Jerry Day Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I guess I am puzzled why the D&RGW operated trains
> over both trestles all these years with two
> passenger trains a day, a number of freight and
> helper movements and no fire. I am not one of
> those black helicopter conspiracy loons, but
> something just doesn't seem right about this whole
> thing.
>
> Jerry Day
Perhaps the Rio Grande maintained their ashpans tighter that C&TS does. I’m just throwing that out as a possibility, since it doesn’t take much of a crack to allow good sized embers to be deposited right where they can do the most damage. For that matter, we have also experienced hostler mind farts where the train left town with the ashpan doors still open. Easy to confirm by the fires every few yards.
Also, it seems that in the vast majority of historical photos, the Rio Grande was able to operate without stack screens at all. Does that point to a generally wetter climate back in the day? Perhaps a long term drying trend has rendered the bridge timbers more susceptible to being kindled.
Regarding the late evening time of the alarm being raised, consider this event: A few years ago, the Railroad Museum of PA was scrapping some junk with a torch on a wooden decked flat car out in their yard. All torch work was stopped two hours before quitting time and a fire watch kept until quitting time in the late afternoon. The same workers arrived back at the museum the next morning neck and neck with the fire department who had been called by a passing motorist who saw the merrily burning flat car while driving past. Judging by the state of the fire at 7:30 am, and the amount of fuel in a flat car deck, they estimated that the fire started burning in earnest at about 6:00 am. Whatever hot ember that started that fire smoldered for about fourteen hours before taking off. I have no problem believing that the fire on the C&TS was started by that afternoon’s train.
