Re: Replica 2-6-6-2...to Tim

This is really an interesting topic if you are a dreamer like me. I think Tim did a great job of describing the plan as it were. Some folks at SVRR suggested that a replica of 50 might be a good plan. It was the darling for a lot of years and would likely be adequate for a pass. consist. A replica of the Tonapah Moguls would have been adequate, as long as the consist didn't grow too much. A replica of the SVRy Baldwin Mikes would be an even better design, because they would be nearly the same TE as 19 and 20 and were pretty conventional in every detail. I think what led to the thinking that replicas of 250 and 251 would be an attractive solution was that their uniqueness would in itself be a drawing card to bolster the ridership. I was never totally convinced that the economics were there to build from scratch engines that were probably larger than needed vs. engines more closely matched to the job one way or another. On the other hand a larger boiler fired at a level well below it's max. firing rate will be more efficient, due to the greater surface area for heat exchange in relation to the amount of steam evaporated. So even though the 250/251 would be heavier, they might well not consume any more fuel than a smaller engine worked to capacity. This is the kind of stuff that the master mechanics/cmo's and mgmt. of old had to grapple with when selecting new power. If SVRy had bought new engines in the late 30's they would probably have looked a lot like the WP&Y 70 class, so replicas of them is also not a stretch. I have not seen anything in writing to verify this, but tradition at SVRy has it that SVRy's master mech. was hired to help design the 70 class. They are everything that the 16, 17, and 18 were as freight hogs plus the speed of 19 and 20 plus superheat for economy. Enough rant.