Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Marker,

 

The CB&Q leased 10 USRA heavy Santa Fe's to C&S for the loco's entire life.   Mostly ran south of Denver.

 

The C&S's USRA heavy mike's were purchased from the CB&Q in 1957,

 

C&S 4-6-2 numbers 350 - 354 were copies of CB&Q S-2s 2900-2949.

 

C&S 370 - 372 were CB&Q 2965, 2970 and 2973.

C&S 373 - 375 were copies of the 370 - 372 but with 69" drivers.

 

C&S 800 - 804 were similar to the CB&Qs O-1 class.  

 

C&S 2-10-2 class E5A were copies of CB&Q M-2A.

 

On the other hand, C&S 4-6-0 numbers 330 - 331 were on long term lease to the CB&Q.

 

Chicago controlled the purse strings.

 

ChipR

Originally Posted by marker: 

I asked the question because I'm interested in trying to get Sunset/3rd Rail to produce a C&S 2-10-2 that could also be modeled for the CB&Q.  I think it might be a good candidate.  

The CB&Q/C&S 2-10-2 project has already been "discussed" with Scott Mann, some years ago. I believe the general thinking was, and is now, whether to do a CB&Q "O" Class 2-8-2 first, or the larger 2-10-2 classes for CB&Q/C&S. My personal preference is to offer the big USRA Heavy O-4 class 2-8-2 first, the the bigger 2-10-2 classes.

"Chicago controlled the purse strings".......as noted by ChipR. The USRA heavy 2-10-2's that landed on the C&S, started on the "Q", in coal train service on the Beardstown Division. Apparently they were pretty slippery, so were shucked off on the C&S. All C&S power after the road was acquired from the Union Pacific after the turn of the century (ok, I'm still living mentally in the last century!) was either passed off from the "Q" or was built to Burlington specification.

       Hol Wagner's book from 1970 on C&S/FW&D power revealed some interesting proposals by the C&S for motive power. They wanted CB&Q 4-8-4's; Chicago gave them B1a Mountains. They wanted either 2-8-8-2's, like the Rio Grande's L131, or 4-6-6-4's  like Rio Grande's L105 or Northern Pacific's Z6, to tame the C&S undulating right-of-way. "Chicago" put the ka-bosh (how's that spelled?!) on all that and essentially told the C&S to live with WW I era 2-10-2's. Subsidiary roads generally came up short when making capital expenditure requests!

Originally Posted by mark s:

 

       Hol Wagner's book from 1970 on C&S/FW&D power revealed some interesting proposals by the C&S for motive power. They wanted CB&Q 4-8-4's; Chicago gave them B1a Mountains. They wanted either 2-8-8-2's, like the Rio Grande's L131, or 4-6-6-4's  like Rio Grande's L105 or Northern Pacific's Z6, to tame the C&S undulating right-of-way. "Chicago" put the ka-bosh (how's that spelled?!) on all that and essentially told the C&S to live with WW I era 2-10-2's. Subsidiary roads generally came up short when making capital expenditure requests!

Wow, big honkin' articulateds with a Burlington herald on the tank.  THAT would've been sumpthin' ta see...

 

Rusty

Of course the Burlington did have early articulateds:  GN-inspired 2-6-6-2's from 1906-07 era, 2-6-6-2's of unique design for the CB&Q which worked in the Black Hills out of Edgemont, SD until 1950, and a lonesome 1911 2-8-8-2 which did pusher work on the Beardstown Line, then ended up in hump service in Galesburg. The latter was scrapped in 1934. Read a rather frightening description of that 2-8-8-2 pushing on the back of a waycar with the floor literally rising and falling with each piston thrust. The crew repaired to a coal gon a couple of cars ahead!

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×