Springfield North Yard, KC,O&S #44 4-6-0, SLSF #94

Discussion in '4-4-0 American' started by klrwhizkid, Aug 15, 2020.

  1. klrwhizkid

    klrwhizkid Administrator Staff Member Administrator Frisco.org Supporter

    From Richard Crabtree on Frisco Rails Across Missouri:
    This is a very rare photograph - if not for the history of the steam locomotive, but for the station behind it. Every now and then I come across a real gem ~ and this one of them, first the locomotive;
    Built by Cooke 1893 Originally lettered No. 10 for the Kansas City, Osceola & Southern Railroad ~ aka "The Blair Line". It was Number No. 44 when the Frisco purchased the "The Blair Line in 1900. In 1903 it was renumbered No. 94. It was assigned trains No. 120 and 123 on the Northern Division between Springfield and Olathe, Ks. By 1927 it had racked up 500,000 miles of service. It was finally retired in 1934.
    2nd the passenger station.
    I have only 2 photos in my collection of the Original Frisco Passenger Station at Commercial and Benton. It was built shortly after the Frisco came to Springfield in 1870. In the 1890's it underwent a major expansion. They razed this passenger station after the Frisco took over the Kansas City Fort Scott and Memphis, shifting passenger service to Mill & Main.
    The photo had to be taken in 1900-1902 timeframe prior to her being renumbered in 1903 to No. 94. We are on the southern track closer to Benton that was not in the 1896 Sanborn map. But was in the 1902 Sanborn map. We are looking NE. See 1902 Sanborn map in comments.
    Click here for current view
    Harry Morgan Photo
    KCO&S #44 4-4-0 Springfield, Mo Harry Morgan photo.jpg
    Ozarktraveler and Joe Lovett like this.
  2. Jim James

    Jim James Staff Member Staff Member

    Absolutely beautiful locomotive!
  3. Coonskin

    Coonskin Member

    What a wonderful picture. Absolutely superb.

    There is a spotting feature in this photo causes me to think this is at least a wee bit earlier than estimated:

    * The link n' pin coupling. That was mandated by law to be gone by the end of 1899 on standard gauge that performed interchange. This is reinforced by the length of the pilot, and the fact that the engine is still using a long pilot bar.

    The above causes me to think that this is 1899 at the very latest. Admittedly this is a small point, and is basically a "for what it's worth" opinion, but such is significant to historians. Ah, the fun of dating a photograph if the date isn't conclusively noted by the original photographer!

  4. klrwhizkid

    klrwhizkid Administrator Staff Member Administrator Frisco.org Supporter

    That is factually correct, Andre and I had not scrutinized the post, just captured what was there. The original author claims to be a Frisco Historian, but occasionally his posts run into a factual divide. Or would that be chasm...?
    Ozarktraveler likes this.
  5. Karl

    Karl 2008 Engineer of the Year Frisco.org Supporter

    By 1927 the locomotive had accumulated 1.584 mm miles.
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2020
  6. Coonskin

    Coonskin Member

    Still gotta' reiterate just how grand that photo is. Photos of earlier Frisco, and Frisco ancestors/etc, are hard to come by.

    Addendum: My comment about the pilot and the long pilot bar...

    As a general rule, long pilots like that began to be phased out with the advent of improved front coupler link pockets. For illustration, below is a picture of Colorado Midland's first class of 2-8-0's (in this case #8) built in 1886. With the development of the cast coupler link pockets, pilots became shorter, and the long pilot bars went with it.
    CM8 2-8-0 near Green Mountain.jpg

    I've also seen pictures of earlier engines being retrofitted with the newer coupler pockets and shorter pilots. Now, the long pilot and bar seen on the #44 pictured above could be an oddity in that it survived intact all the way to 1899, but that wasn't the norm on larger systems like the Frisco was becoming.

    Again, all this is simply FWIW.

    gjslsffan, qaprr and Joe Lovett like this.
  7. Jim James

    Jim James Staff Member Staff Member

    Wait, isn’t #94/44 a 4-4-0?
    gjslsffan and WindsorSpring like this.
  8. Coonskin

    Coonskin Member

    Yes, 44 is a 4-4-0.

    If you're in reference to the CM engine: I posted that to illustrate why the long pilot and long pilot bar on 44 is quite archaic if indeed the photo of the 44 in 1899.

    Does that help clear your corn-fusion? :LOL:

  9. Jim James

    Jim James Staff Member Staff Member

    Corn fused by the thread title. Maybe after a few shots I would confuse a Consolidation with an American but I doubt it. Both very cool photos!
    gjslsffan likes this.

Share This Page