It is fair to say though that in the entire Burlington system from
Chicago to the Gulf Coast, except for the isolated C&S Climax branch,
4997 in Jan. of "59 was the last revenue run.
Actually, not quite on the C&S. I think the last revenue run on the C&S
mainline was in July 1959, when 2-8-0 647 brought a work train south to
Denver from Cheyenne. The 900, a 2-10-2, took the work train north the
previous day, and was scrapped in Cheyenne not long after. The 647 had
operated north that day on a excursion to Cheyenne, and brought the work
train south on its return to Denver. It operated once again in September
1959 on a Denver-Lyons excursion, which doesn't count as a regular
non-excursion run, of course.
Bob Yarger, Editor
Railway Preservation News (free website)
www.rypn.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "gaedgar66" <vje68@hotmail.com>
To: <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 1:48 PM
Subject: [CBQ] RE: Last Q revenue steam & BRHS mbrship
>
>
> Certain questions seem to pop up peridically but that's a good thing
> as means someone new to Q fandom has joined the crowd. Hope all are
> joining BRHS! Still a real BARGAIN @ $30 a yr; send payment to Box
> 456, LaGrange, IL 60525-0456 for a yr's worth of Bulletins, Zephyrs,
> Calendar, etc.
> And speaking of Burlington Bulletins: #35 by John Mitchell (The Q in
> the Coalfields) covers #4997 as the last Q steam loco in revenue
> service on the Q. (with a nice photo taken 4 weeks before). 4997 is
> also cited in other Q books/articles over the yrs.
> The question of 'last' always has to be qualified: CB&Q vs. C&S or
> FtW&D; vs. leased; vs. excursion; vs. urban legend. This is true no
> matter what the issue is. But over the yrs #4997 has been cited as
> the last use of steam in REVENUE service on CB&Q. The Beardstown Div
> was a hold-out due to most revenue being rcvd from coal. This was
> also true of other RR's (think N&W) and similar areas of other RR's
> (IC served the coalfields in S. Illinois also & it was their last
> steam powered area).
> It is fair to say though that in the entire Burlington system from
> Chicago to the Gulf Coast, except for the isolated C&S Climax branch,
> 4997 in Jan. of "59 was the last revenue run. Excursion service ran
> several 6 yrs beyond but from a modeling & a historic perspective,
> Jan. "59 was the end (except again for that C&S Climax run also
> covered in earlier Bulletins). Bulletins have also cited last steam
> runs on passenger & commuter runs, last gas-electric use, etc.
> Suffice it to say that the Q, on average, ran some older equipment in
> certain areas after other RR's quit doing so. (Nice for us modelers!)
> From a purely personal opinion, I often see this as evidence of
> superor Burlington management plus the good care mechanical forces
> gave equipment as well as the crews who operated it. The Q was among
> the 1st if not the 1st to do all sorts of things: diesel-electric
> powered passenger trains, domes, bi-level commuter cars, aluminum
> hoppers, insulated box cars, etc but unlike its generally lesser
> competitors, did not make wholesale switchovers. Q mgt had the dual
> philosophy of seeking out and using the newest technology but keeping
> at least part of the old if it made economic sense to do so; i.e. why
> scrap conventional commuter cars overnight if they still had good
> miles in them? (As opposed to C&NW that converted 100%) or scrap
> recently shopped steam (as did CGW/M&StL, etc)? or totally convert
> to computers (as did Penn Central which at its demise had more than
> ANY entity except the Federal government).
> One can argue that at times the Q was penny-wise and pound foolish or
> in other cases wasted $$$ when looking in hindsight. However, bottom-
> line, WITHOUT cooking the books, it went from 1864 (darn those
> Confederate raiders in Missouri!) to BN in 1970 without EVER missing
> a dividend much less going into bankruptcy. It's kind of like the
> difference between being fiscally prudent and a skinflint; a question
> of degree.
> I should say too this is not just opinion - looking thru Railway Age
> issues in the 1960's and reading studies by others since, this is the
> feeling of many industry watchers: the Q, better than most, knew how
> to strike the balance between when to keeping putting money into
> something and when to replace it. Other RR's either did not replace
> at all (or financially couldn't) or went hogwild & spent (borrowed)
> beyond their means.
> The same problems exist in business today - those with good mgt and
> good employees weather the storms, the others don't.
> Stay tuned for my annual Christmas gift of some off the wall facts
> (will be steam since that is the focus on list now!)
> Season's Greetings! Gerald
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$4.98 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Q7_YsB/neXJAA/yQLSAA/8ZCslB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|