 |
| Denver Public Library |
 |
| Derrell Poole |
 |
| Derrell Poole |
Saturday, June 14, 2014
Roper's Snapshot Saturday No.4 | 7 Comments - Click Here :
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
The first photo is the McClure photo Chris “upsidedown” mentioned in last week’s discussion. The photo was taken in 1906, which seems to be one of his stellar, photo-binge years. If you compare No. 8 in 1906 to that of the Buckwalter Photo of 1901 you will note a number of differences – and a number of details that are the same. For instance the obvious changes were the Headlamp location, the Sanding lines and the Lettering. What seems to be the same would be the tender (overall) including the outside hung brake beams. Many specifics about the paint scheme as well as things like the stack, domes, cab windows and sheathing, most of the piping and even the brass ball on top of the bell are the same.
ReplyDeleteSo what other details have changed? Anyone?
Is the color scheme the same in 1906 as it was in 1901? What was the color scheme of No. 8?
That is what the other two photos are about. I know, I know, I know; "so why didn’t you give us color photos, Derrell? Why is everything in b&w? Because I’ve never seen a color photo of any of the C&Sng equipment before about 1936? Consider that these photos point out the colors – specifically Scale Coat colors (except where I mixed silver and white) – so that you can replicate what you see here yourself. I would not do that if they were in color.
These are my opinion. I cannot prove any of them – but to the best of my knowledge no one can disprove them either.
At the heart of these assumptions is the Entwined Herald. That Trademark was established in 1901. (No. 8 was apparently the FIRST locomotive to use it, even tho C&S 323 (iirc) built at Schenectady, NY, in Jan. 1902, was lettered by the builder in this TM and therefore the Engine of Record to use it first.) To the point here, the Entwined TM was designed specifically for passenger engines. Generally, across the Nation, passenger cars were being painted some type of dark green. They were green on the C&S. Photographs of the period strongly indicate parts of these engines were some color other than black. What would that color logically be? Green perhaps? Again it was not unusual to see Green on engines anywhere in the Nation at that time.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteNo. 8 may not have a green boiler jacket in the Buckwalter photo. Clearly I don’t believe it did. The Entwined Herald was generally executed in Gold (Leaf). That stands to reason since the original C&S Herald applied in 1899 was executed in gold– probably Dulux, but in some cases Leaf. But No. 8’s lettering was in Silver Leaf. That stands to reason because it was the First Application and therefore subject to discovery (as in; is this the look we want or not?). Furthermore the RR commitment to an outstanding yet tasteful presentation of a Passenger engine can be extrapolated from this locomotive portrait. (Nevertheless its smaller size was still something of a lesser risk if the job was not so successful.)
These elements combined made the scheme used on No. 8 rather unique. At least I’ve not seen another exactly like it. The 3rd photo is the more typical – perhaps the standard scheme (to the best of my determination) of a Mogul paint scheme. This one reflects the probability (imo) of the passenger duty engine with plenty of dark Green to match the coaches. Even the 4 Cooke Moguls rebuilt prior to No.8 were repainted after No.8 to reflect this (theoretical) green scheme. That would include No. 8, as I believe the above photo suggests. This scheme seems to have continued right up until the CB&Q took over in late 1908 and consequently beyond. The photo of No. 9 at Baileys, alleged to have been taken around 1910, again suggests an engine that could have been painted in a green scheme.
Now. I hear rumors that there readers who have preferred to discuss the topics we post here on some of the Yahoo or Narrow Gauge Groups. I am not a participant in those groups anymore so whatever you say there I am only going to know about WHEN someone tells me. Wonder if y’all might consider talking to the correct end of the horse – as in HERE. All I ask is that, no matter how you log in (anonymous?), please sign your name at the bottom of your post.
Thanks…
Derrell
Derrell Poole wrote : For instance the obvious changes were the Headlamp location, the Sanding lines and the Lettering. So what other details have changed? Anyone?
ReplyDeleteOK, here goes...
On the Locomotive,
Brake Cylinders moved from between 1st and 2nd drivers back to under cab, revised brake rigging allowing braking on three axles rather than two.
The Equalizing Reservoir has moved forward from the underside centre of cab and rotated 90* with a longer Auxiliary air res. is under the rear of the cab. Air pump is larger, Driver's side injector has migrated into the cab, a bracket supporting Injector pipe to checkvalve, twin Lubricators now fitted to the main driving Rod Big-End.
Cylinder cocks now lever operated, Marker lamps now higher mounted on handrail stanchion, original bracket remains. Two airlines draped over Pilot, Whistle valve linkage different, a wheelvalve is fitted to the Safety valve cluster.
Cab reinforced with steel lower sideplates, now has a roofhatch, cab grab-iron extended (changes back again to original in the OP-6041 picture), Driver's anti-tanning device (sunshade)missing, Cab front door now opens inwards,
On the Tender,
Solid wooden, steel-strap braced coalboards replaced with steelstrap "boards", new patch applied "ern" location of lettering, lockers now constructed from T&G, now hasp padlock on lockerdoor, appears to have steel plate instead of wooden grating between lockers, truck brakebeams steel instead of wood, pipe running from water leg along frame feeding two coiled hoses (no idea why/what purpose), appears to be a toolbox on rear tankdeck.
One more, the lococrew aren't posers. :)
UpSideDown C
YOUR HIRED!
ReplyDeleteYou've seen several things that I didn't. But this is exactly why I ask for folks to participate. You will see things that I don't...
... seems a fair exchange to me.
Now I have to go back and examine the two photos more closely...
Yikes! THANKs, Chris upsidedown.
Derrell
I reconfigured your listings, Chris-down-below-and-inverted, and then checked them out. Below is what I observed. Excellent work btw!
