Return-Path: Delivered-To: unknown Received: from mailhost.usrp-ltd.com (10.45.0.93:110) by pegasus.nauer.org with POP3; 27 Jun 2016 01:55:02 -0000 Delivered-To: archives@nauer.org Received: (qmail 8989 invoked by uid 168); 14 Sep 2015 14:42:41 -0500 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from ng24-vm3.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by mailhost (envelope-from , uid 89) with qmail-scanner-2.10st (clamdscan: 0.98.6/20913. mhr: 1.0. spamassassin: 3.3.2. perlscan: 2.10st. Clear:RC:0(98.138.121.127):SA:0(-2.5/5.0):. Processed in 2.612105 secs); 14 Sep 2015 19:42:41 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: sentto-17127-50285-1442259911-archives=nauer.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com via mailhost X-Qmail-Scanner: 2.10st (Clear:RC:0(98.138.121.127):SA:0(-2.5/5.0):. Processed in 2.612105 secs Process 8978) Received: from ng24-vm3.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (98.138.121.127) by mailhost.usrp-ltd.com with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP; 14 Sep 2015 14:42:39 -0500 Received-SPF: pass (mailhost.usrp-ltd.com: SPF record at _spf.mail.yahoo.com designates 98.138.121.127 as permitted sender) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoogroups.com; s=echoe; t=1442259911; bh=r7bVLwWIjrrgNur/F8xIYX0dibcwHYbCqaSS02ze1KY=; h=To:In-Reply-To:References:From:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:Date:Subject:Reply-To:From:Subject; b=p/KdK9Je/gW/hhDaNFAV5+3/Se8O6poPfufnTjcmekxYViP6Kiuy0P96ZSSnn2kOdVAvCENwQ96qUMP5mrOA+xgyXLDykdj7Ppfd0RmIqLH1j1fPg09BN/tN/71zp/Jxues7HLqFuHfdaK/JaB+FM7Se+QGR8iDIjY4TG4FH8MI= Received: from [98.138.101.140] by ng24.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 14 Sep 2015 19:45:11 -0000 Received: from [10.193.84.148] by tg10.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 14 Sep 2015 19:45:11 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 17127-m50285 X-Sender: holpennywagner@msn.com X-Apparently-To: cbq@yahoogroups.com X-Received: (qmail 62953 invoked by uid 102); 14 Sep 2015 19:45:09 -0000 X-Received: from unknown (HELO mtaq3.grp.bf1.yahoo.com) (10.193.84.142) by m13.grp.bf1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Sep 2015 19:45:09 -0000 X-Received: (qmail 21385 invoked from network); 14 Sep 2015 19:45:08 -0000 X-Received: from unknown (HELO mta1006.groups.mail.ne1.yahoo.com) (98.138.100.121) by mtaq3.grp.bf1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Sep 2015 19:45:08 -0000 X-Received-SPF: pass (domain of msn.com designates 65.54.190.38 as permitted sender) X-YMailISG: Sp0lVW4WLDu4v5kAcjpjgsOnah04Zv6zkTbAGP4oXco8ixM5 AhphlycL7hiDFIAjGEU0ND0t0OYfMBgwXTE_qiIGHuJZBIvDQh14kRW4VOjL lMdDg5LyxKaMwnMSWHUWHplDnyv0m7mrMrPA4dp7iAp3SA_oe6PFujqUlNsW _d.zmwS.R28.Ukw8gOiKy.wGMPf3EkN2zBLq6GKmPEokUqPLNP4e9sYsq697 fEgH1ql006xpzZtnUlSdOY2n9f9wJXvyLx.4zViogFvAO3QvZp2PrP895Rpt .nnEnixwOQ9vkLrnM7me4emzfLavFJ8Xv0SR9XfWFsGila5vN_m3Qsp8ZbdP gQCwq5XrM3mjzzHiHyvQ4.ovAYKGdss3lhe9RfKaS64KLWdw31hLN14bcYVo oB3xz2VmcjsE8MOd.8aNg25LPunZmw0iUPHaxT0kAhZ8cKWxWfhaYX7zqBZG o0BRCteT6YBXSNxujpXufVzIum5aaHzsAgutxq5MJT6WwM5bmkUEZJQyh1Ac Mts6zE1.T8.AXkx5wGR.m.SGGKLa_idOsvX53_1aicfc7RwW04nFT4CPAZY_ ZY2Dyo3naF0NHOx4gFhcT0QhEFlM4jrX3i.cqGLpTHmA_JSNHuNTcB3HxHAu onUmV8bxoUcaqX67ZLin34rXKLDrV8PpvLjvwcG0S69ScNUJEPqNqhMdJZB8 dfJ3E6_wFPWyglhVmN1a_9OFEvGcEo3T9_pROBcvxiRC14U9XH6mzTc1Gps. 7iic41tRxawWPLknVEJzJYTvCHTpSGm1eaCmSoYjvnP0mmGue9I0qhpAdN4o 1gACI2CmjydBRQ_VKRPDuYlxWNR8xIodkX45u3rvsYDgE8Hqkv0nB_rEcU9n RJwLU59GyC5b.fYBNcItQP.QkXIHZFjrnSbIJF4ffXlFcYcVJxaslx921rMK Kh5ngkSlzcBZgcdkbFZpEVRFkMmYKevUIKyAyIUkrj_TWHc0mplDN3rO4RYU l5OpvJvd8eLdrBBKO2pZ0s.YbWRr.OkNVKY_SPMG1BxrBYk9ahWGRxnTT_Kb 9UKVrtY7wADrVKYMVqz8iGbaZRIHYEKWdUeDAkOZGF1osc2mptnEbaV48OJb Zi4Q1WtHye_xhwfy98azffq52VJRZL6cRalgFlUjH5CBEnBw6dEHmwsK0ZJN 1TqWzZYHfaZA1fW0elYvTI1TcQQ7ZJ6fzLUKA.r3iwMOcpkNXWTBnkwv46Ag L1G0IrILCw2c4ntJ6Q.ccFtjC_Bjqxwqfrc_ZUh_P0AYbV5sRcxqYcRs8Dfp 8XQMuDOV8E54m2_68qs5w4zRxFkebdbdiOFt4_jjimUTKi0erWmsBYC2cHME EGENCtjArYCcHatxUJFzhL3piAFDi5Rp9DgXS5HEx0VWulUFc8jhK7Sb4BfQ SEmWGv5SQz48J8XLE7iJ.bm5oxB96zzaGfnQzK0XIeajEtk- Authentication-Results: mta1006.groups.mail.ne1.yahoo.com from=msn.com; domainkeys=neutral (no sig); from=msn.com; dkim=neutral (no sig) X-Received: from 127.0.0.1 (EHLO BAY004-OMC1S27.hotmail.com) (65.54.190.38) by mta1006.groups.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTPS; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 19:45:08 +0000 X-Received: from BAY172-W6 ([65.54.190.60]) by BAY004-OMC1S27.