Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

D&RG, D&RGW and money

February 24, 2019 08:13AM
Earl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chris Walker Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Earl,
> >
> > can you offer any insight into why the Grande
> > didn't adopt the flexi's earlier or upgrade
> rather
> > than treading the well worn path of
> obsolescence?
> > Same goes for continuing with those brass
> blocks
> > for axle bearings instead of rollers, and also
> > putting rollers on the main rods?
>
> The answer is quite simple....
>
> They were cheap and didn't spend a dime more than
> they had to.

Given the mess George Gould & co left the D&RG in by 1918, they didn't have a lot of dimes to spend. Most of the improvements to the D&RGW in the 1920's were done on borrowed $$$. Not to mention the narrow gauge always seemed to be sucking hind teat, however much there was to spend. Frankly, given the attitudes of management towards the narrow gauge, I sometimes amazed as much got done on the 3' lines in the 1920's as actually did!

Of course by the 1920's something had to be done if they were going to keep running trains at all. For example, except for the areas (Salida - Gunnison, and Cumbres - Chama) upgrading for the use of the Class 125 (K-27) engines in 1902-12, almost all of the track still had 40 & 45 lb rail laid in the 1880's up until the 1920's and most of that was beaten to death.

You pinch pennies long enough and it becomes habit, "the way we do things around here," and nobody even considers changes. It can even become a (perverse) source of pride: "Look how much we can get done with almost nothing." Sometimes even when you get some $$$, you spend it on fixing up the old things instead fo even considering improvements. For example, consider the reboilering the Class 47, 60 & 70 engines (forced by ICC regs) in 1912-17. Might have made much more sense, in the long run, to spend the money replacing them, say with some new 4-6-2's & 2-8-2's & perhaps a few 2-6-6-2 or 2-8-8-2 Mallets for helper service but I've never seen even a hint that this was considered. (During the same period the std gauge got 2-8-2's, 2-10-2's, 4-6-2's & 2-8-8-2 Mallets)( oh, and the West side of Soldier Summit was rebuilt to reduce the ruling grades from 4 percent to 2 percent in 1913)

Hank
Subject Author Posted

D&S Feb 17, 2019 Attachments

Earl February 23, 2019 08:21PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

guymonmd February 23, 2019 08:55PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

Chris Walker February 23, 2019 09:15PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

Earl February 23, 2019 10:29PM

D&RG, D&RGW and money

hank February 24, 2019 08:13AM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

SR_Krause February 24, 2019 04:47PM

Re: Roller-Bearing Axles . . .

Russo Loco February 24, 2019 07:26PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019 Attachments

Chris Walker February 24, 2019 08:44PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

SR_Krause February 24, 2019 08:54PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

SR_Krause February 24, 2019 08:49PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

Rick Steele February 25, 2019 11:59AM

Re: Roller-Bearing Axles . . .

Russo Loco February 25, 2019 03:15PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

Brian Norden February 24, 2019 06:54PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

Earl February 23, 2019 10:45PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

Mark Huber February 23, 2019 10:54PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

Kelly Anderson February 24, 2019 07:53PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019 Attachments

Earl February 24, 2019 09:51PM

Flexible stay position selection

cdaspit February 24, 2019 08:17PM

Re: Flexible stay position selection

Earl February 24, 2019 09:55PM

Re: Flexible stay position selection

rehunn February 25, 2019 01:10PM

Re: D&S Feb 17, 2019

drgwk37 February 25, 2019 06:32PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login