Not to mention your last posting. In normal switching operations switchmen
ride with their locomotive or train and then they stop to throw switches.
They don't usually walk ahead any long distance as it makes signaling that
much more difficult. So this scenario just doesn't sound very likely. I
don't think the B&M switcher you see in the photo is related in any way to
the movement of CP 8906. Besides which if you look at the track arrangement
the B&M switcher would have to go through several other switches before he
could even get on the same track as 8906.
Doug
How do you know the first caption is correct? There are glaring errors in
that caption as it is. He can't get the date right, every photo has a
different date, so how can he get any of the other details right? I know
what I am looking at and it isn't a locomotive headed to the scrappers. And
obviously whoever wrote the caption is guessing. And if it was going to
scrap, just suppose, why would it be in Vermont? That is a long way out of
the way. Striegel was located in Baltimore. You are grasping at straws to
try and convince us you are right. And read the caption for the last photo,
it tells you what the fellow at the switch was doing. And it wasn't what you
came up with. You have your mind made up and don't want to listen to any
evidence to the contrary.
Doug
Sorry Doug, but that proves nothing. The fellow at the switch stand
is just as likely to be throwing the switch for that B&M switcher in
the distance to come over to pick up the dead 8906, which then also
answers the question of why they would be coupled together in the
broadside photo.
A person in the cab could easily be a yard helper, checking out an
exotic beast or taking a break until the yard engine can get across
and he has to release the hand brake. In the days when most workers
cared, naturally he would close the window when he left.
And don't forget the message in posting 11796, which I have copied
below. That is hard to ignore, except it was probably the prime mover
that Streigel wanted, not the traction motors.
Walt's comment about the builders plate does not surprise me, since I
bought a CLC diamond from a scrapyard in 1969. Cost was $5.00 but I
had to remove it from the engine myself. The railways were not aware
of how collectible they would become.
John Sutherland
===== 11796 ======
Re: Train Master in Vermont?
It looks like CLC Fan wins. Photographer Haskel says:
"It was enroute to a dealer to have the traction motors removed and
then I presume to be Scrapped."
With the builder plate on! It's possible that the date on the slide
mount was not clear.
Walt Lankenau
===== 11796 ======
--- In cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Doug Cummings" <DougCummings@...> wrote:
a fellow
There is another photo which shows more of the yard and you can see
standing at the switch which is ahead of 8906. Obviously waiting tothrow
it. (photo 258869) It is taken a minute or two after the first oneas the
train in the background has moved further down the track. If youdon't want
to believe it is a working locomotive, so be it, but I have seennothing in
any of these photos to suggest otherwise. In another photo of 8906in the
yard the cab window is closed. In these two the cab window is open.8906 is
in different locations in the yard in both photos. It looks like the
engineers hand is on the arm rest in one photo.
Doug
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