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.23008); Mon, 14 Sep 2015 12:43:03 -0700 X-TMN: [eZF/MnJ72bCdI1AR0PUZZYsCDYqoSMmt] X-Originating-Email: [holpennywagner@msn.com] Message-ID: To: CB&Q Group Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <1e66c2.2882849c.43286fee@aol.com> References: <1e66c2.2882849c.43286fee@aol.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Sep 2015 19:43:03.0698 (UTC) FILETIME=[920E3F20:01D0EF25] X-Originating-IP: 98.138.100.121 X-Original-From: Hol Wagner From: "Hol Wagner holpennywagner@msn.com [CBQ]" X-Yahoo-Profile: fhw632 Sender: CBQ@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list CBQ@yahoogroups.com List-Id: Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 13:43:02 -0600 Subject: RE: [CBQ] Steam Roster Disposition Dates Reply-To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-email-tradh-m Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_12a0afe0-9cdc-44bb-a0ba-86e16dfb738a_" --_12a0afe0-9cdc-44bb-a0ba-86e16dfb738a_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Louis: =20 Condemned was a late addition to the terminology used when dropping a locom= otive from service. By the time it came into use, there was no question th= at stored steam locomotives would not be returned to service, and that term= essentially replaced both of the stored terms -- serviceable and unservice= able. But condemned locomotives were still on the roster until they were o= fficially retired -- and then sold for scrap (since by this time the railro= ad was no longer scrapping locomotives itself). =20 Hol =20 To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 14:46:07 -0400 Subject: Re: [CBQ] Steam Roster Disposition Dates [2 Attachments] =20 =20 =20=20 =20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 [Attachment(s) from LZadnichek@aol.com included below] =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20 September 14, 2015 =20 Hol - Thanks. That answers that. One last question. How does the term=20 "Condemned" that appears on Locomotive Assignment Sheets fit into the roste= r=20 sequence of "Retired" and "Sold For Scrap?" =20 I'm attaching two Locomotive Assignment Sheets for the period of July=20 through December 1960. They date to the time my late father M.L. Zadnichek= =20 was Ottumwa Division Superintendent. Note on both sheets at top far right t= he=20 column of steam locomotive numbers under the heading "Condemned." =20 Would "Condemned" mean the same as "Retired?" Note the difference in the=20 two sheets as steam locomotives were leaving the property to be scrapped an= d=20 were dropped from the list. Also, note that Mark Twain Zephyr diesel locomo= tive=20 9903 appears at the bottom of the July-September List, but is gone from the= =20 October-December List. =20 Also, perhaps, more interesting are the remaining steam locomotives=20 identified on various divisions. Is it correct to assume these locomotives = were=20 considered at the time to be stored serviceable with the exception of=20 No. 35 that is clearly marked Exhibition Engine (Exh. Eng.)? Your thoughts = and=20 comments would be appreciated. Best Regards -=20 Louis=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 =20 =20 =20 In a message dated 9/9/2015 11:16:23 A.M. Central Daylight Time,=20 CBQ@yahoogroups.com writes: Louis: =20 Usually a locomotive had been stored either=20 serviceable or unserviceable before it was officially retired, though thi= s was=20 not always the case. But the date retired is the official date it was=20 dropped from company records and no longer existed as far as the operatin= g=20 department was concerned. Once officially retired the locomotive was=20 usually pretty quickly sold for scrap and moved to the property of the=20 purchaser, or moved to Eola and scrapped by the company. When a=20 locomotive was in really poor condition and it was not considered practic= al or=20 safe to move it to Eola, it would be scrapped where it was, the Denver jo= int=20 shops and Lincoln both scrapping locomotives into the mid-1950s. After=20 that time, however, virtually all Q steam locomotives were sold for=20 scrap. On the C&S a good many locomotives were scrapped by the=20 company at the Seventh Street (Rice Yard) complex in the late 1950s-early= =20 1960s. And the FW&D scrapped locomotives at Childress but not Fort=20 Worth. By 1960 the Q was selling everything to Northwest Steel &=20 Wire at Sterling, Ill., while the C&S and FW&D were shipping=20 locomotives to Commercial Metals Co. in=20 Houston. =20 Hol =20 =20=20 =20=20 To: cbq@yahoogroups.com From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015=20 13:30:49 -0400 Subject: [CBQ] Steam Roster Disposition Dates =20=20 =20=20 =20=20 =20=20 September 7,=20 2015 =20=20=20 Hol and Group - I have some questions on the disposition dates shown for= =20 steam power in the back of the Corbin book.