"I also want to point out how the brake cylinder is mounted on this pre-rebuilt C&S "waycar". And that there are other unexplained bolts near the bottom edge of the body. We really don't know what the frame gear looks like do we? We assume it is much like the later cars and very different from what we see on 306, but is it?"
This same photo, published in the Grandt Narrow Gauge Pictorial that you co-authored, showed the underframe detail a lot better than in the one you posted above. To my eye, it appears to be the original South Park underframe, with the horizontal equalizing bar with its center bracket and 2 large coil springs removed to allow for addition of air brakes.
It appears that 2 short queen posts have been added to the intermediate sills, that have ends with a triangular section, sort of like the short queen posts of the D&RGW 700-800 series drop bottom gons. Some sort of truss rod seems to run from car body/frame, over queen posts and back to car body/frame, near the journal pedestals.
The brake cylinder mounting board/bracket is in the same place as the later, modern mount, but is different, with a shorter board. The two bolt heads vs NBW likely secure the brake cylinder mount to the car body/frame, reminiscent of the two little bolts on the St Charles 1898 and 1899 boxcars that secured the cylinder to the frame. Also note the shallow little retaining bracket that supports the brake lever attached to the clevis on the cylinder piston.
I'm convinced that to model any DL&G / C&S caboose with air brakes, prior to the 1908 rebuilding program, a modified South Park underframe is required.
I've just received 2 sets of the Sn3 parts and they are beautiful--they even include wood beam brake beams with brake shoes for the earlier cabooses, like the car at Hancock in the opening photo of your post. Wheel base is right on at 9 feet. They will require an new scratchbuilt underframe, likely styrene, but that will only reduce weight. I plan to use one set on my Overland #73 waycar sans cupola to model an early South Park waycar to go with my Berlyn Mason Bogie. I plan to use the other set, maybe more, modified as I've described above, to model 313 as in the photo or 306 with airbakes in 1909, but before receiving its new frame.
Also note that the artist that designed the SouthPark underframe also has Cooke domes (for both 2-6-0 and 2-8-0 boilers) printed in HOn3 and On3. If he can be persuaded to print them in Sn3, then Cooke 2-8-0s c1900-1910 could be built from Railmaster kits. He also has one piece Litchfield DSP&P (Type-A) trucks in On3 and HOn3 that look intiguing--not everyone likes to solder everything!
Derrell Poole wrote:
"And btw I submit that what appears to be a wheel out of place is simply an air hose strategically drooping over the rail... Nor can we be certain this isn't 310. "
This car does have a lot of the features like #306 had.
I took the liberty of attempting to show what I see as the Journalboxes, Wheel and Stepboard, I doubt what you see as a "Hose", it is too perfect of a part-circle compared as to a parabola formed by a drooping hose. An airhose such as the train airline wouldn't be long enough and the "Monkeytail" as you call it should be on the other end, wouldn't be permitted to allowed to drag that close to the rail. The shadows of a tree inside the car screams doctored pic, so the rear wheel at the rail got masked out.
Did anyone else notice the MarkerLamp and Brakeman's Lantern on the Cupola roof? Forward window in the Cupola is open.
Can we see the original picture without B.V. in the background?
I also doubt that the diagonal rods from cupola end wall to roof are really braces; the open end window suggests to me that they are a form of safety grab for use by the brakemen to enter or leave the cupola of the caboose via the roof, without falling off the train while doing so. Since the car has a center cupola, and roof walks on both ends, there are diagonal "braces" on each end. The only cupola roof grabs are again over the end windows.
The 1912 photo of rebuilt and recently renumbered 1003, coupled to engine 44, shows the car has a roof walk on the long car body end only. Visible are lateral roof walks next to the cupola, again at the long car body end only. It also has these diagonal "braces", but only on the end of the coupola with the roof walk and lateral roof walk. Having recently been rebuilt within 3 years, with a new cupola, I dobt that it needed its cupola "braced".
I'm working in the hospital today, will try to post the photo of 1003 from my home computer tomorrow, to illustrate my point.
Jim, methinks the diagonal rods are tension members to stabilize the coupola. Others correct me, but the windows are too small to get on the roof from the coupola. The ladder is a much safer route. Plus, only the side windows are operable.
Now I need to make a trip to CRRM to visit 1009 and check the seating in the coupola. Is it a single bench or stool similar to RGS 0404, or a pair of benches ala the D&RGW cabeese?
Keith, take another look at the enlarged photo that Chris posted of (?)306--note the open end window and cupola roof grab iron. The end windows with curved upper and lower edges of the same diameter actually slid inboard to open and allow acess to the roof. Later, by the 1930s, the end windows were sealed.
The cupola end windows, in order to slide inward, had to have these curved upper and lower edges to match the radius of the roof and cupola roof fascia. That's what makes them hard to scratch build and why we buy brass models.
BTW, this was true of most D&RG cabooses prior to 1910-15, when cupolas were rebuilt with square end windows that were fixed.
