Re: Alberta Navigation and Coal/Great Falls and Canada Railway

Nigel Phillips

I had a look at the North Western Coal and Navigation Company, another part of the Galt narrow gauge system in southern Alberta. The library uses North Western and Northwestern in its index. Road numbers 1-6 in 1884, 8-18D, road number 7 in 1887, 8-18C (2-6-0). Many pages for 1884 at the library were not scanned properly, unfortunately, including the 1884 order. Are these the Consolidations? D says they are. If so they would have moved around pretty fast from the NWC&NC to Utah to the D&RGW, as they were built in 1884 and arrived in 1886. Unless there were earlier 2-8-0s. Unlikely though, the narrow gauge railway from Lethbridge to Dunmore was only opened in October 1885. Perhaps they were not required or were NFFIU and immediately sold on. Maybe I can use a D&RGW Consolidation suitably re-lettered. Better start saving up in that case.

On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 8:57 AM Nigel Phillips via <> wrote:
Thanks John.

I am left  wondering where the other locomotives came from. One of the other associated Companies? The information below will help enormously. Book ordered. More research.

On Monday, March 1, 2021, John Stutz <john.stutz@...> wrote:

For Canadian narrow gauge lines, the starting point is Omar Lavallee's "Narrow Gauge Railways of Canada" (1972).  This has brief histories, detailed locomotive rosters, line side photographs, and sketches of locomotives for most lines.  I attache his sketch of the AR&C's heavy Moguls.

Regarding the Consolidations, Lavallee records that two went via the Utah Central to the Rio Grand Western, and ultimately to the D&RGW.  The Colorado Railroad Museum's "Locomotives of the Rio Grande" (1980) indicates that the RGW converted two of the ex UC 2-8-0s to standard gauge in 1900, which on merger became D&RG 554 and 555.  These were converted back to NG in 1918, and after the D&RGW renumbering of 1924, were classified as C-17 #305 and 306, dismantled in '27 and '35 respectively. 

Regarding similar Consolidations, the BLW Class List shows all seven AR&C delivered in July 1890 as class 10-26-E, drawing 9, #155-161. Class AND drawing number identifies the specific design, although auxiliary fittings can vary greatly between orders, while the locomotive numbers are sequential within the class.  Class 10-26-E reached drawing 64 and locomotive #472 by 8/26, the last entry in my copy.

Design 10-26-E drawing 9 had first been built for the Hancock and & Calumet, with deliveries of #95 & 96 in 9/85, #105 in 7/87, #128 in 1/89, #172 in 1/91, and #173 in 2/91.  The latter was actually for the closely associated Mineral Range.  Two of these ended up on the North Shore, later the North Western Pacific, in maintenance service on a commuter lline north of San Francisco Bay.  Other examples were built for the East & West RR of Alabama, as #97 & 98 of 12/85, Canca RR as #188 of 7/91, and Utah Central as #236 of 10/95.  The CRM author believed that the latter was actually the ex. UC engine that ended as D&RGW 306.

The visually similar D&RG class 70s of 1887, later D&RGW class C-17, were built to drawing 10, #99-104 in 5/87.  I've no idea of exactly how drawings 9 and 10 differed, but note that no other engines were built to this class and drawing. 

Another similar and well documented design, the D&RGW's  class C-18,  consisted of six of the 10 Florence & Cripple Creek consolidations, all built to 10-26-E drawing 18, from 7/95 to 3/97.  Two additional of drawing 18 were built for the Silverton Northern in 4/04 and 4/06, both of which last saw service during WWII on the White Pass & Yukon.  Of these, D&RGW 315 has been restored to operation and is now based in Silverton.

So between the other 10-26-E drawing 9 locomotives, and the similar but much better documented locomotives of drawings 10 and 18, there is actually quite a lot of examples for study, including one survivor. 

John Stutz

Join to automatically receive all group messages.