Messages

31

Bridgton & Saco River Railway / Re: Arthur Griffin B&H 1940 excursion photos

« on: April 11, 2020, 01:57:36 AM »

I think they may be hangers for curtain rods, which is weird.

The coach appears to be one of the original Laconias, either 15 or 16. Is there any trace of these rings in either car now?

32

US Two Footers / Re: Newest 2-foot steamer

« on: April 03, 2020, 03:40:53 PM »

Alco (Cooke) was also involved in the war effort and built 100 60cm 2-6-2Ts for the British army in 1917.  This was in addition to 495 60cm 4-6-0Ts built by Baldwin for the British in 1916-1917.

The Ffestiniog's 2-6-2T 'Mountaineer' is one of these British army Alcos (C/N 57156).

33

Work and Events / Re: Coach 9 - Official Work Thread

« on: February 29, 2020, 12:40:15 AM »

We used white oak specifically because it has closed capillaries which do not allow air to leak readily as opposed to red oak, which could leak air readily.

These structures are technically known as tyloses. They're lateral ingrowths of xylem parenchyma (often from the rays) that fill up the conducting vessels over the course of the first growing season after each growth ring is laid down. Tyloses are also why white oak is used for barrels and casks, which are never made from red oak if you want them to hold liquid, and why white oak tends to be more decay resistant than red oak - which is almost certainly the value of tyloses in term of evolution. You will often see old red oak trees with rotten hollow trunks, but white oaks are almost always solid even at hundreds of years old.

Harold, I'm amazed at your craftsmanship. Bravo!

34

Other Narrow Gauge / Re: EBT is SOLD! New non-profit to open RR in 2021

« on: February 18, 2020, 02:47:53 PM »

I also listened to The Roundhouse podcast episode Ed mentions, and Brad Esposito specifically compares the planned arrangement to the C&TS and the Friends of the C&TS, so it's clear that's the model they have in mind.

One difference I suppose is that the FEBT does have a small ownership stake in the form of the Robertsdale depot and several pieces of rolling stock. I'm not sure if the Friends of the C&TS actually own any equipment, but I don't think so.

35

Other Narrow Gauge / Re: EBT is SOLD! New non-profit to open RR in 2021

« on: February 14, 2020, 04:41:50 PM »

This is excellent news, truly the best outcome that could be hoped for. I agree, how the foundation is structured and funded is going to be the key to making it all work. The Kovalchicks have been devoted stewards of the railroad since the 1950s, but the private ownership of the EBT had long been an obstacle to potential donors and collaborating institutions, who were understandably reluctant to throw money at  someone else's private property. Now that the railroad is held by a non-profit foundation I am hopeful that money and resources will begin to flow.

36

Whimsical Weirdness and Foolery / Re: Building an Empire

« on: February 04, 2020, 10:38:04 PM »

Thanks!

37

Whimsical Weirdness and Foolery / Re: Building an Empire

« on: February 04, 2020, 07:17:18 PM »

Wow, very neat, Ed.

Where did you find the O gauge tinplate Porter? I've always wanted one of those!

38

Volunteers / Re: February 2020 Work Reports

« on: February 02, 2020, 10:03:21 PM »

It looks like flat car 118 has a bent brake staff. When did that happen?

39

Sandy River & Rangeley Lakes Railroad / Re: Signal at Phillips depot

« on: January 30, 2020, 06:19:05 PM »

I'd never seen this kind of thing before either, but Guy Rioux says he was told this is the way some semaphores were controlled in Australia, and I don't know enough to evaluate that statement.

I imagine there was a counterweight that kept the semaphore in the horizontal (Stop) position until the operator pulled it either up or down to vertical (Clear). When the cable was released the blade would return to Stop.

40

Sandy River & Rangeley Lakes Railroad / Re: Signal at Phillips depot

« on: January 29, 2020, 06:23:26 PM »

Yes that's it, the winch at the end of the platform at the base of the telegraph pole. (I'm attaching a cropped version of the photo so others can see  what we're talking about.)

It hadn't registered with me that the winch was the semaphore control until Guy pointed it out to me in a different shot.

41

Sandy River & Rangeley Lakes Railroad / Re: Signal at Phillips depot

« on: January 26, 2020, 02:57:23 PM »

I had a conversation about the Phillips semaphore with Guy Rioux at the Amherst Railway Society train show yesterday. He has a chapter about the semaphore in his next book, and suffice it to say the situation is more complicated than I'd thought.

Guy has found evidence of at least three different versions of the semaphore, at least one of which may have been illuminated, at different locations from the north end of the Phillips station platform to the Main Street crossing, and in between. One of them appears to have been operated remotely by a some kind of chain and cable linkage (in the Australian fashion?) passing overhead. He says there may also have been a used standard gauge signal acquired from the MEC in 1919 that may or may not have actually been installed.

I didn't follow everything he was saying, so I hope the book clears things up somewhat rather than muddying the water even more.

42

Museum Discussion / Re: Sheepscot pictures for the away crowd.

« on: January 18, 2020, 08:00:38 PM »

Can someone set me straight on Number 6's number plate? I thought WW&F 9 was ex-SR&RL 6, but that smokebox plate says Sandy River RR.

One of the quirky design features of the Portland Co. Forneys were the number plates, which were customized with the name of the railroad around the outside rim of the casting: Sandy River RR Nos. 4 and 5 (= SR&RL 5 and 6) had plates that said "Sandy River RR", Phillips & Rangeley No. 1 (= SR&RL 7) had a plate that said "Phillips & Rangeley RR", Kennebec Central No. 2 had a "Kennebec Central RR" number plate, B&SR Nos. 3 (= WW&F No. 8 ) and 5 had plates that said "Bridgton & Saco River RR", and W&Q/WW&F Nos. 2 and 3 originally carried plates that said "Wiscasset & Quebec RR". These are all visible in photos.

When the SR&RL renumbered its equipment after the 1908 consolidation, the Portland engines retained their original number plates except with the addition of an engraved center disc with the new number, so SR&RL No. 7's plate still said "Phillips & Rangeley RR" (and still does - it's now on display at the Phillips Historical Society) and SR&RL No. 6's plate still said "Sandy River RR" despite their new identities. When No. 6 went to the Kennebec Central in 1924 they did the same thing again, so she still carried the same "Sandy River RR" number plate with the new-new number 4. For some reason the WW&F didn't like this, so when she became WW&F No. 9 the old "Sandy River RR" number plate was scrapped and replaced with a new plain number plate (known from a handful of photos), which was itself ultimately scrapped and had to be replicated.

It's possible the customized number plates may have been a Hinkley practice that was carried over when Portland acquired Hinkley's patterns and tooling, because B&SR Hinkleys Nos. 1 and 2 (= WW&F No. 5 ) appear to have had "Bridgton & Saco River RR" number plates as well. However I've seen no evidence that Monson Nos. 1 or 2 or Franklin & Megantic No. 1 had them, so maybe not.

43

Museum Discussion / Re: Sheepscot pictures for the away crowd.

« on: January 17, 2020, 11:50:50 AM »

I believe No. 9 had just the handbrake on the tender truck originally. Vacuum brakes on the drivers are supposed to have been added about 1912.

44

Museum Discussion / Re: Sheepscot pictures for the away crowd.

« on: January 17, 2020, 10:37:41 AM »

The electric headlight is correct for her on the SR&RL in the 1920s. What stands out for me, though, is the absence of the Eames vacuum brake exhaust muffler!

45

Museum Discussion / Re: Sheepscot pictures for the away crowd.

« on: January 10, 2020, 12:20:13 AM »

Will the SR&RL railbus be participating?