Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CBQ\]\s+Re\:\s+C\&S\s+E5\s+on\s+Dinky\s*$/: 17 ]

Total 17 documents matching your query.

1. [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "John Mitchell icrr1680@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:44:16 +0000 (UTC)
Here are just some thoughts on this question. By 1950, Burlington management was considering replacing the old, worn out, steam engines in commuter service with diesels. There was a concern as to how
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00124.html (14,569 bytes)

2. [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "John Mitchell icrr1680@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:47:00 +0000 (UTC)
__._,_.___ Visit Your Group Yahoo! Groups &bull; Privacy &bull; Unsubscribe &bull; Terms of Use __,_._,___
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00125.html (13,462 bytes)

3. Re: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "Stephen Levine sjl_prodigynet@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 13:30:07 -0600
Here are just some thoughts on this question. By 1950, Burlington management was considering replacing the old, worn out, steam engines in commuter service with diesels. There was a concern as to ho
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00126.html (15,939 bytes)

4. Re: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "Hol Wagner holpennywagner@msn.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:38:38 +0000
Steve is quite right; C&S 9950A was definitely not surplus power in 1950-51 and in fact quite the opposite. Even the Dec. 1952 purchase of E8s 9981A and B by the FW&D did not completely correct the s
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00127.html (19,964 bytes)

5. Re: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "Stephen Levine sjl_prodigynet@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 19:20:00 -0600
Steve is quite right; C&S 9950A was definitely not surplus power in 1950-51 and in fact quite the opposite. Even the Dec. 1952 purchase of E8s 9981A and B by the FW&D did not completely correct the
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00128.html (20,423 bytes)

6. RE: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "Rupert Gamlen gamlenz@hotmail.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 03:56:32 +0000
Were there any modifications, repairs, etc. that couldnt be carried out in the company shops, requiring an E-5 to visit to EMD? Rupert Gamlen Auckland NZ From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CBQ@yahoogr
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00129.html (16,061 bytes)

7. [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "thommack@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: 16 Jan 2018 13:20:13 +0000
A slight correction in John's comment about DC traction motors. It is not the traction motors themselves that allow for transition. It is the switch gear in the electrical cabinet. Thus the locomotiv
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00130.html (21,054 bytes)

8. Re: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "John Mitchell icrr1680@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 04:32:09 +0000 (UTC)
Steve is quite right; C&S 9950A was definitely not surplus power in 1950-51 and in fact quite the opposite. Even the Dec. 1952 purchase of E8s 9981A and B by the FW&D did not completely correct the
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00132.html (22,025 bytes)

9. Re: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "John Mitchell icrr1680@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 04:35:18 +0000 (UTC)
Steve is quite right; C&S 9950A was definitely not surplus power in 1950-51 and in fact quite the opposite. Even the Dec. 1952 purchase of E8s 9981A and B by the FW&D did not completely correct the
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00133.html (23,714 bytes)

10. Re: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "Stephen Levine sjl_prodigynet@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:24:39 -0600
Steve is quite right; C&S 9950A was definitely not surplus power in 1950-51 and in fact quite the opposite. Even the Dec. 1952 purchase of E8s 9981A and B by the FW&D did not completely correct the
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00139.html (24,561 bytes)

11. Re: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "John Mitchell icrr1680@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 19:16:59 +0000 (UTC)
A slight correction in John's comment about DC traction motors. It is not the traction motors themselves that allow for transition. It is the switch gear in the electrical cabinet. Thus the locomoti
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00140.html (23,127 bytes)

12. Re: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "Don Brown dbrown02@rochester.rr.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 16:19:44 -0500
As I recall it, the road/yard switch affected the load regulator, and provided for more rapid response as soon as the throttle was opened.  It may be the "yard" position forestalled shunting, I don't
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00144.html (15,484 bytes)

13. Re: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "Stephen Levine sjl_prodigynet@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:31:07 -0600
Steve is quite right; C&S 9950A was definitely not surplus power in 1950-51 and in fact quite the opposite. Even the Dec. 1952 purchase of E8s 9981A and B by the FW&D did not completely correct the
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00146.html (23,020 bytes)

14. [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "Bob Campbell amtrak347@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 00:43:49 -0500
Steve - CB&Q E5 and E7 gear ratio was 52:25 (top speed 117 MPH) CB&Q E8 and E9 gear ratio was 55:22 (top speed 98 MPH) Bob __._,_.___ Posted by: Bob Campbell <amtrak347@aol.com> Visit Your Group Yaho
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00157.html (13,832 bytes)

15. [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "Bob Campbell amtrak347@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:48:12 -0500
John - According to the CB&Q Mechanical Department's "Diesel Electric Locomotive Diagram" book, it shows that E5, E7, E8 and E9 class locos all have automatic transition accelerating/manual transitio
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00158.html (13,006 bytes)

16. Re: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "Stephen Levine sjl_prodigynet@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:40:47 -0600
Steve - CB&Q E5 and E7 gear ratio was 52:25 (top speed 117 MPH) CB&Q E8 and E9 gear ratio was 55:22 (top speed 98 MPH) Bob __._,_.___ Posted by: Stephen Levine <sjl_prodigynet@yahoo.com> Visit Your
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00159.html (14,684 bytes)

17. Re: [CBQ] Re: C&S E5 on Dinky (score: 1)
Author: "amtrak347@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: 17 Jan 2018 18:30:19 +0000
Steve - All E5, 7, 8 & 9 had automatic transition, accelerating. First circuit change occurred for the #1 engine about 21-23 MPH, followed by engine #2 about 23-25 MPH. Parallel shunt didn't occur un
/archives/BRHSLIST/2018-01/msg00160.html (13,157 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 17
Page: [1]
This search system is powered by Namazu