 |
| Derrell Poole Collection. |
 |
| Derrell Poole Collection. |
 |
| Derrell Poole Collection. |
 |
| Derrell Poole Collection. |
Saturday, October 4, 2014
Roper's Snapshot Saturday No.17 | 9 Comments - Click Here :
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
Roper, I was afraid you had gone AWOL!
ReplyDeleteLessee here.
Heavy freight with (2) consolidations on the point. Looks like 60 is the lead engine. Both locos have solid pilots, arc headlamps, straight stacks and the modernization program is in place with air tanks on top of the boiler. Except 60 has gone through the shop once, early in the program and the trains road locomotive has received the upgrade with the second air tank. The tenders have yet to be modified.
(I wonder why the C&S preferred the air compressor on the engineer's side of the loco, just ahead of the cab, while the D&RG was just the opposite on the narrow gauge? C&S locos have very clean lines on the fireman's side, with all the plumbing on the right side of the engine, save the ash pipe from the spark arrestor.)
With regard to 47, there is an engineer with some pride: check out his whistle! That link sticking through the plow must have been capable of transferring enormous force.
Keith
Leadville in Sn3
Thanks, Keith, for having the honest enthusiasm and desire to learn - the opposite of reserved "expertise" where caution is the better part of "valor". We live in a society addicted to "experts" who perpetually guide us peons and contradicts the legacy of "Rugged Individualism" our Nation was founded upon - "oh my! We might be wrong!" (So what? - oh I'm guilty too!) I appreciate that you are eager to learn more than you are eager to "look wise" to the crowd of SILENT observers just waiting for the McAnswer to be handed to them!
DeleteBTW. I am no expert. I can only speak from the application of my own time and attention. And I am wrong - often.
(Kicks aside the soapbox)...
Excellent observation in your first paragraph. No. 60 was wrecked at the Washington Spur located above the Hookeye curve southeast of Breckenridge. That was Feb. 1901. The cab was smashed as was the pilot. The tender was also wrecked. And the modernizing program was still quite in progress at the time this photo was taken. Examples of single and double air tanks were common side by side. It wasn't until about 1907 that most if not all of the modernizing had taken place. But, of course, that never completely stopped anyway.
I wonder why the D&RG had their pumps on the wrong side of the engine - lol. I can't answer your question but I am confident each had their reasons. Pre TOC photos, Builder's photos and drawings all put the air pump on the Engineer's side. In the case of the C&S, where (initially) it was "certain" new engines were going to be ordered any day now, the effort to move the pump and plumbing to the Fireman's side was probably considered a waste of time. They worked fine where they were. Better to put money into improvements that actually helped increase the efficiency of the little underpowered monsters than some nebulous convenience to the Engineer. The new engines weren't ordered yet! And in later years - post 1908 - there was very little "corporate" sympathy to the Narrow Gauge. The Ridgeway Spark Arrestor was about saving money yet NOT sacrificing power - since the mean ol' “Colorado PUC and US ICC won't let us just scrap the whole thing!”
Whistles were indeed a point of engineer pride and they changed often!
Interesting that you suggest the presence of a link between the two engines. (See, these are the kinds of comments that inspire the writer to make the following cameo comments y'all otherwise miss out on because no one says anything!!). There is a photo of this engine with generally everything you see in the photo above but WITH a link! The date of that photo was post June 1906; it is an OUTLAW engine! (Why, anyone?) I won't tell you where the photo is because that might spoil the question in my comments below.
Derrell
Why, thank you Roper! You are a marvelous Doggie. The top photo was taken by H.L. Curtiss.
ReplyDeleteLet’s call this week’s lesson, “Identifying C&S equipment in wildly popular photos” – or just how important are the details? The top photo has been published several times. It is thought to be near Pitkin and eastbound, TOC – 1900. (I’m sure y’all understand this means Turn Of the Century 19th to 20th and generally describes the several years just after midnight 12-31-1899 and even a little before. I arbitrarily draw the line at June 1906 because of certain changes that took place then.) The exact date is unknown but is often referred to as “about this” or “about that” year.
A consensus of the published captions would be 1903. The earliest publication that I’m aware of is found on page 403 of the “Pictorial Supplement to Denver South Park & Pacific” by Kindig Haley and Poor – Rocky Mt. Railroad Club, 1959. This caption says that the train is eastbound from Pitkin, the first engine is unidentified, the second is 57 and the date IS 1903 - quoting the caption. The last occurrence of this photo is on page 237 “South Park’s Gunnison Division Memories & Then Some” by Tom and Denise Klinger (the Klinger books are highly recommend and I believe all 3 vol.s are still available. Great photos and text – just be wary of the captions.) Other occurrences are “Narrow Gauge Pictorial Vol. VI, C&S Motive Power” published by Rob Grandt that identifies the first engine as No. 60 on page 132 and the second as No. 47 on page 100. That page also identifies the date as circa 1902. Also on page 304 of “The South Park Line” by Mal Ferrell both engines are identified as 47 and 60 in 1903.
