Oroville turntable

Bob Yarger · **Posted:** Wed Mar 24, 2004 5:57 pm

Old photo of the Western Pacific turntable at Oroville, California. This is the table that sat at Virginia City, Nevada for many years and has recently been traded to the Portola RR Museum.

http://photoswest.org/cgi-bin/imager?00019912+OP-19912
ryarger@rypn.org

Bob Yarger · **Posted:** Wed Mar 24, 2004 5:59 pm

Incidently, both a WP 4-6-0 and two 0-6-0s exist. Lets hope we someday see them on this table again! Photos from Otto Perry collection, 1931.

http://photoswest.org/cgi-bin/imager?00019902+OP-19902
ryarger@rypn.org

Bob Yarger · **Posted:** Wed Mar 24, 2004 6:15 pm

The actual Portola table, removed in the 1950s. Incidently, there is one of these 2-8-2s extant also.

http://photoswest.org/cgi-bin/imager?00019975+OP-19975
ryarger@rypn.org

Raul · **Posted:** Thu Mar 25, 2004 2:29 am

We had the discussion about the Western Railroad Museum, where the WP 94 & 334 languish. Let's not open that wound again!

> The actual Portola table, removed in the
> 1950s. Incidently, there is one of these
> 2-8-2s extant also.

Ted Miles · **Posted:** Thu Mar 25, 2004 12:48 pm

I think languish is a little strong. The two engines are in covered storage, which is more than you can say for the other Western Pacific survivors.

and the museum is going to break ground this year for a new display barn that will display both of them with appropiate freight and passenger consists.

Hold on just a bit longer and you will be able to pat them.

Ted Miles

ted_miles@nps.gov

roger · **Posted:** Fri Mar 26, 2004 1:53 am

Hard to just pat something that Ive had the pleasure of running, the 94 should be made operational.

Biff Byrum · **Posted:** Mon Apr 05, 2004 4:29 pm

>Mr. Yarger, possibly a little correction here. The two photos you linked to seem to show the same table. A few months ago Al Fonseca posted some photos of the same era on some yahoo groups, and there was some discussion about these same two tables. It was determined that Oroville and Portola tables were different in the construction of the arches. I suggest that both photos here really show the Portola table. If you give me a week or so I'll try to research the links to the photos that Mr. Fonseca posted and get them back to you. The actual Portola table, removed in the
> 1950s. Incidently, there is one of these
> 2-8-2s extant also.

bbyrum9@foothill.net