18K Fishbelly Tender Assignments

[NW Mailing List]

To my knowledge, no fishbellies were ever assigned to K2's or K2a's. (Although "never say 'never.'") The 16k tender was more common in the 30's and 40's, although some eventually got 18k waterbottoms (which went to the K1's when the K2's were streamlined.). My guess is that this is an error on the part of the author of the article. So don't consider it as a reliable source. For years I kept seeing references to General William "B" Mahone. Best I could tell it was an error it Waynor's paperback book on Car Numbers, Names, and Consists. People kept repeating it until it was considered as fact. It was not. 
Jim Nichols 

    On Sunday, October 21, 2018 7:08 PM, NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org> wrote:
 

 The article on the K2/K2a engines in the 23-2 Arrow says in the 1940s they received 18,000 gallon tenders of the fishbelly design.  This is the only such reference to this I can find, as Jim Nichols' tender series in the Arrow, the tender assignment chapter in the Williamson Terminal book, and any photographs I can kind show the K2's with 18,000 water bottom tenders, while the fishbelly's were used almost exclusively behind freight engines, the major exception being a pair of E2's in the 1950s for Clinch Valley service.  

Can anyone confirm if the K2 and K2a engines ever had 18,000 gallon fishbelly tenders?

Marty Flick


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


   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist6.pair.net/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/attachments/20181022/aa15b7a0/attachment.html>