Date   
Re: First Shipment Of California Vegetables To Boston?

Donald B. Valentine
 

Would you care to cite the support for your comment please Tony?  
1925 sounds a little late to me but not 50 years late.

Thanks, Don Valentine

Re: First Shipment Of California Vegetables To Boston?

Jon Miller
 

On 2/6/2019 4:25 PM, Tony Thompson wrote:
broccoli---------vegetables

    It may have taken 50 years for the east coast to like broccoli:-D

-- 
Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax  Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
SPROG User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS

Re: First Shipment Of California Vegetables To Boston?

Tony Thompson
 

Don Valentine  wrote:

Would you care to cite the support for your comment please Tony?  
1925 sounds a little late to me but not 50 years late.

      Thee are citations to a number of 19th century examples in the PFE book's Chapter 3 and elsewhere in the book. Certainly there were both fruit (mostly oranges) and vegetables moving across the country from California to the East Coast by 1880, and a few examples during the 1870s.

Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





Re: Military loads - some photos attached

Richard Townsend
 

I checked the January 1959 ORER and the USAX flats in the number series 39500-39649 (150 cars) are listed at 50' long.

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR


-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Townsend via Groups.Io <richtownsend@...>
To: main <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Sent: Wed, Feb 6, 2019 8:38 am
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Military loads - some photos attached

I've thought more about the 39510 50' flat. One could shorten a Proto2000 or Revell/Con-cor flat and end up with the right 50' length (at least roughly) and the right number of stake pockets. Which one you choose would depend on which better matches the configuration of the prototype's sides. And I forgot about the Tyco 50' flat with 13 stake pockets, which would make a decent stand-in. 

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR


-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Townsend via Groups.Io <richtownsend@...>
To: main <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Sent: Tue, Feb 5, 2019 7:25 pm
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Military loads - some photos attached

For the 38000 series cars with 6-wheel trucks the Roco flat would be the best available. I can't suggest a model for the 39510 and the others in its series with 4-wheel trucks. It has 14 stake pockets per side and appears to say its length is 50 feet. Both the Proto2000 and Revell/Con-cor flats have 15 stake pockets, and both are longer than 50 feet. The Athearn 50' flat has 13 stake pockets as does the old Cox 50' flat.

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR


-----Original Message-----
From: Steven D Johnson <tenncentralrwy@...>
To: main <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Sent: Tue, Feb 5, 2019 5:33 pm
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Military loads - some photos attached

Group,
 
Four photos attached. 
 
What would be the best HO model to represent the  39510-type cars? The built date looks to be 8-53.
 
The newspaper clipping is from my hometown paper, showing a long string of the 38000-series cars passing through Hopkinsville, KY, from Ft. Campbell.  This was on the ICG’s former Tennessee Central line.
I realize it’s way out of the group’s time frame, but it does show a bunch of steam era-built cars, and thought it (and the color photos) would be of interest while we’re on this thread.
 
Steve Johnson
 
 
 
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Daniel A. Mitchell
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2019 11:43 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Military loads.
 
I found a photo on the internet showing a T43 (M-103 prototype) on a depressed-center flatcar like the Roco model.
 
 
Unfortunately, the ends of the photo are cropped, so the presence or absence of buffers cannot be determined. The car is clearly lettered USA and carries the ordinance corps. symbol. The trucks are older-style Buckeye trucks with external equalizer bars. Roco got this right … their regular 6-axle USA flat has normal Buckeye trucks.
 
In an actual shipment the turret would be reversed and the gun clamped in the travel-lock shown at the back of the vehicle. Note the blocking and tie-down rods. Compared to other photos of M-103’s in transit these seem  inadequate …usually there are more blocks and more rods or chains.
 
Anyone have a better photo of this?
 
