Re: D&RGW #315 + RGS #20 = F&CC #4 + #20 DOUBLEHEADER . . .

Russo Loco Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dave2-8-0 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't 315
> > run with 20 on the RGS during it's leased time.
>
> > If so, wouldn't a 315/20 lash up be
> prototypical?
>
> pd3463 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well they are also {former} FCC locomotives,
> too.
>
>
> AMEN, Phil -
>
> Of course both D&RGW #315 (ex-F&CC #4) and RGS #20
> (ex-F&CC #20) were modified and upgraded
> subsequent to their F&CC days, but (as mentioned
> previously) IMHO they should at least be lettered
> (and given olive green jackets?) for an F&CC
> double-header commemoration (NOT Phraud-O-Graphic
> re-creation) on the C&TS once #20 is operational
> after returning to Colorado.

The Baldwin, as-built and delivered to the F&CC, would've been (dark) olive green overall, but with an unpainted planished iron (NOT green) boiler. Therefore a green boiler would be inappropriate for it. RGS 20, of course, wasn't a Baldwin, and I don't know offhand how Schenectady painted its locomotives during the period just before the ALCO merger. Fair bet it was either black or dark green since any other color would've been unusual for that era.

Last time I recollect anyone from CRRM discussing 20 they reported having no intention of running RGS 20 anywhere except on their own loop. Has their opinion on that issue changed in the past couple years?