It is currently Sun Jun 17, 2018 11:49 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: D&RGW K-28s
PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:54 pm 

If someone is familiar with D&RGW history ca. 1945 please contact me. I have some questions regarding the K-28s that went to Alaska.

mike211@yknet.ca


  
 
 Post subject: Re: D&RGW K-28s
PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:44 pm 

Maybe this site will answer your questions
http://www.heavenr.com/railroad/boerries.html

> If someone is familiar with D&RGW
> history ca. 1945 please contact me. I have
> some questions regarding the K-28s that went
> to Alaska.


Lost D&RGW engines


  
 
 Post subject: Re: D&RGW K-28s
PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2004 11:04 pm 

> Maybe this site will answer your questions
>
> http://www.heavenr.com/railroad/boerries.html

That site is fraught with errors and the website owner, Mr. Heavenr, refuses to discuss the facts.

I'm looking for someone who actually knows documented D&RGW history not fanciful conjecture.

mike211@yknet.ca


  
 
 Post subject: Re: D&RGW K-28s *PIC*
PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2004 2:12 am 

Ask me a specific question here, and I will give you a specific answer. I have a pretty good library of D&RGW and connections with those who have more. BTW what errors did you find with the website?

[img]http://www.ghostdepot.com/rg/images/rolling/locomotive/474%20locomotive%20gunnison%201940%[/img]


  
 
 Post subject: Re: D&RGW K-28s *PIC*
PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2004 2:15 am 

Ask me a specific question here, and I will give you a specific answer. I have a pretty good library of D&RGW and connections with those who have more. BTW what errors did you find with the website?

Image


  
 
 Post subject: Re: D&RGW K-28s
PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2004 3:04 am 

> Ask me a specific question here, and I will
> give you a specific answer. I have a pretty
> good library of D&RGW and connections
> with those who have more.

What was the D&RGW doing in 1945 and did they need more NG locos at that time?

Is there any documented evidence that the K-28s were offered back to the D&RGW after the war?

Likewise any documented evidence that they were 'worn out' as rumoured?

> BTW what errors
> did you find with the website?

Heavener states: "In the Yukon, storm after storm came pounding out of the North Pacific, dumping tons of snow in the upper British Columbia mountains, and more devastatingly, pouring massive rains on Skagway and in the Yukon Territory. Roads turned to unfathomable mud holes. Work ground to a halt and arctic mosquitoes proliferated."

He obviously knows nothing of winter in Skagway or the Yukon, it snows when the temperature is below freezing and the winters 42-43-44 were some of the harshest on record. "arctic mosquitoes" in the winter? yeah right. Locomotive 195 has been sitting in Skagway as a static display since 1965 and it has not rusted away or become covered with mold. A couple of years ago they removed the asbestos boiler lagging because of the environmental hazard, and the recent pictures show that the boiler did not rust away over the years of exposure to rain and snow in Skagway. It's quite unlikely that the K-28s rotted out in a couple of years like he claims. Plus there is no documented proof of his claims. The two 1920 ex SVRy Mikes were worked just as hard and exposed to even more of the same weather and one is now operating on the SVRy and the other is being restored.

"And all the Army's the extra locomotives, left uncovered for lack of adequate facilities during the WP&YR's too-rapid build-up, began succumbing to rust and northwest mold. It filled the boiler lagging, got into the cylinder packing, and invaded the lubricating systems of the seven K-28s."

Complete conjecture, he has no proof of this extraordinary claim. They didn't keep all the other locomotives under cover and leave only the K-28s exposed.

I've seen pictures of them at Auburn in 1945 and the rust and mold just isn't there. They look just as good as the picture you posted. They were not rusting, they were working.

" Before they really proved themselves pulling tonnage on the grade to Dead Horse Gulch, they proved incapable of even moving themselves around the Skagway docks."

What a total crock of hooey!! I have seen the engine house records and all the K-28s, just like the other 2-8-2s were working to haul freight up and over the hill in 42, 43 and 44. The new 190s proved to be under powered and the K-28s were kept busy, but not any one engine continuously; the record shows they allowed time for maintenance.

"By late 1944, it was obvious that, with one exception, the locomotives were not going back to Colorado. In fact, they weren't going anywhere—they had to be stored unusable on what yard WP&YR sidetracks could be spared."

The Army records show that by October 44 they were already shipped out to Auburn, along with other locos, a huge amount of surplus rolling stock, and equipment. The job was over and the locos and equipment were no longer needed.

I have the references he quotes and none of them have the outlandish claims he makes in his agenda based story. He seems to have his mind made up and does not want to be confused with facts. He refuses to answer any queries to his e-mail address and is making it up as he goes along.

Mike Peltier
Whitehorse Yukon

mike211@yknet.ca


  
 
 Post subject: Re: D&RGW K-28s
PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2004 4:37 pm 

> What was the D&RGW doing in 1945 and did
> they need more NG locos at that time?

> Is there any documented evidence that the
> K-28s were offered back to the D&RGW
> after the war?

> Likewise any documented evidence that they
> were 'worn out' as rumoured?

> Heavener states: "In the Yukon, storm
> after storm came pounding out of the North
> Pacific, dumping tons of snow in the upper
> British Columbia mountains, and more
> devastatingly, pouring massive rains on
> Skagway and in the Yukon Territory. Roads
> turned to unfathomable mud holes. Work
> ground to a halt and arctic mosquitoes
> proliferated."