I donno, Jim. Maybe I just don't have your depth of perception but while I might see some of what you see I don't see enough to say that this frame is the same as that on 306. The photo in the book isn't any better than the photo in my files. I've played with it in Photoshop attempting to wring more info out of it and it just ain't there. I just tried again earlier today and frankly I've gotten pretty hopeless about finding secrets in bad prints - or negatives; there has to be something there (in the form of Silver Halide) in order for it to be found
My point wasn't what frame this was but that the brake cylinder was adaptable to either or any of the frames. (in support of the idea brake cylinders were applied in the mid to late '90s). If you are correct that this is an earlier (and not necessarily the original) frame you've just reinforced that point.
I have a couple of village depot kits where it appears the RP'd pedestals would work well. Thanks for the link.
Chris - of course it has a lot of features like 306 - because we know better what 306 looked like than 310 . But if 306 and 310 are sisters as seems to be the case then it is possible - even likely - this car was either 306 or 310. Please provide a photo of 310 that proves otherwise.
I didn't call it a Monkeys Tail nor did I say it was a part of either car. Why it was there is inexplicable - if it was a hose. There were 6 men in the photo. The object could have been hung off of either car to get it out of hand while the photo was being taken - or any other reason. The angle of the camera makes it difficult to say the object actually formed a perfect circle.
Human beings have a tendency to interpret what they see by what they pre-see. Oh, it has to be a wheel. You are looking at a 2 dimensional image.
That being said and knowing this is a composite of two photos we probably are looking at something from a double image. But what? It ain't part of the caboose...
We can't see the image without BV because the image is a print from two negatives we don't have.
I suppose it's my own fault for enabling the distraction by adding the fuzzy dice and dingle balls to the end my last "photo essay"; I'll not do that again. ( But don't take benevolence to mean I am not thoroughly incensed!!! ) How long does it take to come up with a post like that? First you have to know the questions to ask. Then think thru the possible answers. You might even lay out a new Excel Chart to help understand how the specifics fit into the overall picture (intended to update the one in Vol. III). This takes time!! Finding the photos and even remembering the photos takes time! Putting it all together takes time! Then Idiot me undercut the primary points with a little "frosting" on the cake - like brake cylinders and hoses (probably because photos distract me).
Let's see if anyone actually ate any of the cake; without reviewing that post who among you remember what the two most important points were? This includes the lurkers
Call it todays pop quiz. Answers later today - and no cheating (looking at the post again).
I concede that the end windows appear to have been operable, but it still seems odd to me that one would exit to the roof through the end windows.
1000 received a coat of ocher primer to emulate the interior color. I am discovering the decoders, keep alive and espeically the speakers are all rather large for these small cars. Too bad Soundtraxx cannot cast the sound card in the form of a locker.
Two main take away points from the long and excellent dissertation were:
1). Cupolas on pre-C&S waycars/cabooses were much more common than we think, some may have been new equipment on the original DSP&P construction of 1880-1885, more likely a result of DL&G rebuilds of the 1890s. Thus, the presence of a cupola does not a U&N caboose make.
2). There is no way to be sure where all the surviving C&S cabooses came from, UP-UPD&G-DL&G-C&S numbering systems for cabooses cause migraines and it is quite possible that all C&S cabooses were originally DSP&P / CC cars.
Answer to Bonus Question that wasn't asked:
Caboose underframes between 1880 and 1908 are vague and mysterious things, with very limited photographic documentation, but the available evidence does not preclude the addition of air brake systems in the 1890s, in keeping with one piece of written DL&G documentation.
Now, I've been working on my own dissertation regarding thoughts on underframes and the fuzzy dice that are cupola "corner braces". Should I post it here or start a new thread? Neither has anything to do with 8-wheel cabooses.
I concede that the end windows appear to have been operable, but it still seems odd to me that one would exit to the roof through the end windows.
You need to approach this from the point of view of a working C&S brakeman in the pre-US Safety Appliance era, say 1903. Remember, there are no end ladders on freight cars, the only way to climb to the top of a boxcar is using 4 widely spaced grab irons on the car side.
Now imagine you're the rear brakeman on a freight train descending Boreas Pass. You're riding in the cupola of little caboose 306, watching the train. Its March, 1903. A spring blizzard has been blowing up all afternoon, with a stiff wind and it's getting dark. You sense the train picking up speed and hear the engineer whistle for hand brakes. You pick up your brake club and need to get to the top of the train. Do you:
a) Walk forward to the caboose platform, stand on one foot while raising your other leg over the end rail to get to the outside of the caboose ladder, then climb said ice encrusted ladder between two swaying narrow gauge cars, while not dropping your brake club. Looking down you see the rails and ties passing by and realize that if you fall between the cars, dismemberment will be the likely result.
Or, do you:
b) Grab your brake club, open the cupola end window in front of you, carefully climb onto the roof, using the lateral roof walk for best footing. Then carefully walk to the center of the caboose, braced by the wall of the cupola; using the roof walk, you carefully move forward along the top of the freight cars, stepping across the gap between cars, tying down hand brakes as you go.
Both scenarios are pretty scary, but I would think that b) would be the safer choice.
I get the impression that most on this thread are looking for an exotic origin for caboose #302, as ex U&N, KC or D&NO car, and over looking the possibility that it could have been a UPD&G car.
It has never been mentioned that in the late 1880's early 90's that the CC had 3 caboose cars. The two
4-wheeled bobbers and boxcar #026652. It is seen numerous times in photos working as box-baggage car in mixed trains on the Sunset route. All though not listed as a way car, it is serving as such, and as a conductors car, which by 19th century definition, is also a caboose.
When Trumbull took over, the rosters were in total chaos. The Union Pacific had imported and mixed into the Colorado roads a large number of U&N and KC cars, all of which along with the Colorado cars were lettered "Union Pacific". No doubt that many of the cars were considerably weathered, making it difficult to see the small lettering that distinguished which road the car belonged to. Hence we have DL&G box cars #24172 and #24258 as being UPD&G cars.
About the only way one could distinguish the rightful owner was by the car numbers.
Looking at the first UPD&G, O. R. E. R. roster, 11/94 we see a plethora of road names. And under the narrow gauge section we find that a number of UPD&G cars are still lettered Colorado Central and still retaining their pre-1885 car numbers.
All of these cars were isolated up the Sunset branch by the flood of 1894.
Also note that these include box cars #1608, 1620 and 1650. My notes indicate that only 1620 was eventually returned to service, an at that time was supposedly renumbered #26561. I am not sure where I got that from.
Also note that #026552 is not listed and yet photos reveal that it was abandoned and set off the track at Sunset.
Box car #26552 was one of 70 cars built for the Colorado Central in 1880. They were originally numbered in the 1500 and 1600's with the last car #1702 in even numbers. In the renumbering of 1885 they were assigned #26531 - 26000.
Counting backwards by ones from 26000 and by 2's from 1702, I come up with box car #26552 as being originally numbered #1608.
Also in the 11/94 roster there are two 8-ton box cars #26500-26505 and #1512 for a total of 3.
The 12-ton box cars total 67 when one includes the above numbered cars isolated by the flood.
The 12/95 roster, when caboose #1782 shows up on the SG section, says the 12-ton cars are still at 67.
However the 1/96 roster, shows narrow gauge caboose #1782 and the count of the 12-ton box cars drops by one to 66.
Which to me opens the door for the possibility that #1782 was formerly a 12-ton Colorado Central box car.
Why it was first listed as a SG car remains unknown, perhaps it was being used as a conductors car similar to #026552 on the SG, and then later it was realized that it was originally a narrow gauge car.
Ron, an excellent observation; we have not considered. This is the kind of thinking that helps channel our understanding forward. I agree that the possibility exists that 1782 was formerly a CCng boxcar. I'm not so sure about the probability.
First I want to put something to rest; I'm not looking for anything exotic (quite the contrary). I'm looking for the truth. It makes no difference what we want the answer to be- it just needs to be the right answer.
I can accept that technically the CCng had 3 cabooses. But the reason they never listed it as a caboose was because 026552 was not a caboose. It was a boxcar; it was listed within the boxcar series, which is why it didn't show up on the roster specifically. It was more like what I'd call a utility car. It wasn't a caboose and it wasn't a baggage car - it was both. Y'all might be interested to know that The Leadville Shops offers a kit of this car in both S and O scale. Find an article on the kit on this blog here; http://coloradosouthern.blogspot.com/2014/08/colorado-central-maintenance-of-way-car.html
In general terms the idea that a 24' ng boxcar would make an excellent candidate for 1782 makes perfect sense - perhaps the argument being that they had already used such a car in the past. So why am I not so sure?
The problem I have is that there isn't a clear line of reason without obstruction to the logic of the premise. Certainly everything is an unknown until it is either proven or disproven and most of this is speculation. My thoughts, your thoughts - anyone who postulates theory. Is this not the only truth we actually have in the absence of fact? I think it is vital to your argument that we clarify why 1782 was on the BG roster at all if it was indeed a converted narrow gauge boxcar. It doesn't make sense that they would number a ng car to an sg series and then return it to the ng with that number. I like things simple and this is just too convoluted to me. Of course we can speculate even further and probably come up with a great story... how does that really help us?
Still just because it makes no sense to us today isn't particularly significant; many stranger things happen all the time. What makes it so difficult is that it is in the face of another more straight forward explanation. I've encouraged welcome a substantiated argument against a D&NO caboose becoming 1782. Yet nothing has yet dispelled that theory - and I'm ready to be convinced. To the contrary, when I was ready to cast it aside information came back that further bolstered it to likelihood. All I've done was to pointed out information that offers a reason why 1782 was on the SG roster. I didn't make it up; the ORERs have been available for over 120 year on this. Furthermore Hol sited that D&NO caboose 2114 became UPD&G 1781. He could not substantiate 2106 actually became 1782. But being the last D&NO caboose on the listing that we know of it seems reasonable to believe it did. Especially since 2106 disappeared when 1782 appeared. If it walks like a duck, right?
I think discussions like this are great discord in that they present the possibilities for us to sort out. When the dust settles I believe, in the absence of a defined documented answer, we will each resign to what makes the most sense. I'm not hoping I'm right - I won't feel warm and fuzzy if it was a D&NO caboose. All i want is to know the truth. Here is the evidence as I've found it; decide for yourselves.