<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Narrow Gauge Discussion</title>
    <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/list.php?1</link>
    <description><![CDATA[Narrow Gauge Railroad Discussion Forum
This is a forum for the discussion of narrow gauge and steam railroading with a primary emphasis on railroads operating in the US.  While discussions of modeling are welcome, please try to limit such discussions to issues relating to the prototype.  This forum is not associated with any organization or group, and the authors of each post are solely responsible for the content of their post.

The forum is open to anyone to read, however if you wish to participate, you will have to register, and to provide a valid e-mail address.  When you do so, you will be sent a confirmation e-mail with a link which you can use to activate your account.  You are free to use a handle as your screen name should you wish to do so, however we do ask that you provide a real name in the profile associated with your handle.  Beyond that all we ask is that you accord yourself as if you were visiting a friend's house, or roundhouse.  Remember, you are responsible for anything you say.

Rights to all posts are owned by their respective authors.  All other content copyright 2001- 2010 NGDF, all rights reserved.

This board is owned and operated by Don Richter.  Others who have contributed to the upkeep of this board are (in no particular order): Herb Kelsey, Everett Lueck, Bill Ramaley, Rod Jensen, Russ Sperry (El Russo Loco), Josh McNeal, John West, Jim Armstrong, Bob Bergstrom, Greg Scholl, Blake Forbes, and Doug van Veelen.  
]]></description>
    <language>EN</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:20:21 -0500</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:20:21 -0500</lastBuildDate>
    <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
    <generator>Phorum 5.1.22</generator>
    <ttl>600</ttl>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124251#msg-124251</link>
      <author>John Hewlett</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Linn,
How thick is the frame?
What alloy is the replacement piece?
John]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124251#msg-124251</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:20:21 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124247#msg-124247</link>
      <author>Will Gant</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I remember hearing from several people that 20 going around the Museum's track made her into a 4-4-0 American. So that would not surprise me in the least.

318 even has a usable tender, half the locomotive is already finished *cough cough*

Yea...if only it was that easy...]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124247#msg-124247</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:12:48 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124241#msg-124241</link>
      <author>HighCommander</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Linn,
If I recall correctly, and this was many years ago, #20 was being pulled up the grade through the cut, and over the fill. This is where the west switch is for the runaround track. There is a &quot;tight&quot; left hand curve there where the blocks were placed. After being pulled onto the runaround track, #20 was pushed out unto the stub ended display track it sat on until it was moved for transport to Strasburg. Again, my memory is a little fuzzy, but I think thats the way it was. #20 was moved several times to excercise it and was moved on the main under the water tank coupled to Rico for a night photo session. It was kept off the curve. This was after the loop was completed. I agree the firebox welds were adequate, but they looked terrible. We've noticed on the RGS equipment we have. 20, Geese, etc. Some of the welding is great, nice puddling, smooth beads, etc. And others are horrible.  Goose #7 is a good example. Pro welding on the frame, but on the front &quot;suspension&quot; and the pilot the welding is sloppy and dangerous. 
My diagnosis and evaluation of 20's condition is suspect. That's why it went to the best steam rebuild facility with the best director in the country. 346's rebuild was wonderful, 20's should surpass it! Now that you have your feet wet, we still have #318. (I never said that)
Keep doing what your doing.
HighCommander
Bill Gould]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124241#msg-124241</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:30:18 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124229#msg-124229</link>
      <author>Linn W. Moedinger</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Interestingly enough, the pigeon droppings in the firebox were legitimate repairs. The staybolts had been removed, the cracks welded, and the stays replaced. The only thing they did not do was grind off the welds before applying the bolts. While it looked like the all-too-common post-steam repair of globbing weld on top of a defect, it wasn't.