> He obviously knows nothing of winter in
> Skagway or the Yukon, it snows when the
> temperature is below freezing and the
> winters 42-43-44 were some of the harshest
> on record. "arctic mosquitoes" in
> the winter? yeah right. Locomotive 195 has
> been sitting in Skagway as a static display
> since 1965 and it has not rusted away or
> become covered with mold. A couple of years
> ago they removed the asbestos boiler lagging
> because of the environmental hazard, and the
> recent pictures show that the boiler did not
> rust away over the years of exposure to rain
> and snow in Skagway. It's quite unlikely
> that the K-28s rotted out in a couple of
> years like he claims. Plus there is no
> documented proof of his claims. The two 1920
> ex SVRy Mikes were worked just as hard and
> exposed to even more of the same weather and
> one is now operating on the SVRy and the
> other is being restored.

> "And all the Army's the extra
> locomotives, left uncovered for lack of
> adequate facilities during the WP&YR's
> too-rapid build-up, began succumbing to rust
> and northwest mold. It filled the boiler
> lagging, got into the cylinder packing, and
> invaded the lubricating systems of the seven
> K-28s."

> Complete conjecture, he has no proof of this
> extraordinary claim. They didn't keep all
> the other locomotives under cover and leave
> only the K-28s exposed.

> I've seen pictures of them at Auburn in 1945
> and the rust and mold just isn't there. They
> look just as good as the picture you posted.
> They were not rusting, they were working.

> " Before they really proved themselves
> pulling tonnage on the grade to Dead Horse
> Gulch, they proved incapable of even moving
> themselves around the Skagway docks."

> What a total crock of hooey!! I have seen
> the engine house records and all the K-28s,
> just like the other 2-8-2s were working to
> haul freight up and over the hill in 42, 43
> and 44. The new 190s proved to be under
> powered and the K-28s were kept busy, but
> not any one engine continuously; the record
> shows they allowed time for maintenance.

> "By late 1944, it was obvious that,
> with one exception, the locomotives were not
> going back to Colorado. In fact, they
> weren't going anywhere—they had to be stored
> unusable on what yard WP&YR sidetracks
> could be spared."

> The Army records show that by October 44
> they were already shipped out to Auburn,
> along with other locos, a huge amount of
> surplus rolling stock, and equipment. The
> job was over and the locos and equipment
> were no longer needed.

> I have the references he quotes and none of
> them have the outlandish claims he makes in
> his agenda based story. He seems to have his
> mind made up and does not want to be
> confused with facts. He refuses to answer
> any queries to his e-mail address and is
> making it up as he goes along.

> Mike Peltier
> Whitehorse Yukon

Mike & finderskeepers, The problems you are seeing
here are the problems you run into when you challange the work of a writer. I have run into this same problem with local history that I have
personally experienced.
The Writer becomes indignant when you offer a
correction while the Historian wants all the information you can offer.
Makes you wonder about the stuff you read, doesn't it?
Jim


rrfanjim@mvn.net


  
 
 Post subject: Re: D&RGW K-28s *PIC*
PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2004 12:45 pm 

I've been digging, and people have been giving suggestions, here's one
"The September 1961 issue of Trains Magazine had a great article on the D&RGW
K-class locomotives by R.D. Kindig. In this article Mr. Kindig mentioned the 7
K-28's that were requisitioned by the U.S. Governmemt for use in Alaska. These
7 K-28 locomotives (along with several other narrow gauge locomotives) were
shipped to Skagway in 1942 and 1943. The engines were renumbered in the 250
series (probably 250 to 256) and sported USA on thier tenders. No mention of
locomotive abuse though.

Part of the negative slat in the documentation on the mentioned internet site
may be traced to a Colorado newspaper article (reprinted in the Kindig magazine
article) which expresses the D&RGW's frustration at loosing 7 good locomotives.

And of course, all this may have also been printed to stir up controversy in the
railfan community(and increase magazine sales), which Trains Magazine editor
Morgan was occasionally prone to do.

Dave Bucher
Downingtown, PA"


Image


  
 
 Post subject: Re: D&RGW K-28s *PIC*
PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2004 12:46 pm 

Here's another
"

A few years back I answered to Michael with the information that I
had at the present time. A few years later we know more what realy
happened to the K28 at the WP&YR. Mike Peltier from Whitehorse was
looking into various documents at the Yukon Archive. And for sure,
more lights and facts are know today.

I agree that the story have to rewritteen. But this is Michaels job
as it his web page.

As I know Mike Peltier, in a short time he will update the latest
news at my web page, the http://www.whitepassfan.net .

So click on the link and check the latest news from time to time.

And thanks to all who are working on documents about our narrow
gauge favorites.

Boerries "


Image


  
 
 Post subject: Re: D&RGW K-28s
PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2004 5:47 pm 

> "The September 1961 issue of Trains
> Magazine had a great article on the
> D&RGW
> K-class locomotives by R.D. Kindig.
> ... No mention of
> locomotive abuse though.

Thanks Dave, I don't have that 1961 Trains article so I appreciate you sharing the info. So far I have not found any record of locomotive abuse. In the context of the times [there was a war on] one can understand the Army's dogged enthusiasm to keep the line open and freight moving up the hill and over the pass to Whitehorse, despite some of the heaviest snowfall and lowest temperatures reported in years. No doubt this was hard on equipment, and men, however the 770th ROB was composed of experienced mountain railroaders and I don't believe they would have abused equipment they needed to get the job done, especially since the records show that the K-28s were the backbone of their operations.

Mike


mike211@yknet.ca


  
 
 Post subject: Re: D&RGW K-28s
PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2014 7:41 pm 

Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:45 am
Posts: 313
Location: Alaska
I appreciate your analysis, Mr. Peltier. The real history is interesting enough, but unfortunately it is often clouded by wishful story telling.

_________________
John Hillier


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], lmckay175, Shogo Takizawa, SteamEnthusiast4000 and 47 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: