Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Re: #9 - Why NOT Breckenridge?

July 04, 2008 11:22AM
dougvv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Out of curiosity, what would C&S #9 rate on the
> east side of Cumbres (1.42%)?

South Park Division TT #1 of the C&S (effective 6/5/22) lists
class B-3-c (#'s 4-10) at:
240 tons Red Hill-Como (1.66% max eb)

Or you could work from this chain of logic:
class B-3-c were rated the same as class b-4-d (#'s 63-70)

class b-4-c (#'s 57-62) (and b-3-b, #'s 21, 22) were rated just less (for ex: 80 tons vs 110 tons Como - Breckinridge)

Now ISTR that C&S considered the c-19's as inferior to the b-4-d but (slightly) more powerful than b-4-c so that *might* give you a ballpark to figgur on. smiling smiley

hank
Subject Author Posted

Re: #9 - Why NOT Breckenridge?

Russo Loco July 03, 2008 06:11PM

Re: #9 - Why NOT Breckenridge?

Rick Steele July 03, 2008 08:20PM

Re: #9 - Why NOT Breckenridge?

dougvv July 03, 2008 08:37PM

Re: #9 - Why NOT Breckenridge?

hank July 04, 2008 11:22AM

Re: #9 - Why NOT Breckenridge?

Steve Stockham July 04, 2008 12:54PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login