Proof that not only the Eating House was built on stilts at Forks Creek.

[Rick Steele]

Check this stereoptican photo out.

Neat!!!

http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/Jackson/id/2461

Rick

http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/Jackson/id/2461

[Todd Hackett]

Here are a couple of other views of the stilts, one of just the depot, the other with the eating house.

[Chris Walker]

Which brings me to ask a question I've been wondering about since 1981, Harry Brunk wrote about the Forks Creek Depot and Eating House in his NG&SLJan/Feb 1980 Gazette series.  In that issue he mentioned that overtime the stream and trackage layout appeared to have changed with the Truss bridge being renewed with Iron and the Depot moved further away from the tracks.  I can see how the  stream would move over, I doubt the RR would have blasted away considerable rockwork to achieve the same result.  That stream adjustment may also have undermined those "stilts" and provided the impetuous to contruct rock foundations.


Now to my question, the F.C. Depot has a very close appearance to the standard Section House without the lean-to addition at the rear, a coincidence or copy of design?  Any thoughts on this matter?

Also while we have this subject open, and I can't find the comment to refer to, I "thought" I read recently somewhere that the F.C. Depot was still there at the end of the RR, this was a reply in response to a query about did the Highway Dept or the RR pull it down.
It apparently was gone at the end of operations from this photo.  Note shadows that would have been cast by the Depot, aren't present.

http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15330coll22/id/42658/rec/24

[Darel Leedy]

Maybe it's just me Chris, but I see a little bit of the shadow when looking at the picture on the DPL site with the link you provided.

[Darel Leedy]

But then again I did not bring my laptop home tonight and I cannot zoom in with my iPad to tell if that is something else on the ground.

[Chris Walker]

Not certain what that is Darel, has the appearance of a stack of ties to me,  and the line of stones suggest the outline of foundations directly opposite the Switch as well.  Come to think of it, there seems to be no end-of-operations era photographs showing the Depot extant that has been published in the books.  Directions to one appreciated.

http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/42658/rv/singleitem

[John Schapekahm]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[John Schapekahm]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[John Schapekahm]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[John Schapekahm]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[Chris Walker]

That is what I thought, thanks for the confirmation.  The problem with this C&S research is that the material is spread far and wide and my memory is getting shabby.

Notice that in Todd's post the Switchstand had migrated across the track and got a different target outline.


http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/6346/rv/singleitem/rec/11


Dinner, already, heck I'm just having a late lunch, more like a fabulous afternoon tea.

[John Schapekahm]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[John Schapekahm]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[Todd Hackett]

Here are a few more interesting Forks Creek photos.

This one is dated 1923. Notice how far the lunch room is from the depot, and that htere is another structure extending the depot in that direction.


This one comes from a private photo album, and is the clearest photo from this trip. The only clues I can find to the date are that the observation car has knuckle couplers, and that the High Bridge appears to not have been reinforced yet (but that photo isn't clear enough to be sure).


This one is a bit earlier, with a Miller Hook on the observation car.

[John Schapekahm]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[John Schapekahm]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[John Schapekahm]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[John Schapekahm]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[Derrell Poole]

Near as we can tell the cinder cone came along in early 1912. Also No. 21 has the pneumatic sanding lines  - advent 1910 (near as we can tell). I cannot tell if the lamp is electric but would bet that it was because the Colorado PUC required it to be electric in early 1912. The 1911 ICC laws required a steal pilot beam; it took a few years for beams to show up on all the engines so I would put the date of this photo around 1915 - but that is just my humble "guess".

(Absolutely marvelous - what you can tell from the details...)

[John Schapekahm]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.