Naturally there is good and bad information here. The original photo may have identified the photographer, location, and a year date. The RMRR Club book appears to have benefited from whatever was written there, as it is as correct as any of the other captions, since. And let’s face it – most subsequent publishings likely copied what this volume said. No one got both engines correct and none of them hit the correct year. They all agree correctly to the location.
Let’s start with the first engine because it is the key to decoding this photo. The Grandt book identifies this as No. 60. and it is - unquestionably. Can anyone tell me why? But it is NOT no. 60 in 1902 or 03; not according to C&S records. Engine 60 still had a McConnell stack in 1904 so this photo dates no earlier than Late 1904 - probably late summer or fall (judging by the vegetation and low density of steam). It doesn’t post date mid 1906 because neither engine shows any hint of the Standard Common Lettering inaugurated in June. My inclination is that this is the summer of 1905 – but that is still a guess at best.
What about the second engine? Is this No. 57 according to Kindig, Haley and Poor or 47 according to George Coleman and MF?
Derrell
Derrell:
ReplyDeleteFor no good reason, I think the road loco is larger than the helper, at least the boiler appears to be so. I don't know the relative sizes of the C&S locos, but will venture a guess that the two locos are of different classes. My logic suggests the road loco is 47, a Cooke, not 57 a Rhode Island and peer to 60.
Keith
Leadville in Sn3
I would guess Rhode Island.Check out the builders plate in both locos-both seem to be oval shaped.Both appear to be wagon top boilers.Cooke engines appear to have a significant gap in between the steam dome and the cab.
ReplyDeleteTrue! Compare No. 47's sister, Cooke engine 49 in the last photo, to that of X7 - which, btw you can see on the sand dome. Good call on the location of the steam domes. All of the Cookes had the same general arrangement between them and all of the Rhode Islands had the same general arrangement between them. Where is the bell on each class?
DeleteObviously someone involved with the Pic. Supplement understood the details in 1959.
Of course we know the first engine was 60 because by that time only 60 had the 4 dog UP smokebox front. (I am inclined to believe when the RI engines came over to the SP in the late 1880s they went thru the UP shops and were refitted with short smoke boxes and this smoke box front - all 6 of them. But the DL&G changed out all of them in the 1890s - except 263 (60).
See what other interesting and key details you can find on the two engines - there are plenty to find.
Also look closely at 49. This is another post 1906 photo and if you recall I said there was a photo of the "unknown" engine with a pilot plow and link making it an "outlaw" (Pic. Supplement, page 387). Well so was 49 in this view. I have mulled over these
"Indiscretions" for a long time and have no solid explanation. Keith has alluded to the fact that the Road engine in the above photo is the second engine, which is correct. The front and rear engines are the helpers. No. 60 above has a knuckle coupler in its pilot but there is a slot in it for link and pin use. These couplers were "change over" period couplers because there was certain to be a time, both before and after the 1903 law banning L&P couplers went into effect, where the two types would mix. Since both 49 and the portrait of 57 in the Pic. Sup have pilot plows in place we cannot see the slotted knuckle coupler that is almost certain to be there in the winter of '06/'07 when these pictures were taken. Could it be there was some advantage in using a link between the pilots of the Road engine (or any trailing engine) with a plow on it when coupled to a front helper engine? Could it be that they did not yet have a knuckle coupler with long draft gear to extend far enough beyond the plow to couple with a tender or even a common freight car?
Derrell
well, darnit Derrell here we go again learning and all that stuff. I've been looking at that same photo off and on for a hundred years. give or take. I always thought the engine was one of the Rhode Island engines, and now Keith says it looks "larger" to him. Now it looks that way to me too. I need to go get some other pictures in the way of making up my mind. I haven't really spoke up here about this stuff lately, making me seem like one waiting for the McAnswer, but I assure you that when I spot something it'll get mentioned. So far, everything I've sussed has been addressed before I get a chance to ring the bell. But, it's fun, educational and way better than some of the other things I'd be doing otherwise. Thanks to all. Keep 'em coming.
ReplyDeletePat Hollingsworth
I should have waited and seen what I think gives the illusion of size to the road engine (I'm certain now that it's locomotive #57) The headlight platform mounted further to the rear on this engine makes the whole front of this engine light up instead of the darker, beetle browed appearance of the leading helper. Pat Hollingsworth
ReplyDeleteExcellent observations, Pat. I have been waiting for days for someone to make the obvious post about the headlamp. This feature shows up a lot during the period when engines underwent the change over to the fast drafting straight stacks with long smoke boxes. It is almost like the shop simply added the extension to the smoke box right under the headlamp. They probably took it off but it still looks that way. Did you also notice the "fender" between the front of the walk and the top of the steam chest? What else can be seen on either engine? And what about no. 49? Compare the classes and figure out the differences - you will be greatly rewarded when you review photos. There won't be any question about what class an engine is - usually.
Delete