Challengers and coal

[NW Modeling List]

Not to sound stupid but what would be a "better" coal to use? Isn't the majority of coal deposits in the US  bituminous coal?

Thanks
Jon Kelley

Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

-----Original Message-----
From: NW Modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:41:15 
To: 'NW Modeling List'<nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
Subject: RE: Challengers and coal

Maybe related and maybe not, but the Clinchfield did change the way the UP Challengers were drafted (i.e., single stack replacing double stack)    Jim Nichols

I would guess

> that better coal would make the Challenger steam easier.

> The implication is

> that it would increase the effective output. (as opposed to

> theoretical

> output)      Jim

> Nichols

===============

Trying to keep this on the lite side, I believe the Challengers Clinchfield got from D&RGW were of the same design as the last UP Challengers, so they must have run on some decent coal on CRR. ;-)

Mark Peele
Catonsville, MD




      
________________________________________
NW-Modeling-List at nwhs.org
To change your subscription go to
http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-modeling-list
Browse the NW-Modeling-List archives at
http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-modeling-list/

________________________________________
NW-Modeling-List at nwhs.org
To change your subscription go to
http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-modeling-list
Browse the NW-Modeling-List archives at
http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-modeling-list/