You are very wrong here. Lets have a look at the effort required to "simply
collect an item". Take 4602. When the 46 class were mad available for
preservation, we inspected every available locomotive to establish its
condition, completness, what modifications it had had, etc and came up with
a list of locomotives which best suited our requirements. The two which
topped the list were 4602 and 4608. After much debate over the relative
merits of these two, we settled for 4602.

We had to raise the money to purchase and transport it - a budget of (I
think) $10,000 to $12,000.

To transport it, we had to arrange for (and pay) it to be rail hauled to
Raleigh. This included mechanical work to make it fit to travel, and the
removal of the pans. The siding at Raleighis not secure, so we had to have
people on site continuously until the body had been removed.

To remove the body, all bogie connections had to be removed. Our truck and
float then went to Raleigh and were met by 2 cranes from Coffs Harbour,
which liften the body and placed it on our float. After securing, the truck
noved the body to Dorrigo and was positioned in fromt of the siding where
the loco was to be plleaced.

Our mobile crane can only lift about 20 ton, so the body had to be lifted
the hard way. Norton breakdown jacks, and a lot of sleepers and beams. Once
the body was clear of the deck of the float, and fully supported on pig
sties made up of the sleepers and beams, the float was moved out and
returned to Raleigh for the first bogie. This required another crane hire.
46 class bogies are also too heavey for our mobile rane, so this bogie has
temporarily off loaded onto a ramp, which is at the same height as the deck
of the float. The truch then returned to Raleigh for the second bogie.

This bogie was rolled off onto track suported by a pig sty of sleepers in
front of the body. We then raised the body to the height required to roll
the bogies under, and built temporary track under the loco. The first bogie
was then jacked down from the pig sty to ground level. To give you a feel of
the effort required, just jacking down one bogie took 3 people anut 5 hours
work. The bogie was then moved under the loco body, and the second bogie was
then collected from the ramp and this procedure repeated. The body was then
jacked down - by a foot at one end than a foot at the other (its a
painstaking process) until the loco was back on its bogies. After everything
was reconnected and the brakes tested, it was shunted back onto the siding.

The pans were then reinstalled, and the loco fully weatherproofed and given
a cover of light oil.

If you think this process is simple, then you should see little problem in
the rest to the work we have in front of us.

> >
> > Its a matter of to each his own. If you think we should not have
collected
> > industrial steam, then you are saying our RODs, SMR 13, Corby, Marion,
> > Badger and the rest should have been allowed to go to scrap. Is this
your
> > position?
> >
>
> My point about Dorrigo is that you are trying to be too general in your
> collection. If you were more concerned with industrial steam, then
> concentrate on items like the ROD's. If you are more concerned with
> NSWGR, then concentrate on NSWGR items.

Would you please make a definitive statemet here along the lines of: "I,
James Brook, would prefer to the following locomotives to be scrapped than
to have been preserved by Dorrigo - the RODs, SMR 13, J & A Brown 2 & 3,
Corby, Marion, Badger, the SImplex from Coffs Harbour, Helen Mary, D11".
Remember at the time we obtained these locos they were heading for scrap.

> If you collect everything you will have an unmanageable collection and
> many items will never be properly restored anyway.

We (as in my generation) might never restore some of our collections, but at
least they will be available in the future.

> A museum is only
> successful when items are at least cosmetically restored and displayed
> to the public in a way that they can fully appreciate what it is.

You should read the Powerhouse Museum's charter. Displaying the items does
not come into it as any more than an afterthought!

> > You have not seen because you have not been to Dorrigo. What do you mean
> > "claims" of earthworks? Are you calling me a liar? Go and have a look.
> >
>
> I am not calling you a liar, but I haven't heard about these earthworks
> from any other source. As it is an unsubstantiated 3rd hand piece of
> information, it is a claim as far as I'm concerned.

You cannot have this both ways. You have beleived the words of thos who have
never had a close look at our rolling stock, and have used this
"information" to form your views, yet anything I say is "unsubstantiated"
because you have not seen it for yourself. But then you refuse to go and
have a look - and I have offered you access to the site and the rolling
stock.

> If Dorrigo was closer to Sydney it would be much easier for me to take a
> look because I would probably be doing other things in the general area.

We will move the collection to Sydney for your inspection asap!!

> However, Dorrigo is located in an area of NSW that would require me to
> travel a fairly long distance just to see something that isn't even
> established yet.

You were stilled offered full access to the site and the rolling stock.

> If there was an unestablished group in an out-of-the-way location would
> you travel there just to see a collection of unrestored rolling stock?

Firstly, I this we are an established group, and secondly yes I would. Thats
how I got involved with Dorrigo in the first place. I went, I looked, I
asked, I was impressed, I joined.

> Anyway, I don't have to travel to Dorrigo to know that you haven't
> opened a museum or started operating tourist services.

I never said we had opened!! (Sorry, I realise that doesn't count because
its "an unsubstantiated 3rd hand piece of information".)

> But even some of the other items could be sacrificed to do a better job
> on the whole collection. A possible example might be this. Most of your
> diesels are still fairly common in other areas of the state.

Which ones and for how long?

> If you
> narrowed your focus onto being primarilly a steam and rolling stock
> museum, you would have a significantly smaller collection and you would
> therefore be able to do a better job of restoring the remaining items.
> You could leave the preservation of diesels to another group.

Which group?

> Every group has a huge "wouldnt it be nice to..." category. The biggest
> difference between the successful and unsuccessful groups is that the
> successful groups have been realistic

When Puffing Billy started they were told they were being unrealistic big
time! If you had been arround then, you would have been having this debate
with John Kerley about their plans.

James, I feel there is increasingly little point in this debate. Opinions
will differ, and this allows discussion, but you are refusing to believe
fact.

Trevor