ReplyDeleteOn the Locomotive,
1) Brake Cylinders moved from between 1st and 2nd drivers back to under cab. - Y
2) The Equalizing Reservoir has moved forward from the underside centre of cab and rotated 90* - Y
3) with a longer Auxiliary air res. is under the rear of the cab. - Y
4) Air pump is larger - Y
5) Driver's side injector has migrated into the cab, - Y (Same should be true for the Fireman’s side).
6) a bracket supporting Injector pipe to checkvalve, - Y
7) twin Lubricators now fitted to the main driving Rod Big-End. - Y
8) Cylinder cocks now lever operated – N (I think you can see the rod enter the cab below the doorway just above the reversing rod on both views of the engine. The configuation might be different tho because typically the lever to the cocks is behind the steam chest and cylinder and well toward the rear of the cylinder. The 1901 photo is a bit dark).
9) Marker lamps now higher mounted on handrail stanchion original bracket remains – Y (actually the marker is mounted to the handrail just in front of the stantion)
10) Two airlines draped over Pilot – Y
11) Whistle valve linkage different, - Y and the whistle stem is not as tall
12) a wheelvalve is fitted to the Safety valve cluster – Y (I think this might be called a spiggot and it appears the “pop valves “ are both different. The spiggot was an auxilery steam source. The same thing appears on 2-8-0s sticking out of the front of the steam dome.)
13) Cab reinforced with steel lower sideplates – Not sure I see what you mean.
14) Cab now has a roofhatch - Y
15) cab grab-iron extended (changes back again to original in the OP-6041 picture) - Y
16) Driver's anti-tanning device (sunshade)missing - Y
17) Cab front door now opens inwards – Y (and opens from the opposite direction. This is true of both Front and Rear doors).
Part 2
ReplyDeleteOn the Tender,
18) Solid wooden, steel-strap braced coalboards replaced with steelstrap "boards" – Actually the entire Bunker Extension on the 1906 tender is different (sides seem lower and backboard higher than 1901 and the 1906 backboard is flat across the top where as the 1901 backboard seems to have an arch in it.
19) new patch applied "ern" location of lettering, -Y
20) lockers now constructed from T&G – Y and perhaps taller than in 1901
21) now has padlock on lockerdoor – Uhhh… the hasp would be the more “permanent” device and it appears there may be one on the locker in the 1901 photo. Also now that it appears the door open the opposite direction in the 1906 photo.
22) appears to have steel plate instead of wooden grating between lockers, - more research on this
23) truck brakebeams steel instead of wood - Y
24) pipe running from water leg along frame feeding two coiled hoses (no idea why/what purpose) – this is typically the retainer valve for the tender air brakes. The Valve is usually located on the water wing vertically from where the line elbows upward. This line is also visible on the 1901 view below the tender deck and seems to disappear under the frame. It could be in both cases the valve is mounted on the inside of the Fireman’s water wing but that means in the 1906 view the line is passed thru the nose of the water wing – that seems odd. Why put two potential leaks in the tank so there is likely another explanation we are not aware of.
25) appears to be a toolbox on rear tankdeck – something is there but it isn’t clear that it is permanent. I think there was an effort to keep this deck clear as it was often wet (or frozen in winter).
Additionally
26) I would add that I believe there is a marker lamp cup hanging off the corner of flair of the tender. I’ve not noticed one of this style before. Prior to the rebuilds the tenders used a marker cup that looked more like a barrel cage.
27) And there is a vertical handgrab on the back corner of the tank as well as a stirrup step on the 1906 rear end sill.
28) And don’t forget the coupler lift bars for the knuckle couplers seen on the end sill. (And the pilot on the engine as well)
The summary lesson to all of this is that things were changing constantly.
Derrell
No Problem,
Deletenot being a Steam Enginedriver, the cylinder cocks to me at first in Buckwalter's pic looked air-operated, I completely missed the lever at the Cylinder rear, but it has been moved forward of the Cylinders none-the-less in the McClure pic. A couple of outside-the-USA labels got in there, we call globe valves (Wheelvalves), Tap's, and spigots were on appliances(airbrake cylinders etc). The haspNstaple, plane old "hasp" here, the "hasp padlock" is what we call the oldfashioned padlocks down here. I did see the vacant hasp but called it wrong as is saying that it was now locked. (working crew too busy to guard their lunches?)
As for the meaning of your number 13. I should have wrote the cabside is now sheathed with steelplate below the window slide rail. Riveted or coach-bolted on as opposed to a few bolts at strategic locations as with the wooden cab.
Your number 24. Definitely not the Retainer valve line, I can't say where it was though but I'm certain that ain't it. I doubt very much it wouldn't be elbowed into the water-leg, that would be a nightmare for maintenance and wouldn't explain those two coiled hoses. From what I understand we had very few steam locomotives with a retainer for the tender brakes, none of our rolling stock (at least after the WW2) had them thus I am unfamiliar. Our Locomotives had very little variation, only confined to batches and each loco in that batch the same. We received instruction on each so this trying to decifer the differences between makes (and size) of airpump, injectors and Airbrake equipment shedules is difficult for me. I had to do #4, 6SL, 26L airvalves but have never seen firsthand the early A6ET all though did learn part of that schedule some 33 years ago.
Looking at the next old photo of #8 (DPL OP-6041) the "ern" patch has disappeared yet the lower patch is mirrored at the rear of the tank. Is this the same tank in the Beartrap era or is it from another Mogul ?
As for your colour renditions I have no clue. I don't even dare offer anything as I can barely tell the difference other than in shades and no clue as to what that shade would be. So I won't go there in case you're wondering. :)
Great Fun!! What's next?
Downunder C.