To: | <CBQ@yahoogroups.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | RE: [CBQ] Coal for Denver's Engines: CB&Q vs. C&S, Bituminous vs. Lignite |
From: | "jonathanharris@earthlink.net [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com> |
Date: | 01 Jan 2015 11:09:58 -0800 |
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=1420139399; bh=N4YyCVC/JfIT0Pwo2cRsd/twOKjMSEeZ/7EaZ+Ja6jg=; h=To:References:In-Reply-To:From:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:Date:Subject:Reply-To:From:Subject; b=Ou6SNsfiidS0areeRzH8ebAboO4toVY66PqQMUj59660sBAefZ6uHeKQ3EyAH1z87ntDfd6/AeyMLHldiyKvgkJzryaHjGl5wHZhYMFtJDn++MyzRpTmVzckFKNA8pPeal8QNf4VcAxk39I//yevqPW6W/To0f38KOZQe0sQI+s= |
Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=echoe; d=yahoogroups.com; b=DAPKwLCCzFGG2OohSjPAiLATiwke/2AXjEQ9HxfxdCeOxyLlHxAoUNP1zzYJVBw0uZGWsFv59K404RFjFvt5SYOyN1m577QBMX3psFD/Pbs8QS0s767hjEG1YfkJNoG9aHLcipq41QPKN3pj0o7erP3IKLPviweVvAE/O4bdH8w=; |
In-reply-to: | <NHEDLMPLLMPDGPKKJLJDIEBLEMAA.sarge9@bresnan.net> |
List-id: | <CBQ.yahoogroups.com> |
List-unsubscribe: | <mailto:CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> |
Mailing-list: | list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com |
References: | <m81nge+uirsfj@YahooGroups.com> <NHEDLMPLLMPDGPKKJLJDIEBLEMAA.sarge9@bresnan.net> |
Reply-to: | CBQ@yahoogroups.com |
Sender: | CBQ@yahoogroups.com |
That is interesting, Harold. Thank you. Do you model any narrow gauge traction — either the 42" Denver Tramway or the 3' Deadwood Central? It might be fun to do the 42" in S scale using HO gauge track. I did not know much about the 42" gauge tram line, especially its role as a coal hauler. If the Leyden coal was sub-bituminous (not sure it was, but you speculated it might have been softer than the C&S's other sources) and in light of Hol's statement that the C&S preferred harder coal for its engine fuel, which it got from the southern Colorado fields around Trinidad, I wonder if their acquisition of trackage rights to the Leyden mines might have been primarily to tap that coal for freight traffic. Jonathan __._,_.___ Posted by: jonathanharris@earthlink.net __,_._,___ |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [CBQ] Coal for Denver's Engines: CB&Q vs. C&S, Bituminous vs. Lignite, jonathanharris@earthlink.net [CBQ] |
---|---|
Next by Date: | RE: [CBQ] Camelback locos, 'Rupert & Maureen' gamlenz@ihug.co.nz [CBQ] |
Previous by Thread: | RE: [CBQ] Coal for Denver's Engines: CB&Q vs. C&S, Bituminous vs. Lignite, 'Harold Huber' sarge9@bresnan.net [CBQ] |
Next by Thread: | RE: [CBQ] Coal for Denver's Engines: CB&Q vs. C&S, Bituminous vs. Lignite, Hol Wagner holpennywagner@msn.com [CBQ] |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |