Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Old Irons

Expand Messages
  • Gino And Kelly DiCarlo
    Here s something I ve always wondered about. Maybe Paul Larner can help me out with this. Why did the railroads of the 40 s and the 50 s scrap all their
    Message 1 of 11 , Nov 22, 1999
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Here's something I've always wondered about. Maybe Paul Larner
      can help me out with this. Why did the railroads of the 40's and
      the 50's scrap all their wonderfull steam engines? Was it because
      1. Steam was on the way out
      2. No one wanted to buy used steam engines at the time
      3. The railroads wanted the money that came from scrapping these
      old engines ( what kind of money came from scrapping)
      4. Too expensive for the up keep of steamers

      What do you think? I'm still sad that there are no old steam engines
      around from the FJG's glory days!

      Gino
    • Gino And Kelly DiCarlo
      Hey Aaron, I still have a Beta VCR, 8-track player (with 8-tracks) and I just gave away my Commodore 64 because I couldn t find ribbons for my printer
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 22, 1999
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Hey Aaron,

        I still have a Beta VCR, 8-track player (with 8-tracks) and I
        just gave away my Commodore 64 because I couldn't find ribbons
        for my printer anymore...

        On The Steamer front, weren't some engines converted to diesel
        engines?

        Gino



        ----------
        >From: "Aaron Keller" <aakeller@...>
        >To: <FJGRailroad@onelist.com>
        >Subject: Re: [FJGRailroad] Old Irons
        >Date: Mon, Nov 22, 1999, 5:39 PM
        >

        > From: "Aaron Keller" <aakeller@...>
        >
        > If you take a look at technological advancements over time, very few of us
        > really care to have what is now considered "old junk." Nobody plays Coleco
        > Vision, uses Beta tapes or plays 8-tracks. (Well, if you're into
        > professional TV, you still use Beta, but that's another story). And how
        > many of you still use Commodore-64 or Apple II-E computers?
        >
        > Railfans are an odd bunch because they generally embrace old technology
        > which really doesn't have a place in today's world.
        >
        > From what I've heard, steam was horrendously inefficient. No matter what
        > the old-timers say, steam was a royal pain in the neck for those who had to
        > deal with it daily. They didn't want to deal with it. Most railroaders
        > love diesel.
        >
        > I don't want to come off as a steam-hater; hope I don't sound like one.
        > It's just an old technology and the railroads had to change to meet the
        > times. If they didn't, they'd have been gone long ago.
        >
        > -Aaron
        >
        > > Visit Gino's F.J.G.R.R. Page at
        > http://www.capital.net/~dicarlos/
        >
      • Aaron Keller
        If you take a look at technological advancements over time, very few of us really care to have what is now considered old junk. Nobody plays Coleco Vision,
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 22, 1999
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          If you take a look at technological advancements over time, very few of us
          really care to have what is now considered "old junk." Nobody plays Coleco
          Vision, uses Beta tapes or plays 8-tracks. (Well, if you're into
          professional TV, you still use Beta, but that's another story). And how
          many of you still use Commodore-64 or Apple II-E computers?

          Railfans are an odd bunch because they generally embrace old technology
          which really doesn't have a place in today's world.

          From what I've heard, steam was horrendously inefficient. No matter what
          the old-timers say, steam was a royal pain in the neck for those who had to
          deal with it daily. They didn't want to deal with it. Most railroaders
          love diesel.

          I don't want to come off as a steam-hater; hope I don't sound like one.
          It's just an old technology and the railroads had to change to meet the
          times. If they didn't, they'd have been gone long ago.

          -Aaron
        • Paul Charland
          Does anyone know the tractive effort of the steam engines the FJ&G used? Couldn t have been very much if the S-2 s could replace them. Paul
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 22, 1999
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Does anyone know the tractive effort of the steam engines the FJ&G used?
            Couldn't have been very much if the S-2's could replace them.

            Paul

            Aaron Keller wrote:

            > From: "Aaron Keller" <aakeller@...>
            >
            > If you take a look at technological advancements over time, very few of us
            > really care to have what is now considered "old junk." Nobody plays Coleco
            > Vision, uses Beta tapes or plays 8-tracks. (Well, if you're into
            > professional TV, you still use Beta, but that's another story). And how
            > many of you still use Commodore-64 or Apple II-E computers?
            >
            > Railfans are an odd bunch because they generally embrace old technology
            > which really doesn't have a place in today's world.
            >
            > >From what I've heard, steam was horrendously inefficient. No matter what
            > the old-timers say, steam was a royal pain in the neck for those who had to
            > deal with it daily. They didn't want to deal with it. Most railroaders
            > love diesel.
            >
            > I don't want to come off as a steam-hater; hope I don't sound like one.
            > It's just an old technology and the railroads had to change to meet the
            > times. If they didn't, they'd have been gone long ago.
            >
            > -Aaron
            >
            > > Visit Gino's F.J.G.R.R. Page at
            > http://www.capital.net/~dicarlos/
          • Aaron Keller
            ... Not that I m aware of. I don t even think coal-burners could be converted to oil-burners. ... I think I may have a list somewhere at home, but I m not
            Message 5 of 11 , Nov 22, 1999
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              >On The Steamer front, weren't some engines converted to diesel
              >engines?

              Not that I'm aware of. I don't even think coal-burners could be converted
              to oil-burners.

