Louis: I believe you are right about the photo being at Sterling, but it would be nice to nail it down positively. As for the date discrepancy, I think it's probably greater than two months, as in the August 22 photo the engine already shows the effects of being in scrapyard service for some time -- missing cylinder head cover and beat up sheet metal cylinder jacketing. I only have the January and June 1948 Q locomotive assignment sheets, and in January the 1842 is assigned to the St. Joseph Division, where it had been for some time, but by June it's gone, so it had likely been at the scrapyard for several months by the time its photo was taken on August 22. It's possible that the 1842 was retired under a blanket AFE covering a number of locomotives and that the date someone copied from the records was the date the AFE was completed, that is, all the locomotives retired and sold under its authorization were actually gone. Meaning locomotives retired under that AFE may have been disposed of over a period of several months. Hol
To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 15:18:59 -0400 Subject: Re: [CBQ] Q 1842
October 3, 2015
Hol - THANKS for sharing this interesting image. For my money, that's an
ex-C&NW Class M-2 0-6-0 type behind the ex-Q G-9. That being so, it would
indicate that the scrap yard where the image was taken was interchanged by both
the Q and C&NW. To the best of my knowledge, that could ONLY be NWS&W in
Sterling, IL. Plus, we already know that NWS&W used scrap switchers
from both the Q and C&NW on their industrial railroad prior
to when the GTW 0-8-0's took over duties. I say the location is NWS&W.
As for the discrepancy in dates, we've recently had a similar discussion
here about sold for scrap, retired and condemned dates on the roster and what
the terms meant. Your guess on the two month discrepancy is as good as
mine. I have some images that I took myself in the early 1960s at NWS&W
showing Q steam power being cut-up. By that time, the GTW 0-8-0's were handling
switching duties. If I can find what box the prints are hid away in, I'll
share with the Group. One last thing about your image. It appears that the
stacks on both locomotives are capped (covered) meaning may be the mill had been
shut down for a strike or other outage. I've always thought that an article in
the BRHS Bulletin on how NWS&W scrapped Q steam power, heavy weight
passenger cars and other rolling stock would make for interesting reading.
Best Regards - Louis
In a message dated 10/3/2015 10:43:18 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
CBQ@yahoogroups.com writes:
[Attachment(s) from Hol Wagner
included below]
I just bought this photo on eBay because it depicts on obviously
ex-Q G-9 switcher (its Q number, 1842, is visible on the number plate and
headlight number board) now numbered 5 and in use at what is identified on the
print as "U.S. Steel & Wire Co." The date of the photo is
recorded as Aug. 22, 1948. Company records (and thus Corbin's first
book) say the locomotive was retired in October 1948. In addition to
that discrepancy, there's the question of where this photo was actually
taken. There's no location identified on the print, and an exhaustive
Google search turns up no U.S. Steel & Wire Co., only the expected U.S.
Steel and Northwest Steel & Wire Co.
Does anybody recognize
this scene as being Sterling, Ill., and the Northwest Steel & Wire
plant? We know the Q sold many steam locomotives to NWS&W in the
1950s, including several G-5 USRA 0-6-0s that became Sterling plant
switchers. An d Sterling also used a number of former C&NW and GTW
switchers at the plant in the 1950s. That looks a lot like a C&NW
0-6-0 behind the 1842/5. NWS&W began operations at Sterling in 1936
and the Q began selling locomotives for scrap (as opposed to cutting them up
itself at Eola or elsewhere) in the years following WWII. So it seems
quite probable that retired Q steam locomotives were being sold to NWS&W
in the late Forties, and identifying the location of this photo
would change the probability into a fact. Of course there's still
the discrepancy between the date the Q says the 1842 was retired and
the two-month earlier date on which it was photographed . . .
Hol
__._,_.___
Posted by: Hol Wagner <holpennywagner@msn.com>
![]()
__,_._,___
|
|