Conway Scenic Railroad (CSRX) discussion thread

[Cosmo]

Let's hope!

[Dick H]

Just guessing, but maybe 252 and 216 have been "mothballed" for the winter
and the 573 is being kept in the engine house, where they are keeping the heat
on and has not had to be drained for the winter. AFAIK, none of these GPs can
use antifreeze and they do not have APUs.

[Juniobass30]

Was up there over the weekend and it looks as though both have been drained and sitting on the cross over track infront of the station.

[Reader#108]

I rode last week, and 573 was the only motive power moving.

She is in stall 1 at the end of the day, I'm sure for the very reason as stated above...

252 and 216 were on the sidetrack in their usual position when not in use.

4266 must have been in Stall 3, as 7470 was in Stall 2....

guess we'll see on Friday when I get up there whazup!

[Juniobass30]

4266 is in stall one all the way back to the rear door.

[b&m 1566]

If history has repeated itself, 216 and 252 were drained after the notch train was done for the year. They did the same thing to the Sisters for years.

[steamer69]

AFAIK, none of these GPs can use antifreeze and they do not have APUs.

Railroad Diesel locomotives (not just the GPs) don't use antifreeze because undiluted water is a more efficient cooling agent. An antifreeze-based cooling system would require 20 percent more cooling capacity, which would be difficult to accommodate because even modern locomotives' cross-sections must fit railroad tunnels built more than 100 years ago. The new GM EMD "H" engines are designed to use it. However, problems with leaks and seals and the expense of putting a 100 gallons of coolant into a 3,000 hp engine, means that engines have traditionally operated without it. In cold weather, the engine is left running or the locomotive is kept warm by putting it into a heated building or by plugging in a shore supply. Another reason for keeping diesel engines running is that the constant heating and cooling caused by shutdowns and restarts, causes stresses in the block and pipes and tends to produce leaks.

Dick, what did you mean by APUs? Did you mean Hot Start units?

[Dick H]

I was referring to APUs, as discussed in this thread on PAR:

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 55&t=21319

[steamer69]

Those are SOOO expensive...., thanks though.

[Mountain Family]

Interesting.

[Mountain Family]

Regarding Steamer's response to Dick, is it not customary to cite sources that you are using, especially when responding to technical questions? Much of your response seems to be completely lifted verbatim from http://www.swri.org/3pubs/ttoday/spring04/track.htm Paragraph: "Locomotive." I am sure it was just an oversight..

[Jeff Smith]

Repost of the edit I made to the original poster:

Site Admin Note: Thanks for starting the new thread. I realize there may be some lack of continuity and discombobulation as we transition.

For the old thread: http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 26&t=78060 Some notes as this is a controversial topic:

1. CSRR/CSRX is a privately-owned railroad. Railroad.net makes no representation as to the management, its volunteers, or its operation. We make no representation for those who are critical of some aspects of the operation. Finally, we make no representation as to the opinions expressed here on the operation, pro or con. Judge for yourself those opinions posted on here based on your assessment of the source.
2. Again, this is a private operation. I.e. they are run for a profit, with an expected return on investment. Statements made here without substantion or untrue statements which could adversely affect the ability to make that profit. This could result in action on the part of the owners of CSRX. Again, railroad.net makes no representation on the truth of these statements, and is not liable for them.
3. If possible, back up any assertions with facts, or state opinions clearly as such. Unsubstantiated statements will result in either a request for substantiation, modification, or deletion. The owners, administrators, and moderators of railroad.net may modify or delete posts without notice which do not comply with these guidelines.
4. Leave out the superlatives, hyperbole', and ad hominem. I.e. no personal attacks, on either those pro or con.
5. Let's not play hash and rehash old news. Keep it fresh. Most of the users of this forum know where everyone stands.

That said, I do not intend the above to be an endorsement or rebuttal of anyone's opinions here. I understand both sides. Over the last year our members by and large have complied with these standards, including those critical of the operation. By all means, dispute opinions, but do not attack other members. Use facts to back these up. Do not use this thread to grind axes with either side. Railroad.net, while we support wholeheartedly tourist railroads and museums, whether for profit or not, DOES NOT HAVE A HORSE IN THIS RACE.

Any further discussion of the moderation of this thread should be posed to the moderators via PM or to [email protected] .

Have a great year discussing CSRX!

[jaymac]

by steamer69 » Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:16 am
Dick H wrote:
AFAIK, none of these GPs can use antifreeze and they do not have APUs.
Railroad Diesel locomotives (not just the GPs) don't use antifreeze because undiluted water is a more efficient cooling agent.

"Undiluted" or non-antifreeze-treated water will also not combine with lube oil and can thus effectively be removed by the prime mover's oil separator. If water were treated with antifreeze, the mix would combine with the lube oil and could not be effectively removed by the oil separator. The antifreeze-treated water-and-oil mixture would have a lower viscosity than specified for the prime mover and would cause premature failure. Oil separators permit operation within limits because of the inevitable cooling leaks that get into the lube system.

[steamer69]

Regarding Steamer's response to Dick, is it not customary to cite sources that you are using, especially when responding to technical questions? Much of your response seems to be completely lifted verbatim from http://www.swri.org/3pubs/ttoday/spring04/track.htm Paragraph: "Locomotive." I am sure it was just an oversight..

Thank you for letting everyone know that I forgot to put up the link, and putting it up. Also thank you for not sending me a message or anything to give me a chance to edit my mistake. I hope that you don't forget anything, or ever make a mistake.....I'll be watching.....

[Jeff Smith]

Steamer's very good at posting sources and cites for his material. No worries here.