Quantcast

C&S #22

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
67 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Jerry Kitts
Robert,

I can not see the photos your talking about I have a Abridged Edition of the Pictorial supplement. Nothing on those pages that is #22 or its previous numbers in my book.

Maybe someone with the right addition and a scanner can fix me up?

Jerry

On Mar 11, 2015, at 6:58 PM, Robert McFarland [via C&Sn3 Discussion Forum] wrote:

Check the photos on 351 and 365 of the DSP&P Pictorial.Thats a beautiful well built model.Don't forget the cab roof clerestory and the coal  board extensions on the tender.

Jerry in California
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Chris Walker
I can only guess Jerry but pg 331 Trowbridge Ed. I see #22 in the early years atop the Como table.  I don't have the richmans version either {:))
UpSideDownC
in New Zealand
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Robert McFarland
Both photos are in the Locomotives and Cars chapter.Chris correctly identified 22 on the Como table, the other photo  was taken at London Jct. when  it was DL&G 162-there are four men standing in front of it.Rich mans  edition  my ***.My mom bought it for my 12th birthday for $15-and she ordered it from the Rocky Mountain Railroad Club.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Robert McFarland
In 1959.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Chris Walker
Caboose Hobbies currently have one Original Pict Sup to DSP&P for $150 vs $40 (1986) so yes the Richmans version.  You were most fortunate
UpSideDownC
in New Zealand
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Robert McFarland
Yeah,and what are you getting for that $40 ?The picture quality isn't very good and they left out significant parts of the book.The "reprint" that was done of  Goin' Railroading left out practically all of the photographs.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Mike Keplinger
In reply to this post by Jerry Kitts
Jerry, Ed Gebhardt had an excellent drawing of C&S 22 in  the May/June issue of the Narrow Gauge and Short Line Gazette. Amazon currently has a copy on sale for
$10.99 plus $3.99 shipping.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Jerry Kitts
Hello Mike,

What year is the Gazette? I have all of the older ones.

Jerry

On Mar 12, 2015, at 6:17 AM, Mike Keplinger [via C&Sn3 Discussion  
Forum] wrote:

> Jerry, Ed Gebhardt had an excellent drawing of C&S 22 in  the May/
> June issue of the Narrow Gauge and Short Line Gazette. Amazon  
> currently has a copy on sale for
> $10.99 plus $3.99 shipping.
>

Jerry in California
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Mike Keplinger
Sorry Jerry,   I thought I put that in, ...1989.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Jerry Kitts
Thanks Mike,

I went right to it. I will study the plan this evening.
Jerry

On Mar 12, 2015, at 11:46 AM, Mike Keplinger [via C&Sn3 Discussion  
Forum] wrote:

> Sorry Jerry,   I thought I put that in, ...1989.
>

Jerry in California
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Jerry Kitts
Guys,

This is what I have found for the tender framing so far.

#75's tender on its back.

The photo is scanned from the DSP&P Pictorial Supplement Abridged Edition.

From what I see of other tenders they seem to be similar and until I can prove other wise I will try to follow this tender for details. I see even things like the angle braces on the #5's tender show on the #21's tender.

#21's tender.

This photo is part of photo from DPL.

Look at the shadows and what you can see of the edge of the tender it looks like there is nothing on top of the boards that are spaced apart to support the tank. I am guessing that the coal bunker must have some sheet metal over the deck.

The body bolsters are different from anything I have seen so far. The brake rigging looks complicated but I have not really given it a good going over yet.

So the idea of looking for wreck pictures was a good one. I will have to look for more of them and see if any more tenders are showing their undersides.

Jerry in California
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Chris Walker

http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/42417/rv/singleitem/rec/8



http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/42516/rv/singleitem/rec/1



http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/42509/rv/singleitem/rec/1

Jerry,
#75's tender looks to be very much steel C-channel vs wood beams on the #21/#22 and somewhat further inwards as well.
On pg122 Trowbridge Ed. Pict. Sup. is a shot of #9 over on its side(same photo pg 283 Platte Canon Memories) and pg142 shows the Bunker floor sheet on the #21.
UpSideDownC
in New Zealand
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

John Schapekahm
In reply to this post by Robert McFarland
Robert - - - Some years back I wandered into Scotty’s (Railroad Art by Scotty) up in Silverton, and, lo and behold, there, in the used bookrack, was a mint copy (marginal dust jacket) of Kindig, R.H., Haley, E.J. and Poor, M.C.  Pictorial Supplement to Denver, South Park and Pacific. Denver, CO: Rocky Mountain Railroad Club, World Press, 1959, S/N (2945) – the woman at the register said it had been there several months – suffice it to say, it didn’t last another day in Silverton - AND - suffice (2nd) it to say it cost me something north of $15.00 to make it mine …
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Mallory Hope Ferrell
In reply to this post by Derrell Poole
Nope...models roofs are not red-Mal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Jerry Kitts
In reply to this post by Chris Walker

On Mar 12, 2015, at 10:34 PM, Chris Walker [via C&Sn3 Discussion Forum] wrote:

http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/42417/rv/singleitem/rec/8

http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/42516/rv/singleitem/rec/1

http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/42509/rv/singleitem/rec/1

Jerry,
#75's tender looks to be very much steel C-channel vs wood beams on the #21/#22 and somewhat further inwards as well.
On pg122 Trowbridge Ed. Pict. Sup. is a shot of #9 over on its side(same photo pg 283 Platte Canon Memories) and pg142 shows the Bunker floor sheet on the #21.

