It is currently Mon May 19, 2025 10:19 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: I think Ross and NJT are a better match
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2002 9:02 pm 

Now, if someone at CSX was REALLY on the ball....

74471.3045@compuserve.com


  
 
 Post subject: Re: I think Ross and NJT are a better match
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2002 1:18 pm 

Personally, I have long believed that the 614 belongs in one of two places; the B&O Museum, from whence it went to Rowland in 1979, or the C&O Historical Society at Clifton Forge, VA, where she spent her (albeit short) working life. Sadly, the C&OHS doesn't have the financial means or facilities to make this happen. The B&O Museum presents pluses and minuses, but probably more pluses. While they have money problems like any non-profit, and a decided lack of indoor display space, they have the financial and logistical support of CSX. In cooperation with MARC Rail, CSX permits them to operate a couple of excursions a year using commuter equipment, and while CSX does not currently entertain steam operations, I think the best possibility of operating 614 again lies with the one Eastern museum with close ties to a Class I railroad whose predecessor once operated the engine.

pww57@hotmail.com


  
 
 Post subject: Money Changes Everything
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2002 3:36 pm 

Yowsa, yowsa. Baltimore or Scranton would bode well for operations. Can we dream?

What if Jack Showalter could have kept the VCRR running out of Staunton, made a few bucks and brought the pretty J-3a back to ol'Virginny?

That would have been a perfect ending.

But you know what? She is an odd beast, modified and all tricked out from current and previous experiments and improvements. I just hope someone can get her and run her. Whether it's at the Grand Canyon or Nay Aug Gorge.

But, that's probably a dream.

Glass half full says there are not enough places to run bug steam.

Glass half empty says there are too many operational big steamers.

Shot of burbon says "I hope I hit the lottery."
(User Above) wrote:
:
:-)


Rob


  
 
 Post subject: Steamtown Turntable
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2002 3:47 pm 

Dave,

The turntable in Scranton is only 90 feet, right? So that rulles out #261 and #2102. What about #759? She was kept inside in the roundhouse on the long track. At 101' she is 9 feet shorter than #2102. How long is the long track?

Also, a nit to pick, but #2102 did spend a fair amount of time in the roundhouse, albeit with her tender on an adjacent track.

Rob

>
> P.S. The roundhouse would not hold the 614
> and tender,as it would not fit the 261 or
> the 2102. The locomotive shop however would.


  
 
 Post subject: Pocono Re: Steamtown Turntable
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2002 3:54 pm 

Dave,

To follow-up. I believe that the last Poconos were 101' - 9" long. Undertsanding that wheel-base matters for turntables, what about the roundhouse stalls? I forget how many were legnthened for the Poconos, but I guess being the same size as an NKP S explains why #759 fits nicely.

Rob
> Dave,

> The turntable in Scranton is only 90 feet,
> right? So that rulles out #261 and #2102.
> What about #759? She was kept inside in the
> roundhouse on the long track. At 101' she is
> 9 feet shorter than #2102. How long is the
> long track?

> Also, a nit to pick, but #2102 did spend a
> fair amount of time in the roundhouse,
> albeit with her tender on an adjacent track.

> Rob


  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pocono Re: Steamtown Turntable
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2002 8:33 pm 

Hey Rob

The wheelbase for the 759 is just a hair under 90 feet, like 89 or so. So the 759 fits on the table, but whenever we turned it we had to pull out ALL of those (quite) heavy railings that surround the turntable.

As for stalls, I'm not sure how many were legthened in 1937 for the larger engines, but as I remember it, the complete 759 (engine/tender) fits in just about every stall with some room to spare.

At 101 feet the poconos were still large engines, but many had relatively small 4 axle tenders. Which explains why some 4-8-4's like the 2102 and 261 (each with looooong tenders) would not fit, coupled together in the roundhouse. Food for thought.

Oh by the way Rob, Ken Ganz says "Hi"

Dave Crosby

bing@epix.net


  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 127 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: