Comments: 6
TheIdahoRailfan [2019-02-16 21:31:33 +0000 UTC]
I personally find it very stupid how quickly we converted to diesel. I suppose that’s how so many people then and today view things: once something new comes, folks forget about the old and move on to the next fancy gadget in line. Sad really, but that’s how it is. Amazing work on this piece here!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Rockyrailroad578 [2014-03-02 19:49:40 +0000 UTC]
I personally like traction and steam, but this is still very sad. I like it when it is like the South Shore that took it's trailer cars to the Illinois Central that pulled them the rest of the way on an old plantation-style engine.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
PRR8157 In reply to Rockyrailroad578 [2014-03-07 00:38:26 +0000 UTC]
That goes back quite a ways. The I.C. electrified that operation in 1926. A very few of the Forney type engines were sold or transferred to other locations. The 201 (a 2-4-4) still exists at the Illinois Railway Museum.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Rockyrailroad578 In reply to PRR8157 [2014-03-07 20:38:14 +0000 UTC]
shame too, considering IC's cars were UGLY compared to the South Shore, which is embarassing that their MU's are beaten in looks by the INTERURBAN line!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
riverine69 [2014-01-08 22:33:26 +0000 UTC]
Very nice.
The Delaware & Hudson converted rapidly to diesel in the early 1950's. Many of the diesels were paid for with scrap sales of the D&H's steam fleet to Luria Brothers in Pennsylvania. Not one example of D&H steam was saved, even beautiful 4-6-6-4 Challengers img4.imageshack.us/img4/7141/d… less than 10 years old went to the torch, saddest of all were the very modern dual service 4-8-4 Northerns, with the British-style "elephant ear" smoke lifters and bug-eye marker lamps www.yesteryeardepot.com/DH300.…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
PRR8157 In reply to riverine69 [2014-03-07 00:39:32 +0000 UTC]
A terrible shame. It was all about economics.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0