Dan MItchell
==========
 
 
On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:58 AM, Daniel A. Mitchell <danmitch@...> wrote:
 
Your position is reasonable. I do have a loading diagram for the M-103 (or one of it’s look-alike predecessors) on a depressed-center 6-axle flat that appears identical to the Roco model.
 
I too have photos of the M-103 loaded on the standard Army 6-axle “Roco" flat. The weight of the tank (about 65 tons) is well within the car’s 100-ton capacity.  Related issues are …
 
1) the M-103 Heavy Tank was substantially taller than it’s smaller cousin the M-48 Medium Tank. I suspect the issue may be overall height … in olden days with tighter clearance some movements may have required the lower overall height offered with transport on a depressed-center car.
 
2) For whatever reason the M-103 was often loaded on huge timbers running the length of the vehicle's track, between the track and flatcar deck. these were 8"-10” thick. This raised the height of the load by the same amount. Why? To spread weight? To reduce damage to the flatcar’s deck? Such timbers were often, but not always, used with the Army’s 6-axle “Roco” flat.
 
3) With the depressed-center car loading would be more of an issue. The tank is almost as long as the depressed center part of the car. Loading would almost have to be done with an overhead crane (common anyway). While turning the tank with a “neutral steer” (pivot) might have been possible, it would likely result in some huge stresses to the flatcar, and also tear-up the wooden deck.
 
In all cases, the tank is considerably wider than the flatcar’s deck (this is also true for the smaller M48-M60 tanks). The tracks overhang the edge of the deck by about a foot on either side. Side-clearance issues were a problem as the M-103’s Technical Manual clearly states.
 
Tie-down of such a vehicle in the “steam" era consisted of the use of MANY, large wooden blocks, cut-to fit, and jammed into several locations … in front and behind the tracks, and between the road wheels. Cleats along the inside-run of the tracks prevened side-to side shifting, possibly the use of large timbers under the tracks (above), and multiple (like 12-16) tie-down rods, chains or cables. Assorted loose items from the tank’s exterior (“pioneer tools”, machine guns), spare parts, etc. were packaged in wooden crates and strapped to the flatcar’s deck. Sometimes the main gun tube was removed and also packed in a wooden crate.  Sometimes the whole load was tarped or partially crated.
 
Nowadays they seem to use mostly a spider-web of chains (6-8 on each end) and little or no blocking. The modern flatcars also have full-length tie-down channels set into the deck.
 
Dan Mitchell
========== 
On Feb 4, 2019, at 5:21 PM, spsalso via Groups.Io <Edwardsutorik@...> wrote:
 
I will disagree with Dan's statement that "The depressed-center flat is the transport carrier for the M-103 Heavy Tank...".

First, while there is a photo that appears to show an M-103 on such a car, there is some doubt that the car and load ever traveled more than a few feet.  There is also doubt that these cars ever operated in the US.

Second.  The shop manual for the M-103 shows a drawing of one loaded on the (prototype) non-depressed Roco car.  I presume this drawing was presented as a typical loading.

I intend to place my (HO) M-103's on the plain vanilla Army 6-axle flats.


Ed

Edward Sutorik
 
 

Re: Throwback Tuesday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars

Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 


Hi Ben and List Members,
 
Thanks Ben for the MDC advert.
 
MDC made a 36ft stock car in both HO and N scales. However, altho they were similar, they were not identical models. The outside sheathing on the upper part of the car sides differed between the HO an N scale models - on the N scale model, looking from top to bottom, there is a group of several boards that form continuous sheathing, then a gap, and then a single outside sheathing board. On the HO model, this last outside sheathing board is not present. After that, on both HO and N, the lower part of the car side is sheathed only on the interior.
 
I have been searching for a good match for the N scale model, the closest I have come is a CGW prototype as can be seen in the comparison image linked below (hopefully the mile-long link works!):
 
 
If anyone has any thoughts on a better prototype match, I'd be very glad to hear about it.
 
Claus Schlund
 
 
 

----- Original Message -----
To: STMFC
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2019 10:11 AM
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Throwback Tuesday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars

Model Die Casting ad, January 1969 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman.

Re: Canopy Cement

golden1014
 

Sorry you've had bad luck, Brian.  Formula 560 is the right stuff.  I use it on a whole lot of applications now and it almost always works great.  I get mine mail order and you should be able to as well.

John Golden

Re: First Shipment Of California Vegetables To Boston?

Mark Cartwright
 

>>>>.  Several small carloads of California crops were shipped eastward via the new transcontinental route almost immediately after its completion, using a special type of ventilated boxcar modified specifically for this purpose. The advent of the iced refrigerator car or "reefer" led to increases in both the amount of product carried and in the distances traveled. <<<
From - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rail_transportation_in_California
I am for sure and for certain rail shipments of nuts, fruits and vegetables were being shipped via rail (ATSF) from Stockton, California by 1878.
Yes, I agree off by 50+ years.
Further, I have photographs of California Dispatch Cars near the tender of passenger trains heading East in 1895.
====
As for the period from 1869 to 1877 via the Central Pacific....?
I have read some writings from very unhappy farmers over the rates from the Central Pacific towards the year 1877. There are further suggestions, that the Central Pacific was not Welcome to further build a connection from Lathrop to Stockton during the 1870's.  Instead, the Santa Fe was asked to come to Stockton instead.
Both the Southern Pacific and Santa Fe were however in operation here by 1899 with the Western Pacific (D&RG) in close proximity soon after.
By 1925, even the Western Pacific was announcing a One Million Dollar investment to their operations in Stockton as well. The Front Page of the Stockton Independent Newspaper announcing this investment is hanging on my wall.
====
There are massive storehouses constructed here, which are still standing today, dating back to the 1870's.
Here is a video of the area.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7h2QUPKyOo
Most of the area however, has succumbed to repeated fires over the past 60 years. Today, most of the area has NOT been redeveloped, mostly populated by the Homeless. I would say the decline began around 1959.
====
Here is one more tidbit of information....
Edwin Tobias Earl was born on a fruit ranch near Red Bluff, California on May 30, 1858. His father was Joseph Earl and his mother, Adelia Chaffee. His brother was Guy Chaffee Earl. Career. He started his career in the shipping of fruits. By 1886, he was President of the Earl Fruit Company. In 1890, he invented the refrigerator car to transport fruits to the East Coast of the United States. He established the Continental Fruit Express and invested US$2,000,000 in refrigerator cars. In 1901, he sold his refrigerator cars to Armour and Company of Chicago and became a millionaire.
:)) Mark

Question on height to eaves

Dave Nelson
 

I have long assumed that the ORER column of data titled Height to Eaves was a measurement between the railhead and the top edge of the car side and not to any edge of the roof panels, which may put you 2-3 inches higher.  Today, while examining a cross section drawing of a MDT reefer, taking how the lowest edge of the roof panel was on a line directly above the car side, the thought occurred to me that were it a house instead of a reefer, the word eaves would be a reference to the visible bottom of the roof.  Taking that notion back to the MDT reefer raises a question about where are  the eaves?

 

Obviously that car is not a house but this question remains in my mind: Is Height to Eaves a measurement between the railhead and the top edge of the car side or is it a measurement between the railhead and the lowest edge of the roof panels, in this case that is a straight line across the roof panels to the center line?

 

Dave Nelson

Re: Question on height to eaves

Guy Wilber
 

Dave,

The “Key Pages” of The ORER have diagrams and explanations which will answer your questions.

Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada


On Feb 6, 2019, at 9:17 PM, Dave Nelson <Lake_Muskoka@...> wrote:

I have long assumed that the ORER column of data titled Height to Eaves was a measurement between the railhead and the top edge of the car side and not to any edge of the roof panels, which may put you 2-3 inches higher.  Today, while examining a cross section drawing of a MDT reefer, taking how the lowest edge of the roof panel was on a line directly above the car side, the thought occurred to me that were it a house instead of a reefer, the word eaves would be a reference to the visible bottom of the roof.  Taking that notion back to the MDT reefer raises a question about where are  the eaves?

 

Obviously that car is not a house but this question remains in my mind: Is Height to Eaves a measurement between the railhead and the top edge of the car side or is it a measurement between the railhead and the lowest edge of the roof panels, in this case that is a straight line across the roof panels to the center line?

 

Dave Nelson

Re: Throwback Tuesday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars

Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
 

Claus,

Outside sheathing to form a letterboard for the railroad's name was not uncommon on earlier stock cars. The 1919 CAR BUILDERS' DICTIONARY (reprinted as Gregg TRAIN SHED CYCLOPEDIA NO. 36) shows two 40' Santa Fe cars of different types (59169 and 55807). It is more common to refer to ATSF cars by their class numbers, but those are not given. I'm sure the Santa Fe gurus will step in here. 

Also shown is a Clinchfield 36' car (2499) that was fairly close to the MDC car, and might have been its inspiration. I said "fairly close", but not exact.

I had one of these stock cars in their earliest incarnation with separate wire grabs, was well as a couple of the boxcars. Nice models for the time, but now I see how clunky the tooling was from the picture. I guess we've been spoiled over the years. I sold off my HO standard gauge while I was in college and my early service days to play narrow gauge in HOn3 and later real On2. When I came back to HO, these cars had been retooled with cast-on grabs and ladders. I was greatly disappointed.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff

On 2/6/19 8:26 PM, Claus Schlund &#92;(HGM&#92;) wrote:

Hi Ben and List Members,
 
Thanks Ben for the MDC advert.
 
MDC made a 36ft stock car in both HO and N scales. However, altho they were similar, they were not identical models. The outside sheathing on the upper part of the car sides differed between the HO an N scale models - on the N scale model, looking from top to bottom, there is a group of several boards that form continuous sheathing, then a gap, and then a single outside sheathing board. On the HO model, this last outside sheathing board is not present. After that, on both HO and N, the lower part of the car side is sheathed only on the interior.
 
I have been searching for a good match for the N scale model, the closest I have come is a CGW prototype as can be seen in the comparison image linked below (hopefully the mile-long link works!):
 
 
If anyone has any thoughts on a better prototype match, I'd be very glad to hear about it.
 
Claus Schlund
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
To: STMFC
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2019 10:11 AM
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Throwback Tuesday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars

Model Die Casting ad, January 1969 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman.

Re: Throwback Tuesday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars

Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 


Hi Garth and List Members,
 
Thanks Garth for the additional info. It seems that perhaps an accurate model of Clinchfield 2499 can be made starting with the MDC N scale model and making some modifications.
 
I will also add that the book "Stock Car Cyclopedia Volume 1" by Hundman has several pages with pictures of early stock cars that are close (but not exact) to both the HO and N MDC models - see link below to help identify the book:
 
 
Enjoy!
 
Claus Schlund
 
 

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2019 5:18 AM
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Throwback Tuesday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars

Claus,

Outside sheathing to form a letterboard for the railroad's name was not uncommon on earlier stock cars. The 1919 CAR BUILDERS' DICTIONARY (reprinted as Gregg TRAIN SHED CYCLOPEDIA NO. 36) shows two 40' Santa Fe cars of different types (59169 and 55807). It is more common to refer to ATSF cars by their class numbers, but those are not given. I'm sure the Santa Fe gurus will step in here. 

Also shown is a Clinchfield 36' car (2499) that was fairly close to the MDC car, and might have been its inspiration. I said "fairly close", but not exact.

I had one of these stock cars in their earliest incarnation with separate wire grabs, was well as a couple of the boxcars. Nice models for the time, but now I see how clunky the tooling was from the picture. I guess we've been spoiled over the years. I sold off my HO standard gauge while I was in college and my early service days to play narrow gauge in HOn3 and later real On2. When I came back to HO, these cars had been retooled with cast-on grabs and ladders. I was greatly disappointed.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff

On 2/6/19 8:26 PM, Claus Schlund &#92;(HGM&#92;) wrote:

Hi Ben and List Members,
 
Thanks Ben for the MDC advert.
 
MDC made a 36ft stock car in both HO and N scales. However, altho they were similar, they were not identical models. The outside sheathing on the upper part of the car sides differed between the HO an N scale models - on the N scale model, looking from top to bottom, there is a group of several boards that form continuous sheathing, then a gap, and then a single outside sheathing board. On the HO model, this last outside sheathing board is not present. After that, on both HO and N, the lower part of the car side is sheathed only on the interior.
 
I have been searching for a good match for the N scale model, the closest I have come is a CGW prototype as can be seen in the comparison image linked below (hopefully the mile-long link works!):
 
 
If anyone has any thoughts on a better prototype match, I'd be very glad to hear about it.
 
Claus Schlund
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
To: STMFC
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2019 10:11 AM
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Throwback Tuesday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars

Model Die Casting ad, January 1969 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman.

Throwback Thursday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars II

Benjamin Hom
 

Model Die Casting ad, March 1969 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman.


Ben Hom

ID of hoppers

Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

https://historicpittsburgh.org/islandora/object/pitt%3A200907.1944.09088

are these NYC or P&LE blister hoppers?

Thanks!

Elden Gatwood

Re: Throwback Thursday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars II

Steve and Barb Hile
 

Interesting to note that a basic inflation calculator would project this $3.25 model to cost about $23.00 fifty years later.

Steve Hile

-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin Hom
Sent: Feb 7, 2019 8:27 AM
To: STMFC
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Throwback Thursday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars II

Model Die Casting ad, March 1969 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman.


Ben Hom

Re: Throwback Tuesday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars

Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
 

Claus,

I suppose it depends on your era, though it seems like kind of an odd-ball car. Obviously Clinchfield stock cars were around before 1919. The only complete ORER is have is for 1958, and there are no stock cars listed for the Clinchfield. That said, their 2000-series of pulpwood cars have a nominal 36' inside length, and might have been converted from the stock cars. When this could have happened, I don't know. The Clinchfield is not a line I know much about.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff

On 2/7/19 9:25 AM, Claus Schlund &#92;(HGM&#92;) wrote:

Hi Garth and List Members,
 
Thanks Garth for the additional info. It seems that perhaps an accurate model of Clinchfield 2499 can be made starting with the MDC N scale model and making some modifications.
 
I will also add that the book "Stock Car Cyclopedia Volume 1" by Hundman has several pages with pictures of early stock cars that are close (but not exact) to both the HO and N MDC models - see link below to help identify the book:
 
 
Enjoy!
 
Claus Schlund
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2019 5:18 AM
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Throwback Tuesday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars

Claus,

Outside sheathing to form a letterboard for the railroad's name was not uncommon on earlier stock cars. The 1919 CAR BUILDERS' DICTIONARY (reprinted as Gregg TRAIN SHED CYCLOPEDIA NO. 36) shows two 40' Santa Fe cars of different types (59169 and 55807). It is more common to refer to ATSF cars by their class numbers, but those are not given. I'm sure the Santa Fe gurus will step in here. 

Also shown is a Clinchfield 36' car (2499) that was fairly close to the MDC car, and might have been its inspiration. I said "fairly close", but not exact.

I had one of these stock cars in their earliest incarnation with separate wire grabs, was well as a couple of the boxcars. Nice models for the time, but now I see how clunky the tooling was from the picture. I guess we've been spoiled over the years. I sold off my HO standard gauge while I was in college and my early service days to play narrow gauge in HOn3 and later real On2. When I came back to HO, these cars had been retooled with cast-on grabs and ladders. I was greatly disappointed.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff


Re: Throwback Thursday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars II

Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
 

Friends,

I suppose we all had one or two of these. They were interesting looking cars. Of course that huge underframe, needed to give at least a modest hope the car would stay on the track, was a big detraction. I made a new narrow underframe for mine and stuck some Kadee narrow gauge trucks under it. No prototype, but I wasn't modeling a prototype line. The fictional Salida & Lower Park's management was quite happy with their one tank car.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff

On 2/7/19 9:39 AM, Steve and Barb Hile wrote:
Interesting to note that a basic inflation calculator would project this $3.25 model to cost about $23.00 fifty years later.

Steve Hile

-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin Hom
Sent: Feb 7, 2019 8:27 AM
To: STMFC
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Throwback Thursday: MDC "Old Timer" Freight Cars II

Model Die Casting ad, March 1969 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman.


Ben Hom

Re: Canopy Cement

gtws00
 

My overall experience with Canopy Glue 560 has been very good. I like it to tack parts and follow up with a bit pf CA. I did however get either a old bottle or one that had froze in transit that never seemed to dry properly.
I now make sure that if ordered over the web that the temperatures are not below freezing (recent Polar Vortex) or way too hot. That goes for all my paints and glues. Not sure if that matters but I have not had any issues lately.  
George Toman

Re: ID of hoppers

Benjamin Hom
 

Elden Gatwood asked:
https://historicpittsburgh.org/islandora/object/pitt%3A200907.1944.09088 
are these NYC or P&LE blister hoppers?

Yes; possible lots are 639-H, 640-H, 641-H, 645-H, 651-H, 655-H, or 674-H converted in 1936, 1937, and 1940.  Note that these cars have the type of blister panels that include interlocking side posts vice the ones that reused the existing side posts.  NYCS did convert twelve other cars in 1933 and 1935, but I'm not sure if they used these sides.


Ben Hom




Re: Military loads - some photos attached

George Eichelberger
 

Admittedly, this is not much of a photo but it shows some interesting details..and it was taken under unusual circumstances.

It is a MAIN stopped in downtown Reidsville, NC by David Driscoll 2-26-43. The loads appear to be in gondolas rather than flat cars accompanied by armed guards.

David Driscoll’s family owned a furniture store in Reidsville. This photo appears to have been taken with David standing in the store doorway. Taking troop train photos in 1943 was not a good idea so his photo location was probably not random.

The entire David Driscoll negative and slide collection is in the SRHA archives at TVRM. It contains very early color slides of Southern steam and hundreds more on 616 and 620 B&W negatives.

The photo is from a clinic I did at the CCB RPM several years ago on MAINS to and from the Charleston POE. It was posted on Google Drive but I will upload it again if anyone would like a copy.

Ike


Re: Military loads - some photos attached

gary laakso
 

Ike, please do load it again! 

 

Gary Laakso

Northwest of Mike Brock

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of George Eichelberger
Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2019 7:05 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Military loads - some photos attached

 

Admittedly, this is not much of a photo but it shows some interesting details..and it was taken under unusual circumstances.

 

It is a MAIN stopped in downtown Reidsville, NC by David Driscoll 2-26-43. The loads appear to be in gondolas rather than flat cars accompanied by armed guards.

 

David Driscoll’s family owned a furniture store in Reidsville. This photo appears to have been taken with David standing in the store doorway. Taking troop train photos in 1943 was not a good idea so his photo location was probably not random.

 

The entire David Driscoll negative and slide collection is in the SRHA archives at TVRM. It contains very early color slides of Southern steam and hundreds more on 616 and 620 B&W negatives.

 

The photo is from a clinic I did at the CCB RPM several years ago on MAINS to and from the Charleston POE. It was posted on Google Drive but I will upload it again if anyone would like a copy.

 

Ike