              >Does anyone know the tractive effort of the steam engines the FJ&G used?
              >Couldn't have been very much if the S-2's could replace them.

              I think I may have a list somewhere at home, but I'm not sure I can put my
              finger on it over vacation.

              -Aaron
            • Paul Charland
              Actually, CN and CP, and I m sure many others converted coal to oil (bunker-C) during the forties because it was more cost efficient. Paul
              Message 6 of 11 , Nov 22, 1999
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Actually, CN and CP, and I'm sure many others converted coal to oil (bunker-C)
                during the forties because it was more cost efficient.

                Paul

                Aaron Keller wrote:

                > From: "Aaron Keller" <aakeller@...>
                >
                > >On The Steamer front, weren't some engines converted to diesel
                > >engines?
                >
                > Not that I'm aware of. I don't even think coal-burners could be converted
                > to oil-burners.
                >
                > >Does anyone know the tractive effort of the steam engines the FJ&G used?
                > >Couldn't have been very much if the S-2's could replace them.
                >
                > I think I may have a list somewhere at home, but I'm not sure I can put my
                > finger on it over vacation.
                >
                > -Aaron
                >
                > > Visit Gino's F.J.G.R.R. Page at
                > http://www.capital.net/~dicarlos/
              • Aaron Keller
                ... (bunker-C) ... Hadn t heard of that; thanks for telling me. -Aaron
                Message 7 of 11 , Nov 22, 1999
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  >Actually, CN and CP, and I'm sure many others converted coal to oil
                  (bunker-C)
                  >during the forties because it was more cost efficient.


                  Hadn't heard of that; thanks for telling me.

                  -Aaron
                • Gino And Kelly DiCarlo
                  ... That s what I meant, not diesel! Gino
                  Message 8 of 11 , Nov 23, 1999
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > From: Paul Charland <p.charlie@...>
                    >
                    > Actually, CN and CP, and I'm sure many others converted coal to oil (bunker-C)
                    > during the forties because it was more cost efficient.
                    >
                    > Paul




                    That's what I meant, not diesel!

                    Gino
                  • Gino And Kelly DiCarlo
                    I can check out my stuff Peter, but I think most of their steamers were scrapped. I ll have to look at home many were sold. Those I couldn t tell you what
                    Message 9 of 11 , Nov 23, 1999
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I can check out my stuff Peter, but I think most of their steamers
                      were scrapped. I'll have to look at home many were sold. Those
                      I couldn't tell you what happened to them. I'm sure Aaron has some
                      info on this...



                      Gino





                      ----------
                      >From: psefton@...
                      >To: <FJGRailroad@onelist.com>
                      >Subject: Re: [FJGRailroad] Old Irons
                      >Date: Tue, Nov 23, 1999, 3:51 PM
                      >

                      > From: psefton@...
                      >
                      > But have all the old FJGR steamers been traced to their ultimate fate ? Some
                      > old Washington DC streetcars are supposedly still running in Belgrade.
                      >
                      > ----- Original Message -----
                      > From: Aaron Keller <aakeller@...>
                      > To: <FJGRailroad@onelist.com>
                      > Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 11:10 PM
                      > Subject: Re: [FJGRailroad] Old Irons
                      >
                      >
                      > From: "Aaron Keller" <aakeller@...>
                      >
                      >>Actually, CN and CP, and I'm sure many others converted coal to oil
                      > (bunker-C)
                      >>during the forties because it was more cost efficient.
                      >
                      >
                      > Hadn't heard of that; thanks for telling me.
                      >
                      > -Aaron
                      >
                      > Visit Gino's F.J.G.R.R. Page at
                      > http://www.capital.net/~dicarlos/
                      >
                      > > Visit Gino's F.J.G.R.R. Page at
                      > http://www.capital.net/~dicarlos/
                      >
                    • psefton@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
                      But have all the old FJGR steamers been traced to their ultimate fate ? Some old Washington DC streetcars are supposedly still running in Belgrade. ... From:
                      Message 10 of 11 , Nov 23, 1999
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        But have all the old FJGR steamers been traced to their ultimate fate ? Some
                        old Washington DC streetcars are supposedly still running in Belgrade.

                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: Aaron Keller <aakeller@...>
                        To: <FJGRailroad@onelist.com>
                        Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 11:10 PM
                        Subject: Re: [FJGRailroad] Old Irons


                        From: "Aaron Keller" <aakeller@...>

                        >Actually, CN and CP, and I'm sure many others converted coal to oil
                        (bunker-C)
                        >during the forties because it was more cost efficient.


                        Hadn't heard of that; thanks for telling me.

                        -Aaron

                        Visit Gino's F.J.G.R.R. Page at
                        http://www.capital.net/~dicarlos/
                      • Aaron Keller
                        As far as I can tell, all the FJ&G steam locomotives are scrapped. Parts from the S2s were re-used on some NYS&W equipment. The 44-ton #30 is still in
                        Message 11 of 11 , Nov 23, 1999
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          As far as I can tell, all the FJ&G steam locomotives are scrapped. Parts
                          from the S2s were re-used on some NYS&W equipment. The 44-ton #30 is still
                          in operation on the Burlington Junction Railway in Burlington, Iowa. The
                          gas car, 340, was eventually sold to some sort of museum in Manitoba but I
                          can't find any record of it still existing. That's about all I can mention;
                          of course leaving out other equipment that we've already discussed on-list.

                          -Aaron
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.