Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CBQ\]\s+What\s+Steam\s+Designs\s+would\s+have\s+worked\s+if\s+the\s+1930\s+GN\/NP\/CB\&Q\s+merger\s+had\s+been\s+approved\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CBQ\]\s+What\s+Steam\s+Designs\s+would\s+have\s+worked\s+if\s+the\s+1930\s+GN\/NP\/CB\&Q\s+merger\s+had\s+been\s+approved\?\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. [CBQ] What Steam Designs would have worked if the 1930 GN/NP/CB&Q merger had been approved? (score: 1): Author: "'gary laakso' vasa0vasa@earthlink.net [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 11:58:05 -0400; What steam designs would have worked on a combined merged railroad if the ICC had approved it in 1930 without the divestiture of CB&Q condition? You can assume that the Q had control of the designs a; /archives/BRHSLIST/2015-10/msg00044.html (13,844 bytes)
2. Re: [CBQ] What Steam Designs would have worked if the 1930 GN/NP/CB&Q merger had been approved? (score: 1): Author: "'Kenneth Middleton' krmiddle@charter.net [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 14:12:02 -0400; Hi Gary, I'm not sure there is a simple answer to your question. The CB&Q trackage was relatively much more level that either the GN or NP trackage, both of which had to pass over the continental div; /archives/BRHSLIST/2015-10/msg00049.html (15,972 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]