rbandr he was back and forth between his home in LA and Paola Kansas where he was a consultant inspecting parts 4 overseas nuclear components. when u grow up maybe u can get a big boy job as well mr smart ass!!!
he was back and forth between his home in LA and Paola Kansas where he was a consultant inspecting parts 4 overseas nuclear components. when u grow up maybe u can get a big boy job as well mr smart ass!!!
I suspect that Will Davis and I may know who this is, so you might as well just mention the gentleman's name, since you don't want to provide contact details in a civilized fashion.
I call moderation on the tone of the last reply.
Wow, Mr Sassy! Says I can get a big boy job but doesn't actually know me? That's brilliant.
On the subject at hand, would it have been more practical to say go with a x-6-6-6-x design under the same boiler as the Triplexes? I might have things muddled but smaller cylinders might have helped but then again it may have just been more efficient to go with the simple articulated.
And in terms of the GTELs using traction motors under the tenders, seems a bad idea as the adhesion would reduce as the fuel is reduced.
ML
Erie's and Virginian's Triplexes were both compounds and still managed to run out of steam on a fairly regular basis. It would seem to me that even with smaller cylinders, the boiler would have been incapable of producing enough steam for a simple articulated.
no different than boosters on the tender wheelsets. anything that someone convinced management might help and could be funded was. they all were good ideas till proven impractical.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.