Selkirk

[Don Pacetti]

Awesome photo Jeff, thanks! Interesting that coal chute isn't visible in this shot. The pump & boiler house would still need a source of fuel to keep the tank full - any ideas?

[Jim Courtney]

Jeff,

Just looking at the same photo while doing research for a future post, on page 102-103 of Mineral Belt II.

The debris by the down hill side of the grade, just beyond and to the left of the water tank, is in the same location as the "Coal Chute" as drawn on the map that Don posted at the top of the thread.

Jim

[Jim Courtney]

Jeff, Jeff and Don,

Here are a few other photos to help fill out the thread. All are from Digerness, Mineral Belt II, pages 100-104.

First another shot of the 1929 Denver Water Board Special, stopped for water behind the number 9.  It is obviously a companion to Don's water tank photo, at the top of the thread, and Jeff's photo of the tank and train from the rear. Passengers on the Leadville train were certainly treated to a spectacular view while the train took water at Selkirk!





A later view of the Leadville passenger taking water at Selkirk, c1930s.  I've looked at this photo in the book countless times, but without scanning and enlarging the image, I never noticed the horizontal marks of the tank staves.


William A. Gibson Photo



Finally an early view of the Selkirk trestle, up grade from the tank, by my favorite narrow gauge physician, Dr. C.H. Scott:


C.H. Scott photo.

[Don Pacetti]

Jim,
Thanks so much to you and all the rest of the membership on this thread. It just amazes me what this group comes up with, when it comes to the C&S narrow gauge's history. If it weren't for this group, so much of this wonderful railroads history would have become "lost in the mists of time". Good on ya'!

[Jim Courtney]

Don wrote:  If it weren't for this group, so much of this wonderful railroads history would have become "lost in the mists of time".

That is my fear, Don.  The RGS has a 12 volume encyclopedia of photos, drawings and other documents. Nothing similar exists for the C&S narrow gauge line. It is my hope that Darel's C&Sn3 blog site and "Discussion Forum" can fill that need, for everyone's future reference and enjoyment.

In that spirit, continue to post photos, maps and drawings that you haven't seen anywhere else, as it occurs to you. If you have documents of interest, like more C&S valuation maps, forward high resolution scans to Darel for posting in the "Files" section.

At some point we will need to reorganize the threads more as a collection of archival articles. A good example is Chris Walker's comprehensive posts on the Clear Creek Mines and Mills. I'm trying to reorganized the "C&S Coal Chute" thread in that manner.

Jim

[South Park]

  If it isn't clear to youzalls, the only NG railroad worthy of interest is
the Rio Grande and it is just a waste of time and energy to concern oneself
with anything but.  Please, ...  make a note of it !  

[Don Pacetti]

South Park wrote

If it isn't clear to youzalls, the only NG railroad worthy of interest is
the Rio Grande and it is just a waste of time and energy to concern oneself
with anything but.  Please, ...  make a note of it !  

Yeah, ticks me off too. If Blackstone Models would break with tradition and build just one C&S NG HOn3 locomotive series, it just might help us, some. I would gladly write an article or series of articles, for MR, on C&S NG history and how to model it; however, the lack of motive power is a significant problem. As all of you know, the only C&S locos out there are very, very expensive brass imports, that require significant, expensive upgrades to work reliably with DCC...bummer.

[Lee Gustafson]

FWIW, if Blackstone would/could do a C-16 which has common wheelbase and overall dimensions comparable to C&S 2-8-0's the issue of common appeal may be addressed. We can all hope.

Lee Gustafson

[Jim Courtney]

Don and Lee,

I wouldn't hold my breath.  Model railroad manufacturers have never really understood the market for C&S narrow gauge.

Take Microtrains for example. They invested a lot of dollars in tooling to mass produce two C&S steel underframe cars in HOn3, the 1909 reefer and the 1910 coal cars (likely because they didn't have to fool with truss rods).

Unfortunately, these were the two least numerous car classes on the C&S roster. No one needs more than a couple of reefers and maybe 4-5 SUF coal cars. So sales were disappointing, and with Blackstone beginning to bring in prototypically correct D&RGW cars of common types, Microtrains seems to have abandoned the HOn3 market in general and C&S narrow gauge in particular.

Now if they had done the SUF boxcars first, followed by the SUF stock cars, both painted in the block and button schemes, with multiple road numbers (not just two), they would have found a much larger market. Especially if they had also offered them in the Victor Miller RGS lettering for RGS and D&RGW modelers. Even WP&Y and US Navy schemes could have been applied to the boxcars for the truly esoteric modeler/collector.  But their conclusion was that there just wasn't interest in C&S prototype stuff.

Brass imports are a similar story. In the mid 1980s though early 1990s, there was a flurry of interest in the C&S in all three major modeling scales, largely due to Harry Brunk's series in the Gazette.  Importers such as Key and Lambert in HOn3 and Overland in Sn3/On3, brought in multiple locomotives, cabooses and passenger cars in short order, often in too large a quantity, sometimes multiple versions all in the same run. And their builders, like early Samhongsa and Anjin, built them to merely run, not understanding that we narrow gauge modelers wanted them to run slowly and smoothly. Sound and lights were deemed impractical in HOn3 and even Sn3, so no speaker holes in the tenders, no sound cams on axles. And as a result, the importers were largely left with a lot of unsold stock, some sitting on their shelves for years, because they overestimated the C&S market at that point in time, and how the brass market was changing to factory painted, lights, etc. But again, the myth was reinforced that there just wasn't enough interest in C&S narrow gauge models to make them profitable to produce.

The only C&S locomotives produced in the last 20 years that I can recall are the Precision 2-6-0s in HOn3 (factory painted with lights) and PBL's B-4Fs in Sn3 (factory painted, lights, Tsunami sound with optional weathering). Both importers understood the market; their production runs were based on reservations on hand plus a few extras for the indecisive or impulse buyer. Both runs sold out rapidly and due to the rising labor costs in Korea, by the turn of this century, were very expensive.

Not sure how to change these misconceptions. Perhaps we should start a new thread: "Strategies to get manufacturers to build C&S stuff".

Jim

[snapped_bolt]

 

   Let me guess....

     1. Create a blog that shares interesting information.
     2. Create a forum that blossoms into a repository for even more information. Make it picture-intensive.
     3. Devise a new way to build correct locomotives in various scales-

        a.  Offer them at a more attractive price than current market; not every modeler desires to collect brass.

        b. Support the locomotives with some specific detail parts- either installed, in the box, or available to upgrade.

        When that orphan On30 started becoming popular, it did so because of the motive power. In On3, we have rolling stock, but nothing to pull it with. Same for Sn3 and HOn3. I am confident that the availability of affordable locomotives would have a similar effect in the long-standing scales. Just focusing on locomotives would be all that's necessary to get the ball rolling.

        For certain, a good product would have market "staying power"...a good price point and good quality along with a smooth mechanism would not be a product one would want to compete with. These models are essentially "set in stone"...they have historical significance. The predecessor roads beg to be modeled, and are but with some difficulty and consternation. A new product could become a "default purchase"... for the long-term.

        I wonder what data Bachmann studied before they released locomotives in a rare gauge, then decide to decorate them in roads that 95% of model railroaders has never heard of? Seems awfully risky.

       A similar "risk" would be  the same for C&S locomotives.

       A strategy?

           Stan
       

[Paul R.]

Maybe someone who could draw up a file for a shapeways printed running gear for a c16 in the 3 scales HO,S andO would be a good start, fitted with brass bearings. Wheels might be a problem. Paul R.

[Jim Courtney]

A thoughtful post, Stan.

I'm just not sure who the manufacturer would be that would take that risk.

I spent a fare amount of time talking to the Blackstone folks at the NNGC in Denver last year. I suggested that they consider a run of C&S 2-8-0s based on their popular C-19 mechanism (sure, the wheel base is a couple of scale inches too long, but we C&S modelers would overlook that!). I pointed out that the Rhode Islands and both of the later classes of Baldwin 2-8-0s shared wagon top boilers and cabs of similar dimensions. And tenders were nearly identical. Multiple versions of the B-4Cs and B-4Ds could be produced with varied domes and headlights, just like their various versions of the D&RGW C-19s.

They just shook their heads -- not a big enough market to make it profitable, they said. They are concentrating on the big D&RGW locomotives, the K-28s and K-36s. Eventually, I bet they do a run of K-37s.

I had a conversation with Bill Peters of PBL a couple of years ago at a convention. He was lamenting that PBL had likely made a mistake in producing the K-27 as their first (and only) "hybrid" locomotive. In retrospect, he felt PBL should have started with a common drive train to produce C-16s and C-19s, since they only varied by a few scale inches. I eagerly pointed out that the same mechanism could be used for a run of Sn3 C&S 2-8-0s!

This was after the disappointing number of reservations for the C&S 74-75-76 run. He just shook his head -- not a big enough market to make the tooling profitable, he said . . .

[Robert McFarland]

Why not have 1890s-early 1900s short smokebox versions of the Rhode Islands and Baldwins?

[Jim Courtney]

That would be nice, Robert, but the 1930s C&S locomotives are the most recognizable to fans/modelers, and most likely to sell.

If a manufacturer doesn't think that the familiar 1930s C&S locomotives would be profitable to market, they're not likely to ever produce  products with a market base of 4 to 5 modelers.

I'm afraid that we devotees of pre-920 C&S stuff are forever destined to have to kit bash from existing models.

[Mike Trent]

I've mentioned this before, when I was associated with Overland for a short time back in the 80's, the reality of the Model Railroading pie was made clear to me. I don't mean to sound pessimistic, but bear in mind that those who share a passionate interest in South Park/C&S modeling number in the low dozens, not hundreds. Here is, I think, a pretty good breakdown of how we stack up against the world of model railroading...

Taking out O Scale 3 rail, which was at that time huge in the Northeast, the remaining pie was by far and away HO Scale, then O Scale, N Scale, and S Scale. Those made up about 95% of the pie. (For the sake of a pretty close example) The remaining 5% was narrow gauge. All narrow gauge. Of that 5%, about 90% was D&RGW. All scales of D&RGW narrow gauge with some RGS thrown in. Let's say that of the remaining 10% of 5% of the pie, probably 70% was C&S narrow gauge in all scales.  

So, 70% of 10% of 5% of the whole. That's pretty close. The C&S narrow gauge is super important to us, but pretty miniscule when compared to the "I like trains!" crowd that makes the wheels of the hobby go round and round.  And round....

What it takes are dedicated, determined, and talented people who love contributing to the hobby, especially a tiny sliver of the hobby, and are not seeking to get rich to get stuff actually done. Thank heaven there are a handful of folks like that out there and in our midst.

Granted, new technology changes the game in our favor with 3D printing and developments in new resin casting that were not previously available. This will be necessary, because a number of us want variations that may only be desirable for a handful or fewer, and they will pass on new models and kits because they are willing to hold out for exactly what they want. It's a complicated, and frustrating business.

But if you are willing to keep chipping away and keep your eyes open for opportunities, you'll find a way. Scratchbuilding, kitbashing, whatever it takes, keep your eye on the ball. Don't get discouraged, just keep at it.  

Like Tony does! Take it away Tony, good timing.....

[tonyk375]

Don't know what to say about you Sn3 guys but converting Blackstone C-19s to C&S locomotives wouldn't be difficult.  I little smoke box work including the boiler front I have already done.  New cab with running boards and tender shell.  No more work than this loco.  It was made from a Blackstone RGS 40.  I've looked at it and not a big deal.  I just have plenty of the bigger C&S locos.  It is not hard to wagon top the boiler.  If you go to a good fishing store, they carry lead tape.  Sorry to repeat posting pics of this loco.  i guess the next one will be a C&S.

[ComoDepot]

Blackstone have 346.

Pricy but there was a Mason Bogie in F.

[snapped_bolt]

  Way to go, Tony!

   I can't "just wait" for some things myself....

     As far as making "affordable" locomotives available, I personally think it can be done. In my neck of the space-time continuum, the C&S needs a reason for existence.
    (WARNING graphic language)
    First of all through a poorly placed bet at the poker table and some energetic investors, the Q bows out of (management) of the C&S narrow gauge. Sorry, but it has to be done. I may pen the novel some day, but I have things to build.
    A shipper or two locates along the line. I still need to determine how many carloads a day. One of these new shippers may need to have Prohibition suspended. Or, maybe not. Breweries survived prohibition.
    As it turns out the Q becoming scarce puts the C&S into a small panic. They still have the B-4-B's in storage, and find it less costly to actually make quality repairs than to finance larger locomotives, even if it means having more crews and maintenance. At this point, there isn't enough traffic to sign a purchase order. Larger used locomotives have larger used parts to repair.
   So B-4-B's go back on the line- and- get Ridgways. Most will be involved in moving work trains to correct the deficits you get with "deferred maintenance". This involves cropping and drilling rails, tie renewal, bridge maintenance.
    Yep. I heard there was talk of Uintah malleys coming over. Not with this line. No justification. We currently pick up two reefers daily over what we would have had before the brewery started shipping. No, we need no malleys.

===  So, my first step is to create a small flock of B-4-B's to paint the picture. And that will mean a boiler with a full extended smokebox. That I shall endeavor to do. The process to create the boiler can be used to create a DSP&P boiler/smokebox as well.
Add appropriate PSC and Back Shop details and you have  a darn good start.  I will need to move into "wagontop" boilers soon once I am making the straights. And then after I have it down, so to speak, I could offer the boiler. If we can't skin this cat all in one shot, maybe it can be done bit-by-bit. I guess some cats are really that tough!
       Currently I am looking at the need for having at least one "wagontop" transition done as an injection molded part. I just don't want to handle lead. Sorry. The other injection molded part for the loco would be the cab. No one-piece cabs. This would be something to assemble to allow glazing with glass. I am staring reality in the face. I would have to make the molds for the cab(s).

       Tenders? Ah!!! That's for someone else? Don't know the best way to do this yet. "Rivet impressions" do not leave a good impression on me.

       All in all I would like to day I am narrow-minded, always looking for a way to save money without risk. I am spending more time wracking my brain than my wallet on this plan.
        If I can do something to make it simpler (and possible, for that matter) for folks to put that quadruple-header on their layout, I think we would all be headed in the right direction. I am quite confident re: On3; not up on what detail parts may be in other scales.

       So- that's where I am at. I have waited for over 10 years for a C&S locomotive. Don't want to wait another 10.

       It would be nice to get additional input!

          Cheers!

            Stan
       

[Robert McFarland]

Consider the fact that before the Union Pacific stopped construction beyond Baldwin in the early 1880s the DSP&P was going at least as far as Grand Junction if not Ogden.I seem to remember there being an item in CRA 12 or Poor's about there being some people during theearly 1900s trying to get the C&S to extend the line to Delta or maybe farther to haul fruit and other ag products.What if DSP&P would have made it to Ogden in the 1880s and conncted with U&N or Kansas Central from the east?

[Robert McFarland]

I read in a book about the Kansas Central that there were plans in the early 80s to extend the line to Denver.