Actually nothing. Apparently I'm sufficiently brain damaged I can't tell the difference between Rollag and Madison. My apologies.

Doug

Where was Midland Terminal ROW located?

Thanks,

Ed

Col. Hill, as mentioned by HVP and GWL, did the boiler calculations (Form 4?, did I remember that correctly?) for Sam Freeman's 148 at Black River. This was in the late 1960s.

When reading the article on six-coupled power, I thought of the trips that Mainline Steam Foundation ran with the 148 and the 972 in 1975. Mid-sized power that could go almost anywhere; many of the other steam trips at the time were being run with 2-8-4s and 4-8-4s, although the CPR G-5s had been used, too.

And I wish I'd seen or been on the (too) few trips that Strasburg ran with 1223 and 7002. Smaller power, double-headed, offers quite a bit of flexibility. Bigger is not always better-

Colorado Springs up the Front Range to the Cripple Creek mining district via Ute Pass. A standard-gauge variation on the classic Colorado mining road theme.

That's what I thought, except I know it as "Colorado Midland" and I understand a lot of it was abandoned in the late teens. I didn't realize that a segment had lasted so late. The section between Leadville and Basalt, on the much discussed Aspen Branch, is probably the most scenic piece of ROW in the world.

Thanks,

Ed

[quote="Jim Warsher"]The feature article in Trains regarding the six-coupled steam engines is going to be just the thing to get people to thinking and working. I hope it signifies another whole new and healthy direction for the magazine's editorial objectives.

Agreed - but then I am all for anything that encourages people to start thinking. Makes for a nice change.......

Finally got a copy (hidden beneath aircraft and motorcycle mags at the Savannah B&N) and was very impressed - as I knew I would be due to Erik's craftsmanship. He even made my quotes sound good. Jimbo seems to be making a much needed improvement in the content overall as well. Might have to subscribe again.

On to the subject - I'd like to insert a caveat enlarging on the mention that the choice of motive power was dependent on conditions and service required and a healthy plug for smaller 8 coupled power as well. 8 coupled has superior adhesion, and needen't be larger, while it treads more lightly. This may not matter in many venues, but for some more vertical railroads it may make a critical difference - the low drivered mikado loggers in the Pacific Northwest and the Baldwin low drivered outside framed narrow gage consolidations can take more into places 6 coupled can't manage, and over more precarious rail. There was a reason the Colorado 3 footers in the 1880's and '90's decided on 2-8-0's.

Maybe this can be Erik's next article - low drivered loggers and industrial goats? I'll buy two copies.......

dave

Cheerfuly acknowledged!

To some extent, the six-coupled concept is an oversimplifaction. Concentraing on the smaller six-drivered engines was a pithy way to invoke the qualities I thought were important for an engine that would be economically viable in modern tourist service.

What I actually meant is "engines that can make money in tourist service with 250-ton trains at 25mph and less--moderate-sized engines with 45 to 60-inch drivers, TE around 22,000-30,000lbs, and reasonable-sized fireboxes." Unfortunately, that doesn't make much of a pitch for a magazine article. Just think of a Mogul, 0-6-0, or 2-6-2, on the other hand, and you instantly see in your mind's eye what I was talking about.

With 2-8-0s or 4-6-2s, there's a lot more variation--from locs similar to what I mean on the small end, to behemoths much larger than most tourist roads need on the other. It all depends on the locomotive. Small, narrow-firebox 8-coupled jobs like NH&I's No. 40 have all the positive qualities I was focusing on for the service I was describing. Some smaller Pacifics fit the bill as well--Linn Moedinger mentioned that he thought the CP G-5 4-6-2 design was probably almost the ideal locomotive on paper for the somewhat heavier trains and more intensive service he has to run today.

I'd be the first to admit that it doesn't boil down to a formula quite as rigid as the article would suggest.