BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [BRHSlist] Re: Tender Sprinkling Device

To: BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [BRHSlist] Re: Tender Sprinkling Device
From: Val Nelson <super-chief-val@c...>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 17:57:48 -0500
References: <bb0o5l+btp1@e...>
B I N G O !!! WE HAVE A WINNER!!! lol

In any case, it seems apparent to me that the water was dumped to prevent fires,
especially since the creosote-treated roadway planks were flamable (I don't know
if they did that in 1933 or not). I can only imagine the complaints from local
townsfolk regarding all kinds of issues which could become additional expenses 
to
revenue and public relations. So, a little water spilled on the effected area 
was
a very cost-effective way of preventing bad public relations, not to mention
potential disasters. It's an interesting little factoid you stumbled onto,
Pete! Thanks! -Val

graywolfs2 wrote:

> How about this theory......The report is dated August, 1933...hot dry
> month also in a year of little rain(?). Going with the dust and wood
> crossing angle, sprinkling the crossing helps prevent a fire after
> the passing of the engine (said engine dropping hot ashes/clinkers
> from ashpan due to train movement)...How does that sound?
>
> Greg K.
> Minn.
>
> --- In BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com, PSHedgpeth@a... wrote:
> > This morning while wasting time reading old ICC wreck reports I
> came across
> > something that I have never before heard of
> >
> > This incident August 9, 1933 involved the derailment of CB&Q No.
> 9...Was this
> > THE ARISTOCRAT?? at Mosely CO. The train was "hauled" by engine
> 3007.
> >
> > As a part of the evidence summary a portion of the fireman's
> statement was
> > that as the train approached the point of derailment he had just
> opened a valve
> > on the tender which was used to release water to sprinkle
> crossings, after he
> > opened the valve he turned around to check to see if the water was
> > running.....
> >
> > Now the valve and resultant sprinkling had nothing to do with the
> derailment
> > which was caused by a defective bridal rod in a facing point
> switch, but it
> > brought to me something of which I had never heard in my many years
> of being
> > around railroads...
> >
> > How about it you steam engine historians.....Let's have comments.
> >
> > Pete
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>