=20 =20=20=20 Where "retired" is shown preceding the date, is that the date the=20 Mechanical Department at the Chicago General Offices wrote the locomotive= off=20 the books? If so, then is it correct to assume that a communication=20 then went out to the division master mechanic to take that locomotive out= of=20 service (if it hadn't already been done) and either store it for=20 scrap at whatever roundhouse it was located, or move=20 it dead-in-train to a central location (such as Galesburg on Lines East=20 or Lincoln on Lines West) for eventual sale as scrap? Continuing, isn't=20 it possible that a locomotive after being "retired" could stay on the pro= perty=20 for an extended amount of time in a scrap line waiting for scrap prices t= o=20 increase if they were low at the time of retirement? =20=20=20 Where "sold for scrap" is shown preceding the date, that's much more=20 definitive meaning the actual date the locomotive was sold to a scrap com= pany=20 to be dismantled, correct? I would think that the contract with the=20 scrap company would stipulate that the locomotive had to be delivered=20 within a certain time frame for the quoted price to be honored, say 30=20 days, as market prices then and now do fluctuate. I've never seen an exis= ting=20 scrap contract for a Q steam locomotive, but, having spent many years in = the=20 scrap business, I would speculate the locomotives with their tenders were= =20 purchased on a lump sum basis calculated from their recorded official=20 construction weights including delivery at the Q's expense to the scrap=20 yard. =20=20=20 I would really enjoy seeing a future BRHS Bulletin article on just how=20 the Q went about retiring and selling their steam power during dieselizat= ion=20 following World War Two. There had to be some kind of measured corporate= =20 plan on what classes of steam power were to be eliminated first in=20 conjunction with what divisions were to be first dieselized and "why."=20 Dieselization as I understand was commenced on Lines West on the Casper, = WY,=20 division in the early 1950s due to poor water conditions and the high exp= ense=20 of maintaining water treatment plants, correct? Dieselization concluded o= n=20 Lines East on the Beardstown, IL, division not quite 10 years later=20 where coal and water were plentiful and inexpensive.=20 =20=20=20 As for classes, it seems for the most part dieselization=20 was first focused upon passenger and switching locomotives, then expanded= =20 into road freight locomotives. The Q as I understand took a more=20 "conservative" stance on dieselization than some competitors that purchas= ed=20 diesels as fast as they could be built to quickly replace their steam pow= er.=20 Other roads rushed to dieselize where as the Q held-on to 2-8-2s, 2-10-4s= ,=20 4-6-4s and 4-8-4s that remained in serviceable condition into the late 19= 50s.=20 Although the Q itself had virtually dieselized its yard, freight and=20 passenger train operations by 1955, it still rostered a good number of=20 serviceable steam locomotives that were stored at Galesburg and Lincoln=20 for seasonal traffic surges. =20=20=20 What brings all this up is that in collecting digital images of Q=20 steam power I occasionally come across discrepancies in image dates=20 and retired/sold for scrap dates. Some of the image dates can be=20 considered questionable, but some I think are accurate. So, when I find a= n=20 image of an O-1-A under steam on such-and-such a date, but the Corbin boo= k=20 says the O-1-A had been retired prior to that date, I=20 wonder..... Is it possible that a "retired" but still serviceable=20 locomotive could be fired-up and used for a short amount of time, or does= =20 "retired" mean it never ran again after that specific date? I think=20 sold for scrap dates are chiseled in stone and the locomotive had been=20 delivered to a scrap yard and dismantled by 30 or so days from the date. = I=20 would appreciate any thoughts or comments on this subject. Best Labor Day= =20 Wishes - Louis =20=20=20 Louis Zadnichek II Fairhope, AL =20=20=20 =20=20=20 =20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20 =20=20 =20=20 =20=20 =20=20 =20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=09=09=20=09=20=20=20=09=09=20=20 --_12a0afe0-9cdc-44bb-a0ba-86e16dfb738a_ Content-Type: text/html; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Louis:
 
