> I note the plans for their terminal
> development include a roundhouse and
> turntable. Will this be on the site of a
> previous roundhouse, or completely new?
There was never a roundhouse at Bryson that I'm aware of.
JAC
| Railway Preservation News https://www.rypn.org/forums/ |
|
| Great Smoky Mountain RR question https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8261 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Bob Yarger [ Fri Jan 23, 2004 1:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Great Smoky Mountain RR question |
I note the plans for their terminal development include a roundhouse and turntable. Will this be on the site of a previous roundhouse, or completely new? http://www.smokymountainnews.com/issues/01_04/01_21_04/fr_bryson_leaders.html ryarger@rypn.org |
|
| Author: | John Craft [ Fri Jan 23, 2004 1:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Great Smoky Mountain RR question *PIC* |
> I note the plans for their terminal > development include a roundhouse and > turntable. Will this be on the site of a > previous roundhouse, or completely new? There was never a roundhouse at Bryson that I'm aware of. JAC
|
|
| Author: | Johnny Winkler [ Fri Jan 23, 2004 2:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Great Smoky Mountain RR question |
> There was never a roundhouse at Bryson that > I'm aware of. > JAC If the roundhouse does get built and a railroad museum is established at Bryson City than what would be limit on size and weight of steam locomotives that could get there?I know that K class 2-8-0s were the preferred power in the steam era on the branch,but could something as big as a 4-8-2 or 2-8-4 be carefully and slowly brought in to Bryson City as a museum display? I know that when N&W 611 was taken from Roanoke to Birmingham for restoration in 1981 it was sent on the ex-Southern through Bristol and Knoxville,Tennessee;yet it was restricted from ever operating under it's own power there. wink638@aol.com |
|
| Author: | G. W. Laepple [ Fri Jan 23, 2004 3:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Great Smoky Mountain RR question |
> I note the plans for their terminal > development include a roundhouse and > turntable. Will this be on the site of a > previous roundhouse, or completely new? I believe there was a wye at Bryson City, west of the station in the area now partially occupied by a shopping center. In later SOU diesel days, the diesels would lay over near the station. No engine facility as such. K4s1361@hotmail.com |
|
| Author: | Ron Goldfeder [ Fri Jan 23, 2004 4:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Great Smoky Mountain RR Plans |
There is supposed to be an 85' ex-PRR turntable from Berwick, PA at Bryson City for this project. No idea when it was moved or if one is stored somewhere for the other end of the line at Dillsboro, where an earlier local news article reported another would be installed. Does anyone have any info? rdgoldfede@aol.com |
|
| Author: | Randy Minter [ Fri Jan 23, 2004 5:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Great Smoky Mountain RR question |
The short answer about moving larger power to Bryson is no. Cowee tunnel is clearance challenged. Also, GSMR had been interested in leasing A&WP 290 in past years with prior regimes but this never came to anything due to the rigors of mountain railroading. 611's problem with clearance was more one of axle loading which restricted "operating" over some parts of the NS system in places like New Orleans due to that loooonnng bridge over that pond. minterjr@mindspring.com |
|
| Author: | jimwrinn [ Fri Jan 23, 2004 6:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Great Smoky Mountain RR question |
> The short answer about moving larger power > to Bryson is no. Cowee tunnel is clearance > challenged. Tell me about it.. when we had 1925 out there last fall, that nice tall Ed Collins hooter whistle of ours sure was riding high. So on the Monday before we lit her off, we towed her down to the tunnel and walked her through... I think we came within about 6 inches of the tunnel roof, but you can imagine that if a Shay is tight on clearnance, it's gonna be a 2-8-0 or a light Pacific that will be treading these rails. This will be a first roundhouse for the Bryson City area. http://nctrans.org Wrinnbo@aol.com |
|
| Author: | G. W. Laepple [ Fri Jan 23, 2004 6:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Great Smoky Mountain RR Plans |