Hey Chris,

I really hate email because it is so easy to misinterpret what we are writing from humor to being just plain mean spirited. I am hoping for a discussion, not a debate and certainly not saying your out of your cotton picking mind. Then throw in we live in two different countries and separated by a common language using some of the same words that have different meanings to each of us.

After you said that the side sill was a "C" channel I had another look at the upside down shot of #75's tender. The shadows are such that its hard to really see what we are looking at. It could be a thinner timber than one might expect for a side sill or maybe it could be a steel or iron channel. A cleaner print of the negative if there is one would show us the inside of the side sill on the other side and there would be no doubt about what material it is.

The #75 was built long after the #22 was built and it could well be a "C" channel. Do we have any kind of record saying that that this series of engines came with or were modified with steel frame work? The way the body bolster attaches to the side sill looks like the way one would expect them to be attached to wood. The ends bent over and instead of a small lip there is a rather generous lip to help keep things in place says wood to me.

I do see similarities between the #22 and #75 tenders and will proceed with my drawing using some of the information I see on the upside down tender to guide me with the tender for #22. I will attempt to get my side sill in the right place using the measuring tools in PhotoShop. As the photos are all at angles coming up with exact measurements will not be easy. Some judgement can be used with timber sizes compared to what you could buy for finished sizes at the lumber yard in the time period. Always hard to do research and leave today behind.

I am more than happy to have my drawing corrected a hundred times if that is what it takes to get it right. The beauty of cad drawing its so easy to make corrections.

Right Side Up in California, Jerry


Jerry in California
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Rick Steele
But Jerry....

I've met Chris and he IS out of his cotton-pickin' mind.

Rick
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Jerry Kitts
Well there you have it!

I will proceed accordingly.

Jerry


On Mar 13, 2015, at 12:49 PM, Rick Steele [via C&Sn3 Discussion  
Forum] wrote:

> But Jerry....
>
> I've met Chris and he IS out of his cotton-pickin' mind.
>
> Rick

Jerry in California
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Chris Walker
Gerry,  I was just under the impression it was steel given that the members are narrower and thinner, fewer number of members and the outers further in than with the normal wooden frame.  I been more involved with building Mine cars over the past ten years, a 4"x8" timber was replaced with 3"x6" extra heavy (cross-section) taper flanged channel.  That's what it looked more like to me.

Looking at the #315 book which dimensions in great detail a wooden framed tender from the 1890's, there was a 9"x10" centersill with two 4"x10" intermediate and two 4"x10" side sills with cast gussett corner blocks.  The #75's tender is larger and longer than the #21/22, the lack of an outside sill is what leads me to think Steel.  One would not substitute smaller and lesser number of members in that service I would think, the #75 was also likely to be pushed on by the #76 so would have to have a stronger tender. Also looking at the DB&W pictures had a different frame as built(?) View http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/51265/rv/singleitem/rec/2

Now you may well have used that picture of the #75 to have illustrated the way the C&S did their tenderdeck floors for all I know and not intended to build it as such, as you say it is hard to inflect intention in this medium.  You're right about the common language difficulty as well.  Never picked cotton in my life, but I did pull a few cow's tits back on the Farm {:))

Here's some more fuel for the fire.  {:))


http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/72060/rv/singleitem/rec/7



http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/72057/rv/singleitem/rec/4



http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/72054/rv/singleitem/rec/2
UpSideDownC
in New Zealand
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Keith Hayes
My money is on wood sills with a cast bolster. This is the C&S, after all. Full disclosure: I have neither picked cotton nor milked cows. I have watched paint dry and corn grow, though.
Keith Hayes
Leadville in Sn3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: C&S #22

Jerry Kitts
In reply to this post by Chris Walker
Chris,

I think your right about the metal parts on the #75 tender. That was just a side journey anyway trying to guess what the smaller tender looked like underneath.

Now one of the photos of #10's tender has a whole lot to say. The photo I left on the message shows part of the floor. The sun angle is a great help. It looks like the boards make a full deck with every other board going no further than the top of the side sill. This makes a bit more since than every other board being missing all the way across.

I still think there is some sheet iron or heavy tin on top of the floor were the coal sits to keep the fireman's shovel from digging into the floor boards.

I have a question about the way you search DPL. I have been searching at DPL for C&S photos and you keep turning up more than I am finding. Could you give an example of your search words for finding the wreck photo of #10 as an example?

It does not appear that the C&S did not use intermediate sills on their tenders at least not on the 2-6-0s.

Thanks for today's help,
Jerry
Jerry in California
1234
Loading...