RE: (erielack) New EL and Erie prototypes!!!!

["Paul R. Tupaczewski" <paultup_@_comcast.net>]

> Ed Montgomery wrote:  I'm grateful that they are recognizing 
> their heritage.
> 
> I would have to say that being grateful might be the 
> appropriate thing. If every historical society is criticizing 
> NS on their choice of roads as the ELHS folks are, then the 
> response on the NS side could easily be NEVER AGAIN!
> 
> The positive and constructive approach is a simple thank you.


My gripe is that THEY HAD ALREADY CHOSEN EL AND ERIE AS THEIR PAINT SCHEMES.

And then a group of DL&W fans apparently lobbied for them to change it - and
they did, to the detriment of the EL.

I also note that none of the well-known Erie fans on this list have offered
an opinion either - why should they? :)

Regardless, I have a feeling this EL vs. DL&W scheme issue is not settled
yet at NS. And I HAVE let them known my appreciation for doing this,
regardless of what their final decision is. But I'm sure going to provide
them some other details (from my point of view) why EL should be included. I
even spent a lot of my time PROVIDING ARTWORK AND DETAILS.

Maybe I'm a bit irked that all my work was usurped by a bunch of people who
didn't get what THEY wanted?

<rant off>

	- Paul


	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	http://EL-List.railfan.net/
	To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html

------------------------------