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

Re: n.c.n.g. Photos

Expand Messages
  • Kevin Miller
    Andrew, Thank you. I guess I will purchase this issue then. I am always on the lookout for more photos of the NCNGRR. I purchased all the drawings from
    Message 1 of 6 , Dec 25, 2007
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Andrew,

      Thank you. I guess I will purchase this issue then. I am always on
      the lookout for more photos of the NCNGRR. I purchased all the
      drawings from Herman a long time ago.

      Kevin Miller
    • Dennis Burke
      ... several ... Kevin, I did a quik review of Browns and Best s books as well as other files i have and there are many photos in the new annual that i could
      Message 2 of 6 , Dec 26, 2007
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In NCNGRR@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Miller" <nvngrr@...> wrote:
        >
        > Are the photos the same as in Gerald Best's book or are there
        several
        > new ones? I didn't buy the last annual because there were no new
        > photos or info.
        >
        > Kevin Miller
        >



        Kevin, I did a quik review of Browns and Best's books as well as
        other files i have and there are many photos in the new annual that i
        could not locate in these books. Some are of flatcars with loads,
        also tankcars, as well as passenger equipment. I must concur with
        Andrew that the shot of locomotive #8 that Mal stated says the
        handwriting on the back says Mina is not Mina. To the rear of the
        loco is the a portion of the S.P. engine facility in Colax, which is
        very close in appearance to the facility at Mina.Maybe this caused
        the mis-label. The dead give-a-way is the cliff over the pilot of the
        loco. There are no such cliffs in the Mina yard. Just other
        structures and sage with a few trees.
        Also, correct me if I am wrong, if there would have been a S.P to
        N.C.N.G. 2-8-0 at Mina, as the discussed photo, would this not have
        been N.C.N.G.#9 (the 2nd #1 on the S.P.N.G.), the other 2-8-0, which
        arrived on the N.C.N.G. from the S.P. in 1933. I dont think the #8
        was on the S.P.N.G. The only other 2-8-0 on S.P. was # 13 which was
        scrapped in 1927. I am new on the N.C.N.G. so any additional input
        would be great.

        Anyway, I am personally greatful to Mal for sharing his collection
        with us mislabeled or not. Look what its got us doing, research, just
        another part of being a rail-buff. I love it!!

        Dennis
      • Andrew Brandon
        Dennis, If you look there is a photo of #9 Mal has a caption stating as being in Grass Valley when it is in fact Colfax as well, the white fence on the top of
        Message 3 of 6 , Dec 27, 2007
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Dennis,

          If you look there is a photo of #9 Mal has a caption stating as being
          in Grass Valley when it is in fact Colfax as well, the white fence on
          the top of the hill in the background and larger water pipe give it
          away. I have seen many a photo of Colfax captioned completely wrong
          there is at least one photograph in the Searls Library in Nevada City,
          CA which was labeled as Grass Valley when it was Colfax and during the
          final rebuilding of the yard none the less. There was another photo
          showing Hobart Estates #7 hauling a long train over an impressive
          trestle which is captioned "NCNG 7". Worst of all, these were recently
          captioned by volunteers in the past few years. Silly captions aside,
          Mal did a great job although I am a bit distraught that he put out a
          number of shots in his articles that I have been using for my
          clandestine NCNG pictorial.

          -=Andrew=-

          On Dec 26, 2007 10:02 AM, Dennis Burke <birdnest60@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In NCNGRR@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Miller" <nvngrr@...> wrote:
          > >
          > > Are the photos the same as in Gerald Best's book or are there
          > several
          > > new ones? I didn't buy the last annual because there were no new
          > > photos or info.
          > >
          > > Kevin Miller
          > >
          >
          >
          > Kevin, I did a quik review of Browns and Best's books as well as
          > other files i have and there are many photos in the new annual that i
          > could not locate in these books. Some are of flatcars with loads,
          > also tankcars, as well as passenger equipment. I must concur with
          > Andrew that the shot of locomotive #8 that Mal stated says the
          > handwriting on the back says Mina is not Mina. To the rear of the
          > loco is the a portion of the S.P. engine facility in Colax, which is
          > very close in appearance to the facility at Mina.Maybe this caused
          > the mis-label. The dead give-a-way is the cliff over the pilot of the
          > loco. There are no such cliffs in the Mina yard. Just other
          > structures and sage with a few trees.
          > Also, correct me if I am wrong, if there would have been a S.P to
          > N.C.N.G. 2-8-0 at Mina, as the discussed photo, would this not have
          > been N.C.N.G.#9 (the 2nd #1 on the S.P.N.G.), the other 2-8-0, which
          > arrived on the N.C.N.G. from the S.P. in 1933. I dont think the #8
          > was on the S.P.N.G. The only other 2-8-0 on S.P. was # 13 which was
          > scrapped in 1927. I am new on the N.C.N.G. so any additional input
          > would be great.
          >
          > Anyway, I am personally greatful to Mal for sharing his collection
          > with us mislabeled or not. Look what its got us doing, research, just
          > another part of being a rail-buff. I love it!!
          >
          > Dennis
          >
          >



          --
          -=Andrew Brandon=-
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.