Condemned was a late addition to the terminology used when dropping a locomotive from service.  By the time it came into use, there was no question that stored steam locomotives would not be returned to service, and that term essentially replaced both of the stored terms -- serviceable and unserviceable.  But condemned locomotives were still on the roster until they were officially retired -- and then sold for scrap (since by this time the railroad was no longer scrapping locomotives itself).
 
Hol
 

To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 14:46:07 -0400
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Steam Roster Disposition Dates [2 Attachments]

 
[Attachment(s) from LZadnichek@aol.com included below]
September 14, 2015
 
Hol - Thanks. That answers that. One last question. How does the term "Condemned" that appears on Locomotive Assignment Sheets fit into the roster sequence of "Retired" and "Sold For Scrap?"
 
I'm attaching two Locomotive Assignment Sheets for the period of July through December 1960. They date to the time my late father M.L. Zadnichek was Ottumwa Division Superintendent. Note on both sheets at top far right the column of steam locomotive numbers under the heading "Condemned."
 
Would "Condemned" mean the same as "Retired?" Note the difference in the two sheets as steam locomotives were leaving the property to be scrapped and were dropped from the list. Also, note that Mark Twain Zephyr diesel locomotive 9903 appears at the bottom of the July-September List, but is gone from the October-December List.
 
Also, perhaps, more interesting are the remaining steam locomotives identified on various divisions. Is it correct to assume these locomotives were considered at the time to be stored serviceable with the exception of No. 35 that is clearly marked Exhibition Engine (Exh. Eng.)? Your thoughts and comments would be appreciated. Best Regards - Louis       
 
 
 
In a message dated 9/9/2015 11:16:23 A.M. Central Daylight Time, CBQ@yahoogroups.com writes:


Louis:
 
