Railway Preservation News :: View topic

You could take the same picture tonight, the only noticeable difference being that the 486 now has a stack screen. In fact it's been estimated that the D&SNG puts many more miles on the engines today than the Rio Grande ever did in freight service. Things are very much still 'for real' in Durango.

Steve Wasiura
D&SNG Fireman

Author:	Frisco1522 [ Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:49 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Durango
I've often wondered why some road's roundhouses were used with the engines backed in. I always thought that the engine required most of the work and needed the most room, so if it was pulled in, there would be more room between stalls at that end. Anybody have any theories or facts? BTW, nice shot!

Author:	Txhighballer [ Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Durango
I was always told that they headed in so that if she decided to take a "walk" only the tender would end up in the pit.

Author:	swasiura [ Thu Aug 28, 2008 12:48 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Durango
You could take the same picture tonight, the only noticeable difference being that the 486 now has a stack screen. In fact it's been estimated that the D&SNG puts many more miles on the engines today than the Rio Grande ever did in freight service. Things are very much still 'for real' in Durango. Steve Wasiura D&SNG Fireman

Author:	Dave Sutter [ Thu Aug 28, 2008 7:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Durango
I agree with Mr. Wasiura, Things are still very much "for real" in durango as well as many other places. I always have to question the use of such comments as "in revenue service" and "When it was in use." The things are still making money and still being utilized every day. Almost as bad as when people ask "Are you an actor or are you actually doing something?"

Author:	Bobharbison [ Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:42 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Durango
What I've read lines up with your comments about how the actual "engine" portion of the locomotive needed the most work by far, and so it was useful to have additional room to work. I've never really studied the issue, but I always had the impression that most US roundhouses were designed for the engines went in nose first? The only reason I can think of for backing in is that it would reduce the amount of smoke and steam in the enginehouse when pulling in and departing since the stack isn't traveling as far inside the building, and it also would reduce the chance of a cinder lodging in the roof timbers and starting a fire. The reduction in fire danger from sparks seems like a fairly reasonable explanation, but it's really only a guess on my part...

Railway Preservation News https://www.rypn.org/forums/

Durango https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=25898	Page 1 of 1

Author:	DavidKaplan [ Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:53 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Durango
Txhighballer wrote: I was always told that they headed in so that if she decided to take a "walk" only the tender would end up in the pit. This comment makes a lot of sense plus weren't most tools located along the outside walls? If so, "nose first" would still make the most sense to keep fetching to a minimum. Shots I've seen of C&O, SP, and NYC roundhouses also seem to bear this out.

Author:	Robby Peartree [ Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:56 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Durango
swasiura wrote: You could take the same picture tonight, the only noticeable difference being that the 486 now has a stack screen. In fact it's been estimated that the D&SNG puts many more miles on the engines today than the Rio Grande ever did in freight service. Things are very much still 'for real' in Durango. Steve Wasiura D&SNG Fireman This strikes me as naive and egotistical comment. Consider the following material taken from the book "Rio Grande Narrow Gauge" by John Norwood. The Rio Grande claims the distance between Chama and Alamosa as 92 miles without a hill turn. The distance listed between Chama to Durango is 107miles without doubling any of the hills. The Farmington Branch was only 49 miles one way for a 98 mile round trip. The Silverton Branch is listed at 45 miles long or only a 90 mile round trip. So in the course of a month of a locomotive being on the Silverton branch for 30 days it sees 2700 miles. If the same locomotive worked the San Juan from Alamosa to Durango it saw 5970 miles. If a locomotive worked one hill turn and one trip to Alamosa a day and return to Chama next it would have seen 3300 miles by the end of the 30 days. If it was working between Chama and Durango it would have seen 3200 miles. The Silverton branch is a good honest RR but it is no more intense than what the Rio Grande did year round in all types of weather with the same equipment without some of our "technological advantages". If you really want to be impressed consider that some RR got 20 to25 thousand miles per month average out of their locomotives. At that rate they were doing a tire turn at least twice a year on each locomotive. It is nice to have a slow season for maintenance. Robby

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/