Terry --
Thing to keep in mind about the R1 is that it was an early ... you might
even say a transitional or experimental ... engine. Historically important
and apparently quite successful, but (like much motive power of its
generation) very quickly superceded by galloping technology. The R2s - R5s
were developed fast on the R1's heels and had rendered it obsolete by about
World War I. All four R1s survived into the late 1920s, with two of them
(1702-3) being converted to 0-6-0s as class G-7. The unconverted pair were
out of service in 1929-30. The two switchers lasted a little longer, at
least on paper, 'til '31 and '33 respectively (however, Corbin and Kerka
show 1702 dead in the Eola weeds in August 1928 -- generally not a good
sign if you are a Burlington steam engine).
The point is, the window for operating these first prairies closes rather
early. (Of course as a wise man said recently, "it's your railroad.") I
would be very interested in knowing the WHAT and WHERE of the R-1s'
assignments, especially later in their career. They were built as "fast
freight" engines. To run where? There are so many possibilities. Since they
were state-of-the-art, I presume they were originally "Lines East" engines
(also suggested by their original "CB&Q" designation). But what about when
they were demoted? Where did they go? and in what service?
Note that Nickel Plate's R1 is of the engine as built, c.1900. Since the
earliest standard gauge I personally model (so far) is early-mid 1920s, I
have very little turn-of-the-century rolling stock to run with it. So I am
going to add at least a generator (directly behind the stack), to make mine
more plausible for post-WWI operation.
It seems odd that the K2s -- 8 years older and with 1,200 lbs. less
tractive effort than the R1s -- remained active so much longer (1/3 of the
class were on the roster post-WWII, several still steaming into the
1950s!). You'd think the R1s would have fit the same branchline niche as
those ten-wheelers. My only guess at an explanation is that the R1s were a
small, and therefore non-standard class. The K2s probably were just easier
to maintain and service, since there were so many of them to cannibalize.
Jonathan
--------------------
Schultz Terry-QA2088 wrote:
>
> Does anyone have experience with a brass HO scale 2-6-2 R1 by Nickel Plate.
Up until now, I didn't know that anyone had ever made a R1. According to the
BRHS roster, the Q had 4 of these, numbered 1700-1703. Is this model very
prototypical of the CB&Q? Does it run well? In the past there has been some
discussion about Nickel Plate's 4-6-0 K2 but I have not noticed anything on a
2-6-2.
>
> Terry
|