Do you recall whether it was a right or lefthand curve going forward? The lateral on the center drivers wasn't all that bad, but the wheels were shifted way out of line - if I recall correctly to the left side. This means it would go around a right hand curve just fine but a left hand curve could be problematic. I'll have to look at the photos to verify when I get home.]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124229#msg-124229</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:50:05 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124220#msg-124220</link>
      <author>HighCommander</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Number #20's jury rigging:
Bob Richardson tells the story that every time,in later years, the Boiler inspector showed up in Ridgway, No. 20 would be somewhere out on the line at some inaccesible location, making inspection impossible. I have an annual inspection report, dated January 3rd, 1944. Stating #20 underwent Class A-5 repairs in Alamosa. The hydro test was witnessed and notarized. #20 was certified OK. Report says &quot;staybolts hammer tested under 225 lbs. hydro pressure, in the margin. This had to be a legit overhaul/inspection.
20 odd years ago, John Bush had the asbestos removed from #20's boiler and fabricated a new jacket. The boiler was ultrasounded and there were &quot;thin&quot; spots. Visual inspection showed welding in the firebox up to the first course of staybolts for quite a distance on both sides. It looked like a flock of pigeons had had dumped on the firebox. The 2nd set of drivers had so much lateral play, that when moving #20 4'X 4' cribbing had to be laid on the outside &amp; inside of the curved portion of track to keep the 2nd driver set from dropping on the dirt. 
Just thought folks would like to know. It's amazing that 20 operated up to the end of the RGS. 20 also pulled 346 from the Montezuma lumber spur in Dolores to Durango, after Bob Richardson bought 346.
HighCommander]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124220#msg-124220</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:23:45 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124058#msg-124058</link>
      <author>Bill Dennehy</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Linn,
Would it be possible for you to keep us updated on the new passenger trucks you will be assembling for the FEBT. Sure would be nice to see them come together. I've enjoyed all your posts on RGS 20.]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,124058#msg-124058</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 09:29:36 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123680#msg-123680</link>
      <author>K-27 Afficianado</author>
      <description><![CDATA[You guys are on an absolute roll with #20. It'll be quite a sight to see her running with #346 in GOlden.]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123680#msg-123680</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 22:10:22 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123678#msg-123678</link>
      <author>SandingValve</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Linn,

We just had the new tender drawbar for SRY#3 delivered last week. It was cut using water jet because a flame cut could have induced warpage or a twist. It came out very nice, just some enlarging of the holes for the pins is left.

We also took delivery of the tender cistern steel. Many of the rivet holes along the bottom row and the vertical rows along the ends on all the sheets were cut out using water jet to minimize the amount of time spent with the mag-drill. Riveting should begin in 2 weeks, should be like a 'big train kit'. Yippee...

Erik Young]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123678#msg-123678</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 22:03:38 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123650#msg-123650</link>
      <author>myork</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Railroads have many different reasons.  I know that in 30 years ago, they were far more concerned about the steam locomotives than the passengers.  Now days, it is usually the passengers (and the lawsuits) that are the greater concern.

There are many reasons for the diesels.  Here are two examples I've personally been there for:
-leading up to the NRHS convention in Huntington, WV...the 1225 was to make its first major foray outside of Michigan and meet the veteran excursion engine #765 at Lima, OH.  They were then to double head from Lima to Huntington.  The 1225 was 4 hours late in arriving at the Rob Ave. yards in Lima.  She didn't have a speedometer, and so they had to quickly round up a pair of diesels to make her legal (or at least kosher for CSX).  The d-evils were then dropped in Lima and the 765 took the point with her speedometer...they put on an awesome show from there.  Sadly, the 1225 had additional troubles while there and the 765 had to lug her dead plus a 34 car passenger train through the mountains (any surprise that an NKP S-2 was the first locomotive to defeat d-evils head-to-head?)

-I had the pleasure of riding the 30+ car passenger train behind the 261 through the New River Gorge.  It was an eventful day.  Thanks to the my father's long time friend Tom Stevens being the engineer that day, I received a cab ride for the photo run by.  I then had the pleasure of riding the tool car and watching the 261 turn on the wye near Hinton.  Tom mentioned that the 261 was far slipperier than the 765, and we really saw it as she was nearly unable to make it around the wye.  We then returned to Hinton to pick up the train.  Then we had problems.  I don't recall what they were...I think it was an airbrake failure on the 261...and we had to wait for a pair of d-evils to arrive and couple aboard.

My last experience with d-evils and steam was a couple years ago when the 765 had some break-in runs on the PRR between Ft. Wayne &amp; Van Wert.  The local road, so generous in the terms to allow her on their rails, also supplied a dynamic brakes equipped diesel to pull around.  The dynamic brakes were used to simulate heavy trains and give the berk a workout.  

Railroad managements change over time, and different policies have existed.  Some roads insist on their engineer being at the throttle, some don't...some have had previous bad experiences with steam and insist on diesel backup.  Let's not use track of how real railroads used to have many locomotives hot and ready to step in if needed.  The NKP used to use two PA-1s on their top passenger train for if one failed...and I've heard stories from engineers about losing one of their modern diesels while out on the line.  I can certainly understand their fears about fowling the line with a breakdown...something they wouldn't trust even with a lone GP-40.

---------------------------------------------
I can't wait to see #20 rolling again.  I can't get over what a wonderful job is being done on #20.  WoW!  I'd sure love to see her go for a test run on the EBT...you know, a break in run, to make sure everything's fine...before shipping her across the country, make sure there isn't anything the Linn &amp; the wonderful team would still like to fix in Strasburg...and give those of us in the East a chance to see her!  (:P)]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123650#msg-123650</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:29:59 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123624#msg-123624</link>
      <author>Will Gant</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I have read around that she is beat up and worn out. D&amp;S considered restoring her I believe (I am going completely from memory from books), and they stated that she would have to operate at a lower pressure, and since she is already small, it was a bit of a waste.

I think the running gear is shot as well.

I could be completely wrong, but that is what I remember.]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123624#msg-123624</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:28:30 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123613#msg-123613</link>
      <author>Linn W. Moedinger</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Water jet is more accurate than flame cutting but is a bit more limited in thickness before it gets erratic. We use water jet to put holes in flue sheets. We made a radius rod for a customer as well and it came out very nice except we had to allow more for finish at the 5&quot; segment and the jet did wander a bit.]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123613#msg-123613</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:45:11 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123612#msg-123612</link>
      <author>Linn W. Moedinger</author>
      <description><![CDATA[The weight of the locomotive is taken at the equalizer pivots, not at the journal. The main consideration is to prevent movement of the frames from weld shrinkage. This will be done by using a large stitch on the top frame rail and blocking the journal opening. Stress relieving will reduce strain on the welds and they should be as strong as the original frame.]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123612#msg-123612</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:42:58 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123611#msg-123611</link>
      <author>Linn W. Moedinger</author>
      <description><![CDATA[There are extensive weld repairs on both sides of the frame, with more being on the right side. There is actually a piece from another locomotive inserted on the right side. We UT tested the welds and they are not good. Additionally the frame is of varying widths front to rear and it is bent. Rather than repair the existing welds, about 12 in all, we will insert these two new frame sections and weld them with a total of 4 welds. This means less cost for welding, a better frame structurally, and we can straighten the frame as well.

We are still thinking about the volunteer program. Once our winter push is over and we are able to concentrate more on #20 we will try to get work lined up for volunteers.

I can't comment on #42 other than to say that it probably needs a new boiler. I don't know what the machinery is like.]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123611#msg-123611</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:38:53 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123609#msg-123609</link>
      <author>Rick Steele</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Well, young laddy-buck,

Then it's a damn good thing that I don't work for the PR Department and I just run trains, isn't it?

Rick]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123609#msg-123609</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:10:10 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123530#msg-123530</link>
      <author>John Cole</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Daniel, I think Rick meant that in jest.]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123530#msg-123530</guid>
      <pubDate>Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:30:46 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123524#msg-123524</link>
      <author>dandtsrr2</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Rick, you may be a &quot;professional railroader&quot;, however, your posts are certainly anything but professional or respectful.

Daniel]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123524#msg-123524</guid>
      <pubDate>Sun, 01 Mar 2009 01:48:02 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123481#msg-123481</link>
      <author>Rick Steele</author>
      <description><![CDATA[SO there Steele, take that! You..You G-D Professional Railroader, you...

Now back to that weenie engine RGS 20 and the wonderful job that Strasburg is doing on IT.]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123481#msg-123481</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2009 08:15:09 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123467#msg-123467</link>
      <author>dandtsrr2</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Rick,

I believe that you are &quot;woefully misinformed&quot; as to the reasons for my resonse to your post.  If you actually read my original post I state the very thing you are saying.  I may not want the diesels in the mix but I realize that it is necessary for the very reasons I give.  I leave room that there could be other reasons for having a diesel but I am simply making a point that surely a primary reason for including a diesel is concern for failure.  You made a very broad statement that previous posters, including myself, were wrong about the reason for the diesels to the exclusion of all other possibilities.  You may have been referring only to the UP practices but that is not the way your post represented it and you did not allow that mechanical failure had anything to do with the reasons for a diesel in the train.  

I do not intend to bite any hand that is feeding me and my opinion hardly matters to anyone at the UP anyway.  I would have preffered the doubleheader but I was still happy with the show that Steve and the team put on with the awesome train that we had to ride.  Surely, even you would admit that steam [u]without[/u] a diesel would be better.  Alas we do not live in the 1940's and we take what we can get even if we yearn for the day of yore.

Daniel]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123467#msg-123467</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 22:57:23 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123456#msg-123456</link>
      <author>Rick Steele</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Daniel Wrote:

1. I am curious why BNSF would insert a diesel on a train hauled by the 3751 or the 4449. How about the 261? They have no vested interest in protecting the brakes on these cars in the trains that they are hauling that are owned by other parties. I suppose you could make an argument that the diesel would provide additional braking but I would suspect that in most cases the diesel is there to protect the train from the steamer experiencing a menchanical failure.

2. I am also surprised that there is absolutely no concern at UP about a steam only hauled train experiencing a major failure on their very busy mainlines with no steam servicing facilities in close proximity. With two steamers on the train in 2005 there were no diesels. When one steamer failed they went to the diesel standbys from the closest place they could get them. If the diesels are only for braking, why didn't they have them on the doubleheader prior to the failure of the 3985? 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Daniel, the BNSF is not the UP and I have never dealt with the BNSF, as for their diesels with Steam Locomotives, not only do I not know, I really don't care. The Railroad belongs to the BNSF and they have the perfect right to do with it what they wish. Just be greatful that they let Steam out occasionally and don't bitch about the diesels.

2. I'm sure that there is concern for a Steam only failure, but with the traffic that the DP was experiencing when the pin on the 3985 went bad, I'm sure that Steve thought that it was necessary for the diesels. Why no diesel on the way TO Denver? Maybe because he just wanted to show off, he didn't tell me and I didn't ask, I just enjoyed the show. If you don't like the thought of a UP Steamer leading a UP diesel, see my last sentence of the paragraph above.

Remember, both the UP and BNSF are in the Railroad BUSINESS, not in the Railfan business. Running steam is totally optional and on the BN (while Louie Menk was alive) was totally verboten. If you want Steam on the High Iron to continue, don't bite the hand that feeds you and enjoy what you get.

Rick]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123456#msg-123456</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:58:12 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123440#msg-123440</link>
      <author>GeorgeGaskill</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Flame cutting machines are pretty inexpensive as far as large metal working machines are concerned.  Water jet machines are quite expensive and cost more to operate.  Their advantage is there is no heat affected zone in the finished part.  This can be important depending on the alloy that is being cut.  Also, they will cut all kinds of material while a flame cutter is pretty much confined to cutting steel.]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123440#msg-123440</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:11:55 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123436#msg-123436</link>
      <author>mesaman3000</author>
      <description><![CDATA[From my experience, the water jets would still leave a taper in the steel.  It may be more or less of a taper, but it will still be there...  

Casey]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123436#msg-123436</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:03:43 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123408#msg-123408</link>
      <author>jcpatten</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Linn W. Moedinger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
&gt; Actually, it is a flame cut shape out of a piece
&gt; of plate.


Have you had any experience with water jets for cutting pieces out of plate?  Just curious if the water jets require less touch-up afterwards but are more expensive up front?]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123408#msg-123408</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 06:19:35 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123406#msg-123406</link>
      <author>tractor</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Linn I just scanned the RGS 20 paperwork most of it was DRGW paper hopefully posted today or pm me your email and I can email it to you.]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123406#msg-123406</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 02:20:32 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123397#msg-123397</link>
      <author>dandtsrr2</author>
      <description><![CDATA[[quote=Rick Steele][Having been on the UP Steam Crew, I believe that you are woefully misinformed as to the reasons for the diesels.]

Two thoughts come to mind in response to this.  I will not disagree with Rick's assertion of UP's practices and reasons for inserting a diesel.  It would make a lot of sense that UP would want to preserve the cars that they own and want to protect.  However:  

1. I am curious why BNSF would insert a diesel on a train hauled by the 3751 or the 4449.  How about the 261?  They have no vested interest in protecting the brakes on these cars in the trains that they are hauling that are owned by other parties.  I suppose you could make an argument that the diesel would provide additional braking but I would suspect that in most cases the diesel is there to protect the train from the steamer experiencing a menchanical failure.  

2. I am also surprised that there is absolutely no concern at UP about a steam only hauled train experiencing a major failure on their very busy mainlines with no steam servicing facilities in close proximity.  With two steamers on the train in 2005 there were no diesels.  When one steamer failed they went to the diesel standbys from the closest place they could get them.  If the diesels are only for braking, why didn't they have them on the doubleheader prior to the failure of the 3985?

Just my thoughts,
Daniel]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123397#msg-123397</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:54:35 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123392#msg-123392</link>
      <author>mesaman3000</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I am curious about the process of joining the frame pieces at the journal.  Is there any special preparation for setting up this weld?  Will this point of weld be strong enough to support the locomotive, and the pounding of the wheels, rods etc...

Not that I doubt your skills in any way, its just a hard thing to believe that these pieces will be welded together and support all this weight....


Casey]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123392#msg-123392</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:04:25 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123385#msg-123385</link>
      <author>Will Gant</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Thats about what I thought they were there for. I also thought they were along to provide Head end power for the passenger cars. When I was up in Cheyenne, I got to go in the cabs of both 844 and 3985 (as well as D&amp;RGW 5371) and I have seen the MU controls in the cabs to control the disesls.

and I think you mean Drum brakes. Disc brakes are common, Drum brakes are installed on the rear wheels of some cars, and are a pain in the butt to change out, work better, but require twice as many parts]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123385#msg-123385</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:25:38 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123382#msg-123382</link>
      <author>Rick Steele</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Having been on the UP Steam Crew, I believe that you are woefully misinformed as to the reasons for the diesels.

First off, the Steam Locomotive is more than capable of hauling the train. The Diesel is usually tagging along in notch 1 or idle. The main reason that the Diesel is there is to lessen wear and tear on the Passenger fleet.

How so, you may ask? Easy... A Steam Locomotive has no dynamic brakes. So downhill the equipment's brakes are what are being relied on to slow the train. I hate to put it this way, but getting Disc Brakes and installing them on old GSC (General Steel Castings) trucks is a very expensive and time consuming process. They are like disc brakes on a car, they are not easily available or replaceable like freight car brakes. Being a specialty item, are expensive to replace. Having a diesel along for the dynamic brakes just insures that the passenger equipment will be around for many years longer than they otherwise would be.

The 844 and 3985 have been through some very thorough and EXPENSIVE rebuildings in the past couple of years and are in no way any less (and are probably more) like the locomotives that they were built to be. Steve tells me that the 844 rides entirely differently and is much more powerful after its rebuild. It was no slouch before the rebuild, I remember hauling a Special Train outside of Boise at almost 100 mph (according to the tattle-tale hot box detector).

Just because the 844 or 3985 is hauling along a diesel doesn't mean that the diesel is working or that the Steam Locomotive isn't. If you don't like it, they you are perfectly welcome to not go and look and complain.

Rick Steele]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123382#msg-123382</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:11:10 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123378#msg-123378</link>
      <author>Chile John</author>
      <description><![CDATA[You just reinforced my point.  Thanks. Think what UP had to go through to cover their fannies, instead of having backup power already on the train.  QED

CJ]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123378#msg-123378</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:45:42 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123369#msg-123369</link>
      <author>dandtsrr2</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Back in July of 2005 UP ran the Cheyenne Frontier Days special with 3985 and 844 (first trip after firebox and tube replacement).  No diesels were put in the train.  I was supposed to ride the next day after the special with the UP Historical Society as the equipment was repositioned.  On the way to Cheyenne on the day of Frontier Days there was a problem with the 3985 (I think it was main bearing pins, not sure).  The 3985 was set out and a couple of SD40's were added.  In Cheyenne, Steve Lee grabbed the DD40AX for the return to Denver.  The next day, the trip was still on but much to everyone's dissapointment there was no steam doubleheader.  This was however a great train with seven domes in all.

I don't like the diesels in the mix but this is exactly the reason they are included.  On a side note, I guess the DD40 was better than a couple of ratty old SD40's...
[attachment 4718 ThePonyExpress7-24-05_086.JPG-modified.JPG]

Daniel]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123369#msg-123369</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 19:17:03 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RGS #20 frame</title>
      <link>http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123343#msg-123343</link>
      <author>Chile John</author>
      <description><![CDATA[A few years ago the BNSF ran an extensive employee appreciation special.  They had two brand new dismals in the consist.  But I noticed that they really only used the steamer hard when the train was entering or leaving station stops. Otherwise it was just idling along for the ride.

Seems silly I know but think about it.  Dismals are replaceable, but steamers, by and large - aren't. So why use up a steamer's useful lifetime where its unique features aren't really that much needed - like across the eastern plains of New Mexico.

So although I agree with your petulant attitude to a degree, I suggest that you trade in your foamer's hat for a slightly larger size, and start being thankful that we have a couple of Class 1's who are willing to tolerate a steamer occasionally. Maintain your elitest attude and you will find the big boys pinning a sprig of mistletoe to their coattails and walking away. And then where will we be?

CJ]]></description>
      <category>Narrow Gauge Discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,123252,123343#msg-123343</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:31:47 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
