BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [CBQ] Q ditcher

To: <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [CBQ] Q ditcher
From: "Rupert & Maureen" <gamlenz@ihug.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 17:24:15 +1300
Delivered-to: unknown
Delivered-to: archives@nauer.org
Delivered-to: mailing list CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoogroups.com; s=echoe; t=1394598256; bh=LK118/S6krPFpuguN86soaEkED2lLB5F0JAS0wJDNUI=; h=Received:Received:X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Sender:X-Apparently-To:X-Received:X-Received:X-Received:X-Received:X-Cloudmark-SP-Filtered:X-Cloudmark-SP-Result:X-IronPort-AV:X-Received:To:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:X-MimeOLE:X-Originating-IP:X-eGroups-Msg-Info:From:X-Yahoo-Profile:Sender:MIME-Version:Mailing-List:Delivered-To:List-Id:Precedence:List-Unsubscribe:Date:Subject:Reply-To:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Content-Type; b=itY+07V/Rid8YmpXAbLdrcXNlgIv5FJ4lWXkakm//toGzMWfR9HJFY44K253qhFRSvpMrEaRxZZPXzM8Nwzsiz9GYywmXW2U6KB8l11XTyjLlqbY0u7yRYGo5hwUVNyVeN7aeiitX+kwV5tNAqMiZ4nTSkm97vD2VyBp21E9Oq4=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=echoe; d=yahoogroups.com; b=lAK5cAVO7V/Z+HQNiryK1bXtObwfMwLNn4BfRGcHCgGhLTJdzGQwRtEO52J4Cwak7ElVypCMhwBGBEn8xwtIgXnS7DTwL3QptPDHNyZoUTQzo8nGap3eGQjCif64DLY/8pbORDnDmdbwrOR/G5YVCklrCF06YeOlbxbkU9YhKu8=;
In-reply-to: <1394594621.49851.YahooMailNeo@web164804.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
List-id: <CBQ.yahoogroups.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Mailing-list: list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com
References: <63D06891-D492-4CFA-A72B-C6912339D49C@surewest.net> <7F115CA5F22D42058D7DEF5D94799E6F@USUS> <80CBFBDD01F34FD8B91CE5E21261ED6B@USUS> <1394594621.49851.YahooMailNeo@web164804.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Reply-to: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Sender: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Thread-index: Ac89onq5yOMxtIn0TQyBV2Ud/eV3ywABqbcw
John

Yes I agree.  Seeing three and a half of the six ditchers in the one photo
suggested that all six might be present (or why else would they have at
least four together).  The flat cars with consecutive numbers had rails
along them in a similar manner to the advert photos suggesting that they
were the ones allocated to each of the ditchers and, with so many together,
I thought the photo might have been taken at the time the Burlington bought
them.  My copy of the photo came from the original LOC collection and
doesn't have the subscription shown in the Shorpy copy, so I was unaware of
the date.  None of the photos used in the advert, calendar or UK website
show the number of the flat car bearing 260 but presumably it was in the
company service numbering series.

Rupert Gamlen
Auckland NZ

 

  _____  

From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CBQ@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John D.
Mitchell, Jr.
Sent: Wednesday, 12 March 2014 4:24 p.m.
To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Q ditcher

 






Rupert

I don't believe the photo is a delivery photo. This is for three reasons.
First the picture is a WPA photograph, made during the Depression years in
the 30's many years after they were delivered. Second, as delivered, they
were painted white and in the picture they are black and lastly, they are on
flat cars in the company service number series.

 

On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 9:08 PM, Rupert & Maureen <gamlenz@ihug.co.nz>
wrote:

  

Going back through my e-mails, I see that Ken Martin should be credited with
finding one of the adverts I referred to. 

There is a similar photo to the second advert showing the dump car in the
April 2011 calendar from Mile Post 206 Publishing except that, once again,
it is a much better picture than the magazine one. And the way car in the
photo is apparently 14252.

Rupert Gamlen
Auckland NZ




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