- 21. Re: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es (score: 1)
- Author: "David Weber dave@cimmarondesign.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 16:42:11 -0700
- __._,_.___ Visit Your Group New Members 1 Yahoo! Groups • Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use __,_._,___
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00086.html (18,362 bytes)
- 22. Re: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es (score: 1)
- Author: "Edwardsutorik@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
- Date: 13 Jan 2018 00:06:51 +0000
- The KCZ and NZ were split at Galesburg. May we assume that the loco consist was split at that point? Seems likely. For the other trains, I don't believe they ever split. So there would be no related
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00087.html (15,564 bytes)
- 23. Re: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es (score: 1)
- Author: "Rick rkeil6721@hotmail.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 01:20:17 +0000
- I thought there were trains that split at Alliance, NE with one going to Billings and the other Wyoming, Casper perhaps? Ricky Keil Papillion, NE From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com <CBQ@yahoogroups.com> on be
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00088.html (17,736 bytes)
- 24. RE: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es (score: 1)
- Author: "Rupert Gamlen gamlenz@hotmail.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 02:32:35 +0000
- Ed Leaving aside the reasons already offered (and I dont profess to know much about this subject) there seems to be two questions. Firstly, why did the Burlington not keep A+B units together and seco
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00090.html (19,517 bytes)
- 25. Re: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es (score: 1)
- Author: "Hol Wagner holpennywagner@msn.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 15:05:57 +0000
- Ricky: Yes, 42-43 were split at Alliance to create 31-32 that then ran to Casper and back. But the scheduling was such that 31-32 did not get their single E-unit from 42-43 but rather from 33-34, the
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00093.html (19,625 bytes)
- 26. Re: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es (score: 1)
- Author: "Bill Hirt whirt@fastmail.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 09:05:09 -0600
- The answer is yes. The KCZ had a much shorter consist and usually only had one E unit leaving Galesburg. Bill Hirt On 1/12/2018 6:06 PM, Edwardsutorik@aol.com [CBQ] wrote: The KCZ and NZ were split a
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00094.html (16,260 bytes)
- 27. Re: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es (score: 1)
- Author: "Jpslhedgpeth@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 12:18:46 -0500
- Rickie..Both those trains..43 out of Lincoln and whatever it was going to Casper were "light" trains...I may be wrong on this, but I don't think that "in the latter days" they were just two totally s
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00096.html (15,925 bytes)
- 28. RE: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es (score: 1)
- Author: "cvlk@comcast.net [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 14:15:50 -0600
- All- While this 1960 letter does not mention the number of cars to be handled by one unit it does mention mention both cabs forward (elephant) configuration and specifies certain trains had to have a
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00110.html (14,399 bytes)
- 29. Re: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es (score: 1)
- Author: "Jpslhedgpeth@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 15:27:30 -0500
- I love to read this "vintage" railroad correspondence. It is so predictable and unchanging over the years...Note that it was done on a "stencil"..then "run off" on mimeograph machine with copies to "
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00112.html (15,168 bytes)
- 30. Re: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es (score: 1)
- Author: "David Weber dave@cimmarondesign.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 13:44:13 -0700
- __._,_.___ Visit Your Group Yahoo! Groups • Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use __,_._,___
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00141.html (18,355 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu