Friends of the Cumbres & Toltec - FriendsOfCumbresToltec.org

While everyone is going ga-ga at the storage facility, and it *is* gonna be great when it's finished, "someone" during the off season ripped out two historic D&RGW wooden trestles just west of the Hwy 285 road crossing and replaced them with two steel culverts. This was no small feat ...requiring the removal the track, removal of the existing trestles and putting in the culverts, adding sub-roadbed fill and finally ballasting and relaying the track ...so the task wasn't something done in the dark of one night.

We discovered this while our crew, the Whistle Posts & Mile Marker gang, was working on the section of track from Antonito out to Hangman's trestle. What's left of the old trestles is piled in a heap on the side of the ROW. We looked over the debris and the wood was pretty well rotted in a lot of places and what we saw was pretty scary. These two trestles were often exposed to standing or flowing water which probably explains the rotted condition. I have submitted e-mails to the Railroad Commission, the Friends Chairman Craig McMullen and Friends President Tim Tennet. So far nobody seems to know what happened or why, if the trestles needed replacing for safety reasons, they weren't either rebuilt to replicate the originals.

I mean we are supposed to retain the historic fabric of the railroad are we not? And how does something like this bode for our status in becoming an historical landmark?

Thanks for posting this, Mike. Please let us know what you find out.

Mike, there is a standard applied as to when a “historic” trestle may be replaced with a culvert. That standard is predicated on the length of the original structure (and I'm sure, other considerations.)
Here I’m working from memory so the actual length might very well be different but at least for the sake of illustration it’ll work; if the original structure is less than 10 feet replacing it with a culvert would be okay. Anything 10 feet or longer would have to rebuilt according to the original construction. Hope this helps.

Mea culpa. I have been 'gently' advised that my information is incorrect as the points I refered to do not apply to this situation. They were originaly given to me as an interpretation of a part of the FRA regulations.

The old bridge in 2006



The new culvert 2012

Thanks for the before and after photo Jim, do you remember how long the origional wooden bridge was?

The changes happen incrementally.

If we were to come back 200 years from now, the C&TSRR will be operating "historical" high-speed nuclear fusion powered maglev trains between Chama and Antonito.
At least they will be using a synthesized steam whistle for realism. The docents will be androids and can answer any possible question about the railroad.

Greg

Greg Raven wrote:The changes happen incrementally.

If we were to come back 200 years from now, the C&TSRR will be operating "historical" high-speed nuclear fusion powered maglev trains between Chama and Antonito.
At least they will be using a synthesized steam whistle for realism. The docents will be androids and can answer any possible question about the railroad.

Greg

Agreed ...about changes happening incrementally.

But the rest of your statement, if we are to be concerned with historic *preservation* ...and do it right ...then if I could come back 200 years from now I would expect to see pretty much what I'm seeing today. They might even have the 463 up and running ......

Mike

To John Cole's question - In short:

Bridge 281.25 is 10 feet long and 2 ft high
Bridge 281.26 is 14 feet long and 3 ft high

But I have two drawings from the 1974 Bridge Inspection Report for the Cumbres and Toltec Scenic Railroad. All the bridges are listed in the 20 page report.

Mike Mahoney wrote:
But the rest of your statement, if we are to be concerned with historic *preservation* ...and do it right ...then if I could come back 200 years from now I would expect to see pretty much what I'm seeing today. They might even have the 463 up and running ......
Mike

Ouch!

With 3-dimensional printing it will be possible to make all the parts and assemble a totally new replica locomotive in a matter of days.
First, the locomotive will have to be completely disassembled and scanned. The parts will have to be sampled to determine their metallurgical make-up.
At that point the machine is essentially 100% preserved in the form of a computer database. As many copies as required can be easily manufactured.

Greg

Greg, It would really be cool to see 3D files that were produced from a scan of something as large and complex as 463. I haven't read up on 3D printers in several years. How large a part can they now work with/produce?

They might even have the 463 up and running ......

That was an "ouch" but hey that's alright guys you can joke about it.......the 463 will be completed and then we can all look at it in the rear view mirror. I just take it a little more personal at times.

Rich Murray wrote:Greg, It would really be cool to see 3D files that were produced from a scan of something as large and complex as 463. I haven't read up on 3D printers in several years. How large a part can they now work with/produce?

I'm not sure how big the parts can be. You can own your own 3d printer though!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmkQCUJNooA&feature=plcp

Here's a method for printing in metal:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6Px6RSL ... re=related

Regards,
Greg

Here's a video which shows the scanning and printing process:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQ-aWFYT ... re=related

Greg