> There is supposed to be an 85' ex-PRR > turntable from Berwick, PA at Bryson City > for this project. No idea when it was moved > or if one is stored somewhere for the other > end of the line at Dillsboro, where an > earlier local news article reported another > would be installed. Does anyone have any > info? I helped arrange the purchase and loading of the Pennsy turntable about a dozen years ago, and the last time I was in Bryson City it was sitting along the track a couple of blocks west of the station. K4s1361@hotmail.com |
|
| Author: | Ryan Scott [ Sat Jan 24, 2004 10:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Great Smoky Mountain RR question |
The turntable will straddle the location of the former east leg of the wye. The new post office next to Slope street is located about where the tail switch used to be. The plan is to install three tables, one in Bryson (semi surrounded by the roundhouse), one at Dillsboro, and one at the MP86.5, right at the foot of Red Marble. As far as big power to Bryson, there are several challenges to that. Cowee Tunnel is definitly clearance challenged, but bridge loading and rail size would prove to be the biggest challenge. There is interest in operating a 2-8-2 over the line, but most of those are right on the bridge loading maximum, or over. That's why SOU never ran them over here. The biggest power may continue to be a 2-8-0. 1702 is a little anemic for the line, but the Murphy Branch was not where BLW or the Army had intended her to go. The 722 is really a perfectly sized locomotive for the Murphy Branch. Perhaps a future reuniting with 630 sometime in the future?? I'm not sure what could run over NS to the Sylva interchange, height restrictions are definitly more generous as witnessed by the 1925's oddessy to Dillsboro last year. As Jim said, though, she barely fit through Cowee, and that was after we unloaded her from the flatcar! Oh well, it made for some fun dead heading, didn't it Jim?! Ryan lima709@aol.com |
|
| Author: | Johnny Winkler [ Sat Jan 24, 2004 11:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Great Smoky Mountain RR question |
> The turntable will straddle the location of > the former east leg of the wye. The new post > office next to Slope street is located about > where the tail switch used to be. > The plan is to install three tables, one in > Bryson (semi surrounded by the roundhouse), > one at Dillsboro, and one at the MP86.5, > right at the foot of Red Marble. > As far as big power to Bryson, there are > several challenges to that. Cowee Tunnel is > definitly clearance challenged, but bridge > loading and rail size would prove to be the > biggest challenge. There is interest in > operating a 2-8-2 over the line, but most of > those are right on the bridge loading > maximum, or over. That's why SOU never ran > them over here. The biggest power may > continue to be a 2-8-0. 1702 is a little > anemic for the line, but the Murphy Branch > was not where BLW or the Army had intended > her to go. The 722 is really a perfectly > sized locomotive for the Murphy Branch. > Perhaps a future reuniting with 630 sometime > in the future?? > I'm not sure what could run over NS to the > Sylva interchange, height restrictions are > definitly more generous as witnessed by the > 1925's oddessy to Dillsboro last year. As > Jim said, though, she barely fit through > Cowee, and that was after we unloaded her > from the flatcar! Oh well, it made for some > fun dead heading, didn't it Jim?! > Ryan With plans for 3 turntables and a 9 stall roundhouse there must be plans for future steam acqusitions.I don't think I like the idea of a restored 722 bearing most of the burden of daily service.The Santa Fe 2-8-0s of which there are quite a few preserved look like fairly hefty locomotives to me,how about one of them? Also the ex-Clinchfield 4-6-0 #99 at Jackson,Tenn looks like a capable yet small enough locomotive. wink638@aol.com |
|
| Author: | Ryan Scott [ Sun Jan 25, 2004 1:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Great Smoky Mountain RR question |
> With plans for 3 turntables and a 9 stall > roundhouse there must be plans for future > steam acqusitions.I don't think I like the > idea of a restored 722 bearing most of the > burden of daily service.The Santa Fe 2-8-0s > of which there are quite a few preserved > look like fairly hefty locomotives to me,how > about one of them? Also the ex-Clinchfield > 4-6-0 #99 at Jackson,Tenn looks like a > capable yet small enough locomotive. The 99 (originally Clinchfield No 3) is really too small for the GSMR. It has only 25,400lbs of tractive effort. The 1702 is rated at 31,500lbs, and the 722 at 46,700lbs. For comparison, a GP9 is rated in the neighborhood of 68,000lbs. We get a GP9 down on it's knees anytime we have more than 12 cars (fairly