Re: Locos on the RGS

hank Wrote:

> Now for a few quibbles...
>
> > 2nd 1 56 Class 1906
>
> > 1913 D&RG 56/RGS 35/BC&F 1
> There is some evidence that this engine never made
> it to RGS before it was sold to BC&F. All of the
> class 56 engines from the RGW went first to
> Burnham for shopping then on to the RGS and #35
> apparently hadn't been completed yet when the
> Silver Panic and the 1st recievership went down in
> '93.
> >

I hadn't heard that but it is not surprising and a reasonable assumption.


> > 18 60 Class
> > 1891 1916 D&RG 258
> > 19 60 Class
> > 1891 1916 D&RG 259
>>
> > 21 60 Class
> > 1891 1916 D&RG 261
> >
> 18, 19 & 21 were never used(AFAIK) after they went
> outlaw at the start of 1917 but they remained on
> the property, along with 2nd #1, untill the
> mid-20's (1924 by some sources)


This too is not surprising in that 6 of the final 60 Class engines languished on the property providing spare parts until WWII's scrap drives. The seventh (No. 6) remained at Alamosa for repairs (that never came) until around 1940.

OBTW, speaking of the final seven, I seem to recall something about some of them being used after 1926 but apparently they were all OOS before the second receivership in 1939.


> > 26 - Number never assigned
> I have seen, somewhere, that RGS was going to use
> #26 on an addtional ex-RGW engine but that the
> deal fell through. I can't remember where I saw
> this or what engine it was going to be.

That is interesting and may answer the "whither the 26" quandary. Any chance of a source on that one?


> > Quite a stable of power but many were out very
> > early. The little 56 class 2-8-0's were too small

> Actually, records indicate that the RGS used the
> Class 56 engines heavily in the late 1890's, they
> had all just been heavily refurbished at Burnham.
> Class 56 was only a little lighter than Class 60
> but, with main line standard gague after 1890 the
> D&RG system had a surplus of engines with most of
> the smaller ones going away, a process added to by
> the arrival of the Class 125 engines in 1903.

There were a couple that show up in train orders and dispatcher's trainsheets - 27 and 30 come to mind - during that period but as business wound down the smaller engines were sold off as surplus. It has been said (Josie Crum) that management didn't care for the 56 Class locos and wanted to rid themselves of them.

> > of the 60 Class (C-16's) didn't survive the
> 1903
> > edict to install automatic air and equipment
>> and

> I've hever heard that reason given before, do you
> have a source for it?

I'll profess being guilty of logical speculation that the two occurrances - mandate to install automatic air and couplers by 1-1-04 and the sidelining of surplus and worn locos in 1904 - would have that consequence for 1, 5, 7, 8 and 9, much the same as the removal from service of the 2, 13, 18, 19, 20 and 21 coincided with the boiler replacement mandate of 1-1-17.

> I have heard speculation that the Class 56 engines
> were disposed of by the RGS, and many of the Class
> 60 engines were scrapped so that the D&RG, in
> complete control of RGS since 1896, could lease
> engines to RGS for it's own profit. Don't know if
> that was the plan but it certainly worked out that
> way. Note that 1904 is also the point at which
> D&RG was digging up funds for WP construction
> wherever it could.
>

Could well be, knowing the Rio Grande. LOL!

> cheers,
> hank

Cheers backatcha.