Usually a locomotive had been stored either serviceable or unserviceable before it was officially retired, though this was not always the case.  But the date retired is the official date it was dropped from company records and no longer existed as far as the operating department was concerned.  Once officially retired the locomotive was usually pretty quickly sold for scrap and moved to the property of the purchaser, or moved to Eola and scrapped by the company.  When a locomotive was in really poor condition and it was not considered practical or safe to move it to Eola, it would be scrapped where it was, the Denver joint shops and Lincoln both scrapping locomotives into the mid-1950s.  After that time, however, virtually all Q steam locomotives were sold for scrap.  On the C&S a good many locomotives were scrapped by the company at the Seventh Street (Rice Yard) complex in the late 1950s-early 1960s.  And the FW&D scrapped locomotives at Childress but not Fort Worth.  By 1960 the Q was selling everything to Northwest Steel & Wire at Sterling, Ill., while the C&S and FW&D were shipping locomotives to Commercial Metals Co. in Houston.
 
Hol
 

To: cbq@yahoogroups.com
From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 13:30:49 -0400
Subject: [CBQ] Steam Roster Disposition Dates

 
September 7, 2015
 
Hol and Group - I have some questions on the disposition dates shown for steam power in the back of the Corbin book.
 
Where "retired" is shown preceding the date, is that the date the Mechanical Department at the Chicago General Offices wrote the locomotive off the books?  If so, then is it correct to assume that a communication then went out to the division master mechanic to take that locomotive out of service (if it hadn't already been done) and either store it for scrap at whatever roundhouse it was located, or move it dead-in-train to a central location (such as Galesburg on Lines East or Lincoln on Lines West) for eventual sale as scrap? Continuing, isn't it possible that a locomotive after being "retired" could stay on the property for an extended amount of time in a scrap line waiting for scrap prices to increase if they were low at the time of retirement?
 
Where "sold for scrap" is shown preceding the date, that's much more definitive meaning the actual date the locomotive was sold to a scrap company to be dismantled, correct? I would think that the contract with the scrap company would stipulate that the locomotive had to be delivered within a certain time frame for the quoted price to be honored, say 30 days, as market prices then and now do fluctuate. I've never seen an existing scrap contract for a Q steam locomotive, but, having spent many years in the scrap business, I would speculate the locomotives with their tenders were purchased on a lump sum basis calculated from their recorded official construction weights including delivery at the Q's expense to the scrap yard.
 
I would really enjoy seeing a future BRHS Bulletin article on just how the Q went about retiring and selling their steam power during dieselization following World War Two. There had to be some kind of measured corporate plan on what classes of steam power were to be eliminated first in conjunction with what divisions were to be first dieselized and "why." Dieselization as I understand was commenced on Lines West on the Casper, WY, division in the early 1950s due to poor water conditions and the high expense of maintaining water treatment plants, correct? Dieselization concluded on Lines East on the Beardstown, IL, division not quite 10 years later where coal and water were plentiful and inexpensive.
 
As for classes, it seems for the most part dieselization was first focused upon passenger and switching locomotives, then expanded into road freight locomotives. The Q as I understand took a more "conservative" stance on dieselization than some competitors that purchased diesels as fast as they could be built to quickly replace their steam power. Other roads rushed to dieselize where as the Q held-on to 2-8-2s, 2-10-4s, 4-6-4s and 4-8-4s that remained in serviceable condition into the late 1950s. Although the Q itself had virtually dieselized its yard, freight and passenger train operations by 1955, it still rostered a good number of serviceable steam locomotives that were stored at Galesburg and Lincoln for seasonal traffic surges.
 
What brings all this up is that in collecting digital images of Q steam power I occasionally come across discrepancies in image dates and retired/sold for scrap dates. Some of the image dates can be considered questionable, but some I think are accurate. So, when I find an image of an O-1-A under steam on such-and-such a date, but the Corbin book says the O-1-A had been retired prior to that date, I wonder..... Is it possible that a "retired" but still serviceable locomotive could be fired-up and used for a short amount of time, or does "retired" mean it never ran again after that specific date?  I think sold for scrap dates are chiseled in stone and the locomotive had been delivered to a scrap yard and dismantled by 30 or so days from the date. I would appreciate any thoughts or comments on this subject. Best Labor Day Wishes - Louis
 
Louis Zadnichek II
Fairhope, AL
 
 
 
   
 
      






__._,_.___

Posted by: Hol Wagner <holpennywagner@msn.com>



__,_._,___
--_12a0afe0-9cdc-44bb-a0ba-86e16dfb738a_--