often). So needless to say a good candidate for the GSMR has small wheels, big cylinders, and weighs about 230,000lbs. Some of those AT&SF locos are good candidates when strictly looking at their specs. But before the forum lights up on which locomotives the GSMR will be aquiring, I must say that it will be some time yet before another steam locomotive will join the GSMR roster. The shop facility in Bryson City is the priority, and #722 will be close behind. Also, while certain locomotives may be a mechanically good fit with the GSMR, some of those "perfect" locomotives currently have good homes, and are not or will not be available for relocation. Somewhere out in the future, there will be the melodious stack talk from a pair of mountain locomotives pulling a loaded passenger train up Red Marble Grade! Ryan lima709@aol.com |
|
| Author: | SOUTHERN630 [ Sun Jan 25, 2004 2:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Great Smoky Mountain RR question |
About the thought of having the 630 reunite with the 722, it would be a nice thought, but whos going to move the 630 from TVRM? Plus, what is the schedule for the 722, last I saw of it, the 722 was in LOTS of little pieces and didn't look like GSMR had touched it in a long time, because there ws grass growing around the frame and running gear. So it might be a while before GSMR is able to get around to the 722. > The turntable will straddle the location of > the former east leg of the wye. The new post > office next to Slope street is located about > where the tail switch used to be. > The plan is to install three tables, one in > Bryson (semi surrounded by the roundhouse), > one at Dillsboro, and one at the MP86.5, > right at the foot of Red Marble. > As far as big power to Bryson, there are > several challenges to that. Cowee Tunnel is > definitly clearance challenged, but bridge > loading and rail size would prove to be the > biggest challenge. There is interest in > operating a 2-8-2 over the line, but most of > those are right on the bridge loading > maximum, or over. That's why SOU never ran > them over here. The biggest power may > continue to be a 2-8-0. 1702 is a little > anemic for the line, but the Murphy Branch > was not where BLW or the Army had intended > her to go. The 722 is really a perfectly > sized locomotive for the Murphy Branch. > Perhaps a future reuniting with 630 sometime > in the future?? > I'm not sure what could run over NS to the > Sylva interchange, height restrictions are > definitly more generous as witnessed by the > 1925's oddessy to Dillsboro last year. As > Jim said, though, she barely fit through > Cowee, and that was after we unloaded her > from the flatcar! Oh well, it made for some > fun dead heading, didn't it Jim?! > Ryan SOUTHERN630@HOTMAIL.COM |
|
| Author: | SOUTHERN630 [ Sun Jan 25, 2004 6:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | SOU 722 |
Can anybody tell me what the GSMR plans on doing with the 722? I posted the above message and I was over at GSMR back in 2001, so things might have changed. Info. would be helpful, if anybody has any, please contact me via e-mail. Thanks Sou 630 > About the thought of having the 630 reunite > with the 722, it would be a nice thought, > but whos going to move the 630 from TVRM? > Plus, what is the schedule for the 722, last > I saw of it, the 722 was in LOTS of little > pieces and didn't look like GSMR had touched > it in a long time, because there ws grass > growing around the frame and running gear. > So it might be a while before GSMR is able > to get around to the 722. SOUTHERN630@HOTMAIL.COM |
|
| Author: | Ryan Scott [ Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SOU 722 |
> Can anybody tell me what the GSMR plans on > doing with the 722? I posted the above > message and I was over at GSMR back in 2001, > so things might have changed. Info. would be > helpful, if anybody has any, please contact > me via e-mail. > Thanks > Sou 630 722 has been on the back burner while 1702 recieved a rather major running gear rebuild. The hope is to dig back into the 722 this summer. Ryan lima709@aol.com |
|
| Author: | southern630 [ Sun Jan 25, 2004 10:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SOU 722 |
> 722 has been on the back burner while 1702 > recieved a rather major running gear > rebuild. The hope is to dig back into the > 722 this summer. > Ryan Well, is this a hope or a fact? Because I would like to see both the 630 & 722 running! The 630 is still a ways ahead, but mabey be done next winter or spring...but thats subject to change! SR 630 southern630@hotmail.com |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|