Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

February 12, 2005 01:12PM
This wives tale of 268 or 278 having K27 tenders just will not go away. This was discussed before and the D&RGW records clearly show that it NEVER happened.
I wrote the history of 268 and 278 using D&RGW records provided by Jack Thode and others. 278's tender was rebuilt long before any K27 was scrapped and 268s tender was not completey rebuilt, just the cistern (tank) which the shops were perfectly capable of doing easily. Anyone want to wager how long it will be before this crops up again?
[www.drgw.org]
Subject Author Posted

C-16 No. 268 Tender

Kenneth Milner February 11, 2005 05:15PM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Paul Gibbs February 11, 2005 05:59PM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Kenneth Milner February 11, 2005 08:04PM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Fred February 11, 2005 10:47PM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Jerry Day February 12, 2005 01:12PM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Fred February 12, 2005 02:13PM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Dennis O'Berry February 12, 2005 05:07PM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Fred February 12, 2005 06:33PM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Paul Gibbs February 12, 2005 09:02PM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Jerry Day February 12, 2005 07:44PM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Kenneth Milner February 13, 2005 08:52PM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Mike Stillwell February 14, 2005 06:34AM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Jerry Day February 14, 2005 07:52AM

Re: C-16 No. 268 Tender

Bill Dennehy February 14, 2005 08:37AM



Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.