NH1402
Member
NH1402
Member
Joined: February 26th, 2006, 6:23 am

January 28th, 2009, 2:49 pm #11

This photo from Nerail shows the ex CR 7589 nee NH 1402 at Danbury. She still has her original tank. I have many close up photos of this unit from when we went
down to Georgia to get her. Unfortunatly it was in my pre digital days and have yet to scan them. I also do not know why they changed the tanks. pehaps
replacements from ALCO. The lower ends woiuld indicate less fuel capacity, but without the need for water they may be the same amount or more than the
origionals.


Randy





http://naphotos.nerail.or...anbury%20Railway%20Museum
Last edited by NH1402 on January 30th, 2009, 9:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Peter R Ness
Member
Joined: December 17th, 2005, 1:21 am

January 29th, 2009, 4:45 pm #12

NH1402,


Thanks for the info. Unfortunately I cannot view the photo, I just see a white square with a red "X". This could be my computer system...worse
still, maybe no one can view the five photos I posted! I loaded the photos that I posted up to my yuku-kuku space (album, whatever it's called) then used
the "insert image" icon that appears when you are creating a post.


That's an interesting point about the capacity...I was thinking that the "bookends" on the original tanks may have been for vapor expansion
rather than capacity, but that's speculation on my part.





Again, thanks for the info on the unit at Danbury.





Regards,


Peter
Peter R. Ness
Modeling the New Haven in 1959
http://newhavenrailroad1959.webs.com/
Quote
Like
Share

NH1402
Member
NH1402
Member
Joined: February 26th, 2006, 6:23 am

January 30th, 2009, 9:13 am #13

I think I fixed the photo and added a link just in case. On the 1402 the fill pipe was located on top of the "bookends". the water one was blanked
off on both sides. there was a nastly gash located onon the top corner of one of the "bookends" and there was fuel up to that point . so the tank is
as high as the "bookends" which are really a cutout of the tank to accept the air reservoirs. the other tanks look to have high filler pipes but are
flat across the top below the resevoirs indicating less capacity.


regards


Randy
Quote
Like
Share

Peter R Ness
Member
Joined: December 17th, 2005, 1:21 am

January 30th, 2009, 11:38 pm #14

Hi Randy,


Yup, the photo is there, now. Many thanks for the additional detailed comments on the fuel tank design.




Regards,


Peter
Peter R. Ness
Modeling the New Haven in 1959
http://newhavenrailroad1959.webs.com/
Quote
Like
Share

DBrion
Member
Joined: June 21st, 2006, 1:52 am

July 6th, 2018, 1:19 am #15

Peter R Ness wrote: Hi Mike,




Gee...good shots of the sides? I think four of the five I posted here are pretty good - those four photos show both sides of the the tanks on different units.
If you're asking about a good shot meaning just the fuel tank alone in a larger photo, sorry, no.  For some reason unknown to me, most photographers of New
Haven equipment when it ran the rails weren't interested in such things (and yes, I am kidding!)




There is an RS-11 at one of the museums (Danbury?) so perhaps someone could obtain photos of the tank(s) on that unit if they are present and not changed from
New Haven days...having modeled from available photos for 30+ years (I've been modeling longer, but didn't have photos then) I find there are usually
photos with sufficient information...it just takes a long time to find them


Regards,


Peter
These two photographs of RS11 7662 (nee NH 1402) were taken by me at DRM on Nov. 27, 2010.  Not certain if this is a 5-plug tank or a 6-plug tank with one of the plugs plugged up.
 
Since many strange things occurred on the NHRR, and since there appears to be endless consternation on this subject, could it be possible that the engineer's side tank was different than the fireman's side tank?  If only one tank was bad and the other was good, would both be changed?  Whose got the proof?
RS-11 (3).jpg
RS-11 (2).jpg
Quote
Like
Share

Peter R Ness
Member
Joined: December 17th, 2005, 1:21 am

July 6th, 2018, 7:28 am #16

PC 7662 (nee NH 1402) in the above photos still has the original tank(s) seen from both sides.  The giveaway is the :"bookends" that rise up on either end of the air tank on each side.

Regards,
Peter. 
Quote
Like
Share

BX10
Member
BX10
Member
Joined: January 15th, 2010, 12:40 am

July 6th, 2018, 11:20 pm #17

OK will the real 1402 please stand up!?
 
According to Randy and the picture at the top of page 2,( posted Jan. 2009) #7589 is the former NH 1402 at Danbury.
 Then according to DBrion, and Peter Ness and the picture at the bottom of page 2, (posted July 2018) #7662 is the former NH1402  taken at Danbury.
 Now let me add a little more mystery too this. In the book Penn Central Power the 7500 number series only went to 7559 and that was NH GP-9 #1229. The RS-11s number series started at 7600, which would make #7662 the former NH #1402. So where did the #7589 come from? A CONRAIL renumbering?😟 

  Bill
Quote
Like
Share

Ed ORourke
Member
Joined: October 4th, 2008, 9:50 pm

July 13th, 2018, 11:11 am #18

Even seeing it from two different sides, I have trouble thinking that the pictures are of the same unit. Given that it is 7 years later, the later photo shows considerably worse condition than we see in the 2003 photo. Any thoughts?
Quote
Like
Share

Statkowski
Member
Joined: March 5th, 2003, 4:39 am

July 13th, 2018, 11:58 am #19

Ed, if we left you outside, in the rain, in the snow, in the summer heat, in the winter cold, how do you think you'd look seven years later?

Them's my thoughts, which you asked for.
Quote
Like
Share

Ed ORourke
Member
Joined: October 4th, 2008, 9:50 pm

July 13th, 2018, 12:08 pm #20

True Henry, but I was thinking it looked more like damage than just weather. You are probably right however. Interesting that the pictures are of different sides of the unit. I've known modelers to put different numbers on opposite sides of cars and locos to "expand the fleet," but I don't think the prototype did it. Considering that the PennCentral lettering is still visible, the cab number should be a PC number. It certainly hasn't been painted over since 2003.
Quote
Like
Share