HEADS UP: Heritage Units on NS Southern Tier

Respectfully, Leo, I disagree. Many of the problems you cite also affected the other Conrail predecessors, as well as Penn Central. The key differentiator at Penn Central was the devious Sanders management team, which funneled PC's revenue into a variety of business endeavors but put very little money back into the physical plant itself. Penn Central was also paying dividends at the same time it was getting loans to float its operations. Those were factors that made Penn Central the Enron of its era. Celebrate fiscal malfeasance? I think not!

This shouldn't be construed as a shot against Penn Central's employees. I'm sure most of them worked just as hard as the employees on other RRs at the time. That being said, Penn Central's notorious business practices will overshadow anything else we remember about that railroad.

I don't disagree with you. But I still think there is a legitimate argument to be made for why it would be worth representing that piece of their heritage in a program like this.

Either way, at least we get a nicer looking locomotive than we would've if one of these slots had been taken by a Penn Central scheme. As a railfan, I can hardly complain about that.

While I certainly agree that PC was a major fail, I too feel it should be recognized. I am hoping that NS will continue the heritage program and follow up with a PC and EL engine further down the line.

How one views history is relative, I suppose. IIRC Matt, you are younger and perhaps never saw an actual PC train? Like them or hate them, they were omni present on the scene of NE railroading in the 70's and as such, IMO, deserve to be recognized. Perhaps your vision is tainted by studying railroad history, mine is based on rememberances of what I witnessed on the rails, someone else may be influenced by another factor. As distasteful as it may sound, my memory of visiting Horseshoe Curve is defined by watching Penn Central locos work their hearts out. Now it is NS engines doing the same. The PC line through PA is a major part of NS heritage... how can it be ignored?

I for one can't stomach the sight of a Conrail locomotive and avoided railfanning for more than a decade out of spite for them yet I understand the need to represent them in NS history. Personal opinion means nothing... factual heritage is all that matters. I only wish they had postponed that scheme as well.

I am amazed and delighted that a company that has traditionally been very unsentimental about the rail industry and cool toward railfans has come out with this program!

Its funny how people feel so differently about the same railroad..
I was indifferent to PC, but loved Conrail!
because PC had little impact on my railfanning, except to see a few remaining PC black locos in the early 80's..
but Conrail is one of my all-time favorite railroads, simply because it was the railroad in my hometown when I began
railfanning as a teenager in the early-80's..Growing up in Waverly, NY and Sayre, PA, I knew of the LV and EL, but I missed out
on them..I was 7 years old in 1976..Conrail was the game in town when I was a teenage railfan..

Personally I think NS should have *definately* included a PC unit in the heritage program..no question about it..
the "why" of how PC failed is, IMO, irrelevant..the heritage program is about history, and "the predecessor railroads that made NS what it is today"..
how can PC not be included in that list?
NYC failed, PRR failed, LV failed, DL&W failed, Erie failed, PC failed..whats the difference?
and all those failures led to half of what NS is today..
business practices aside, PC was a huge part of NS's heritage..they should have definately had a spot in the lineup IMO..
PC is MUCH more relevant, from an "overall history of NS" standpoint, than CNJ, LV, DL&W, Erie, "original Norfolk Southern"..etc..

PC definately deserved a spot..

Scot

Who knows why they didn't include PC, but AFAIK, it was originally in the plans and then dropped last minute!! I could careless, but I can understand some of the sentimentality for it since I wanted to see a Erie Lackawanna unit, and that got dropped as well in favor of DL&W... Yes, DL&W and EL had the same passenger schemes, but it would have been nice to see a EL diamond, just as some would have liked to see the PC worms!

For now, let us just be thankful NS is even doing this to begin with!!

Leo_Ames wrote:I suspect they couldn't get permission to use the name from the corporate remains of Penn Central (American Premier Underwriters), rather than being dropped due to unpleasant memories or due to a simple black paintscheme

If I were a betting man, this would be my pick for the reason to drop the PC unit. I knew there was something left of Penn Central out there. Its name was changed to American Premier Underwriters, and they were bought out by another company. The Penn Central name existed into the 90's. (see link) NS may not have the rights to use the name.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_P ... derwriters

American Premier Underwriters (I believe now a part of American Financial Group) still own the rights to the name. As I recall, the Penn Central Historical Society is utilizing the name via permission from them so it hasn't reverted to the public domain or been inherited by a rail company like Norfolk Southern.

Although when that nut tried to copyright the Pennsylvania Railroad name and trademark the Keystone logo to extort money from the railroad press and model manufacturers a few years ago, they came out and said they still owned the rights to the Penn Central name and its various predecessors. Yet lines like the New York Central are represented here while Penn Central isn't. So I don't know.

Hopefully something like Trains Magazine will do a nice story and get some inside information about this after these start hitting the rails. Would be interesting knowing just what lines were considered, the selection process, the various issues they had to work around, and how this entire plan came to be in the first place.

According to someone at the Kalmbach Publishing forums, a Penn Central unit has been re-added to the roster for a total now of 19 units. He also linked a shot showing the Conrail unit after leaving the paintshop, so I imagine he's a reliable source since I assume he's an employee.

Here is Conrail ES44AC 8098 painted in regular Conrail colors. No Conrail Quality or white face in sight.

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=2945994

Windseeker1 wrote:While I certainly agree that PC was a major fail, I too feel it should be recognized. I am hoping that NS will continue the heritage program and follow up with a PC and EL engine further down the line.

How one views history is relative, I suppose. IIRC Matt, you are younger and perhaps never saw an actual PC train? Like them or hate them, they were omni present on the scene of NE railroading in the 70's and as such, IMO, deserve to be recognized. Perhaps your vision is tainted by studying railroad history, mine is based on rememberances of what I witnessed on the rails, someone else may be influenced by another factor. As distasteful as it may sound, my memory of visiting Horseshoe Curve is defined by watching Penn Central locos work their hearts out. Now it is NS engines doing the same. The PC line through PA is a major part of NS heritage... how can it be ignored?

I for one can't stomach the sight of a Conrail locomotive and avoided railfanning for more than a decade out of spite for them yet I understand the need to represent them in NS history. Personal opinion means nothing... factual heritage is all that matters. I only wish they had postponed that scheme as well.

I am amazed and delighted that a company that has traditionally been very unsentimental about the rail industry and cool toward railfans has come out with this program!

Tainted? I prefer the term informed when it comes to RR history. While both EL and PC failed, EL fixed its management problems early on. Bill White and Greg Maxwell are remembered well for keeping EL afloat in a very difficult era. They contrast strongly with Sanders' green team at PC, which was eseentailly committing fraud. A railroad is more than just its routes- there are also people in the equation. Sanders was the Ken Lay of the late '60s/early '70s. That does matter, IMO. And speaking of people, EL was the only CR predecessor which didn't ask the ICC for permission to completel cease operations. As note by one observer, EL didn't know the meaning of the word quit.

And yes, I did see PC in my early years. The I lived in Elmira until May of 1976, so I saw PC freight action occasionally on ther Elmira Branch. I also saw PC trains on the Corning Branch a few times. However, PC was not one of my Big 5- the RRs which made me a railffan: EL, LV, the B&H, the LA&L and the Strasburg RR. I can certainly understand your love of the Horseshore Curve- it was and is an impressive location. However, Pennsy rather than Penn Central made the Horseshore Curve. Therefore, Pennsy is the history we should celebrate.

That being said, I hope that NS will consider adding an EL heritage unit, since they're going to have a PC heritage unit. Diamonds trump mating worms, as far as I'm concerned.

Matt Langworthy wrote:
Tainted? I prefer the term informed when it comes to RR history. While both EL and PC failed, EL fixed its management problems early on. Bill White and Greg Maxwell are remembered well for keeping EL afloat in a very difficult era. They contrast strongly with Sanders' green team at PC, which was eseentailly committing fraud. A railroad is more than just its routes- there are also people in the equation. Sanders was the Ken Lay of the late '60s/early '70s. That does matter, IMO. And speaking of people, EL was the only CR predecessor which didn't ask the ICC for permission to completel cease operations. As note by one observer, EL didn't know the meaning of the word quit.

