No.
is it normally under water?
Or you just took the picture or processed it upside down?
Where would the fun be in that?
There is a very good reason why what you see is so. And an interesting one...
rcdryeIs it part of a counterweight on a trunnion (bascule) drawbridge?
But you are getting ever so slightly warm...
Ooops, apologies. Wrong shadows for that!
Is it part of a counterwight on a trunnion (bascule) drawbridge?
Here's an amusement while I try thinking of a real question.
Why isn't this installed incorrectly?
Oh, Ah. My bad. Please continue your search for a good question!
You've answered in the wrong question thread!
Kneeland Street pre-dated South Station. The other two stations in Boston city limits were Columbus Ave (later Huntington Ave AKA Trinity Place, replaced by Back Bay, and Lansdowne, AKA Beacon Street or Brookline Junction. The station that replaced it when the Mass Pike was built is (or at least was) called Yawkey.
I seem to remember that B&A and Boston & Providence crossed each other at street level near the present Back Bay station. B&A's Boston-Framingham local service via the main line and the Riverside branch made local stops at all three stations.
Rats! I guess that means I have to find a question of the caliber of the stops on the B&A going into Boston. That's going to take time.
I just wanted information. Thanks!
I thought the question Mr. Klepper asked about the Tidewater Mallets was the next one on the quiz!
I asked the question you answered. I just added a little explanation after you did.
I'm giving this to rcdrye because Deepwater was so simple to locate in even a crude search for the Virginian. It was a few seconds longer to find the distinction in the corporate records for the 'state' entities (Tidewater and Deepwater) used during the initial planning of what became the Virginian... and that accounted (no pun intended) for the unusual name.
The earliest of the Mallets were so early that they were nominally Tidewater engines, not Virginian.
Very interesting that they were the first evolutionary step after Old Maud. For some reason I thought a 2-8-8-0 was the first to need a Bissel -- iirc on the Erie.
Interestingly enough I was gearing up to ask about that feedwater heater equipped Mallet power and got beaten to the punch.
Were the Virginian engines the ones that got no complaints from the unions about crewing because they were double-manned for firing?
The AA and ACs lasted until the mid-1930s. Overmod came up with Deepwater.
Thanks! Hapy to learn that information, And did not some of those earlybMalletws last a very long time?
And are not you up to ask the next question?
The AA class 2-6-6-0s were the first with a lead truck. They were among the largest hand-fired locomotives ever built. The story goes that Virginian tried to hire both right- and left-handed fireman so they could work in pairs.
I think the experimental boiler was on the AB class 2-8-8-0 600 (1911). The engine suffered from cracked frames and boiler leaks. After Baldwin supplied a new Boiler and frame it settled down to mine run service, but was even less popular with crews than the hand-fired AA class.
The slightly larger AC class 2-6-6-0s (1910) were also hand-fired. All but one of the AA and AC classes eventually got stokers and superheaters.
That sectional boiler with the front part as a feedwater heater.
This was the same general idea as the ATSF 'hinged boiler' Mallets -- the firebox and boiler were the rear; the front was all, or nearly all, chock full o'tubes for more heat transfer surface.
Off the top of my head they were hand-fired and saturated steam as delivered, so they can't have been much fun for firemen. (They were later equipped with stokers and superheaters.) 22x30 high pressure, 35x30 low pressure cylinders. In common with many contemporary Mallets, they had piston valves on the high pressure cylinders and slide valves for the LP cylinders.
What was unusual about the Virginian's early Mallets?
Overmod pretty much got it. The Deepwater Railroad was completed first, the Virginian resulting from the completion of the Tidewater Railroad and the merger wih the Deepwater. The junction on the opposite side of the Kanawha River from Deepwater (with the New York Central's Toledo & Ohio Central) was, and may still be, known as DB Tower after the Deepwater Bridge).
Pennsylvania has lots of strange place labels. North East, PA, near Erie in northwest PA, still makes me laugh.
Are the technical details what you are requesting as your question?
Deepwater. Kinda like the Jersey Shore, PA of West Virginia...
There was a Deepwater Railway and a Tidewater Railway that were developed (by William Page) as intrastate components of what became the Virginian Railway. I always considered them examples of 'wishful thnking' about what would be done with the coal that was shipped over them.
The earliest Mallets on the Virginian were actually 'Tidewater Railway' engines -- they were interesting in contemporary technical details.
Virginian, like C&O and N&W was known mainly for sending coal to Tidewater. The west end of the Virginian's main line was in a location with an unlikely name, considering this...
Correct on all counts.
N&W retired the ex-Virginian electrification west of Roanoke VA it got in the 1959 merger after shifting traffic so that it ran one way on the ex-Virginian, the other way on the "old" N&W. Since the electrics could only run on the ex-Virginian, their utility was greatly reduced. N&W had barely retired steam before the VGN merger. The VGN's 1955-built GE EL-C class (by then N&W EL-C) went on to become New Haven EF-4 class, then PC and Conrail E-33 class, eventually operating on almost all electrified trackage extant when they were built.
VGN's 1925 Alco-Westinghouse EL-1A and EL-3A equivalent of N&W's "Sqareheads" were retired in the mid 1950s after the arrival of the EL-Cs. VGN's huge motor-generator EL-2B units were scrapped without resale.
In the meantime, how about a quickie?
There was a second example of de-electrification that would have very likely have been run with steam if implemented even a couple of years earlier, less than a decade after the N&W's Elkhorn Tunnel project. It was run with comparably very modern power, unlike the N&W's clunking squareheads; in fact one of its classes of locomotive had more lives than a cat on a fairly amazing number of electrified railroads elsewhere. So no lack of either utility or distinctive competence led to the abandonment.
Where was this, and what were the specific reasons for it?
Waiting for South Shore's question.
Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!
Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter