Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

September 20, 2019 10:51AM
We all know it was one of the commissioners who killed the deal based on local sentiment from one or a few folks. So that is done and gone.

But, I wonder if another alternative might be thought about for the future. The D&S is rebuilding a K-37, number 493 to burn oil. If this is a success they may want to consider restoring another K-37 to
operation, either coal or oil. Now yes, they have the 498, but it might not be worth restoring.

I guess what I am getting at here is that perhaps the D&S would be willing to trade the 478 for perhaps one of the C&TS's K-37's, like 492 for example. Or trade 478 for 494 and 495. This way they have potentially two engines, and parts that are needed could be made for 2 at the same time, saving money in the long run, or one is parts for the other. Either way they have an engine that is capable of pulling 2-3 more cars than 478. If they like the results of 493, then more K-37's might be appealing.

If the C&TS was willing to give up 494 and 495 for 478, it would solve the problem of 483, which could be retained for the history of the C&TS making everyone happy. I know in the past the D&S was not fond of the K-37's, which is why they traded 497 to the C&TS for 482 in the first place. But now that they are rebuilding 493, perhaps the attitude has changed in regard to the K-37's.

Food for thought anyway. No worse than some of the speculation on this board, eh!!!

Greg Scholl

(PS One month until our Big Boy Special ends-Oct 20th)
[www.gregschollvideo.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/20/2019 10:52AM by Greg Scholl.
Subject Author Posted

Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Greg Scholl September 20, 2019 10:51AM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

evankamp September 20, 2019 11:01AM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Mike Stillwell September 20, 2019 11:15AM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

evankamp September 20, 2019 11:17AM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Mike Stillwell September 20, 2019 11:20AM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

drgwk37 September 20, 2019 11:27AM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

evankamp September 20, 2019 11:44AM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

drgwk37 September 20, 2019 11:48AM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

evankamp September 20, 2019 11:53AM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Joe Weigman September 20, 2019 12:03PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

cdaspit September 20, 2019 02:36PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483 Attachments

Jerry474 September 20, 2019 03:03PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Greg Scholl September 20, 2019 03:09PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483 Attachments

Joe Weigman September 22, 2019 12:04PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

drgwk37 September 22, 2019 04:24PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Kevin Cook November 12, 2019 02:26PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Will Gant September 25, 2019 09:22AM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

HRB November 12, 2019 02:10PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Sean Jackson November 12, 2019 05:17PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

jonaths November 12, 2019 06:19PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Carl T. Henderson November 12, 2019 09:07PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Dirk Ramsey November 12, 2019 09:11PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Joe Weigman November 13, 2019 01:33PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Earl September 22, 2019 08:42AM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

drgwk37 September 22, 2019 04:22PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Rob483 September 24, 2019 08:08PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Ryan Morris September 24, 2019 08:32PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483 Attachments

Jerry474 September 20, 2019 12:31PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Rick Steele September 20, 2019 01:07PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Greg Scholl September 20, 2019 01:13PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

Jerry474 September 20, 2019 01:17PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

guymonmd September 20, 2019 01:19PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

evankamp September 20, 2019 01:24PM

Re: Revisiting the trade for 478 for 483

cdaspit September 20, 2019 02:42PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login