And yes, I did see PC in my early years. The I lived in Elmira until May of 1976, so I saw PC freight action occasionally on ther Elmira Branch. I also saw PC trains on the Corning Branch a few times. However, PC was not one of my Big 5- the RRs which made me a railffan: EL, LV, the B&H, the LA&L and the Strasburg RR. I can certainly understand your love of the Horseshore Curve- it was and is an impressive location. However, Pennsy rather than Penn Central made the Horseshore Curve. Therefore, Pennsy is the history we should celebrate.

That being said, I hope that NS will consider adding an EL heritage unit, since they're going to have a PC heritage unit. Diamonds trump mating worms, as far as I'm concerned.

Amen Matt!!

Very well stated on all accounts!!!
Unfortunately, I have this unsettling feeling NS won't do a Erie Lackawanna Heritage unit, but it is always nice to think someone else might someday!!

Check out this view of the 8098 in CR livery: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.p ... 356&nseq=4

Well put Matt.

As far as I'm concerned, our views parallel on the PC. After reading
The Wreck of the Penn Central and The Men Who Loved Trains,
I couldn't believe who brazen and inept Penn Central was managed. Of course,
it's subjective, but who knows who things would have shaken out if Penn Central
didn't go down the way they did. All the other roads were a lot smaller.

Charlie

I imagine this program has a far larger purpose than just to honor past management of Norfolk Southern predecessors. So I don't see what any flaws with PC management has to do with why it shouldn't of been represented.

Penn Central is a recent and major part of their heritage and one of the biggest components that eventually made up the current NS system. Representing it made sense.

And the Erie Lackawanna is essentially represented here. The Erie and Lackawanna names both are repesented as is the paint scheme that the Erie Lackawanna eventually adopted and is now best remembered for. I imagine they felt like that was an adequate nod to that portion of their heritage (Not that I wouldn't love to see a EL unit added, just taking a guess at how their thinking went).

Leo_Ames wrote:I don't see what any flaws with PC management has to do with why it shouldn't of been represented.

Penn Central is a recent and major part of their heritage and one of the biggest components that eventually made up the current NS system. Representing it made sense.

What Leo said!
You misunderstood me, Matt. I am not a PC advocate, I am an EL fan, an ELHS member and grandson of an Erie/EL man. Nor is Horseshoe Curve a near and dear location to me. All I meant is that while Pennsy built it, PC did own and operate it for a time in history, and now it belongs to NS. You can't dismiss history due to distaste for management.
As mentioned, I despised CR, whose early management was dominated by PC leftovers. I didn't like CR...early or late.. in large part due to their "scorched earth" policies... but I don't begrudge them a heritage loco.
I don't like it, but I don't begrudge it!!
And I don't begrudge a man his opinion either.

Leo_Ames wrote:I imagine this program has a far larger purpose than just to honor past management of Norfolk Southern predecessors. So I don't see what any flaws with PC management has to do with why it shouldn't of been represented.

Of course, a RR is more than just management... but in the case of Penn Central, it played a pivotal role in the RR's downfall. It's a piece of RR history better left uncelebrated, IMO. Thank goodness the Finger Lakes Railway has the good sense to realize this.

Leo_Ames wrote:And the Erie Lackawanna is essentially represented here. The Erie and Lackawanna names both are repesented as is the paint scheme that the Erie Lackawanna eventually adopted and is now best remembered for. I imagine they felt like that was an adequate nod to that portion of their heritage (Not that I wouldn't love to see a EL unit added, just taking a guess at how their thinking went).

By the same token, NS's Pennsy unit and New York Central unit could represent the territories that came to make up Penn Central.


P.S. I apologize for my atrocious typing in my previous post in this thread.