Russo Loco Wrote:
--------------------------------------------------
> John Oldberg directs a back-up move; I don't
> remember whether this was to re-rail #484's
> trailing truck or her tender – or both
. . .
Casey Akin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------
> Judging by the relationship of the tender to
> the engine, Id say this is at least to re-rail the
> front tender truck. The tenders on the K-36's
> are narrower than the cab, and the only two
> ways I see for them to hang outside the width
> of the cab is either on an "S" turn (which doesn't
> seem to be the case here) or to be derailed. I
> would have no idea if they were trying to re-rail
> both here, as I was not born yet, but if the ten-
> der went on, there doesn't seem to be a good
> reason to relocate the re-rail frogs before the
> trailing truck
. . .
There's no question that the tender was on the ties, Casey -
What there was left of them.* My question is based only on the series of photos – all on one strip of negatives, and numbered so there's no question of the sequence – that showed a frog under the trailing truck and then a couple shots later a frog under the tender but no shot of re-railing the engine in between. So did they try to do it all in just one move – which seems highly difficult and unlikely – or did I somehow skip any shots of rerailing just the engine? OTOH, there would be no way to move just the engine without moving the derailed tender at the same time, so
. . .
- El Abuelo Histœrico, Greengo y Curmudgeoño de los Locomoturas Viejos y Verdes,
aka Der Grossväterlich DünkelOlivGrünDampfKesselMantelLiebHabender
* IIRC, the initial derailment happened because the rails spread due to too many old and weak ties, and this happened again – maybe more than once – when they attempted to get #484, and her tender, and the flanger, all back on the track.