HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eddie@railnet.nshore.ORG (Eddie Van Huffel)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: On-time Performance for Lake Shore Ltd.
Keywords: Amtrak Lake Shore Limited On-time
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 22:58:04 EDT
Distribution: na
Organization: Railnet BBS +1 216 786 0476

eazy@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Eric Anderson-Zych) writes:

> Howdy all-
> 
> In November my wife and I will travel from Rochester to Chicago on the
> Lake Shore Ltd.  We've made the trip before and generally enjoy it.
> 
> What I'd like to know is the Lake Shore's recent on-time percentages.
> If memory serves me corectly, they are not that impressive.  Sigh.
> 
> Also, what's been happening on the Chicago Line in the way of maintenance
> projects that could slow down the train.
> 
> Please e-mail responses.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Eric
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Eric Anderson-Zych, Department of History, University of Rochester,
> Rochester, NY  14627                eazy@troi.cc.rochester.edu
> --------------------------------------------------------------------


On a whole, since I live near the depot in Cleveland, and listen to Conrail 
on a scanner, I can tell you the following....

Eastbound, #48 is usually 1/2 hr to 3 hours late.
Westbound, #49 is usually on time (more the rule than the exception)
Eastbound  #30 (Capitol) is not more than 1/2 hour late in general
Westbound  #29 is a joke.  Usually 2 - 4 hours late regularly.

Don't ask why, I just listen to em, not run em.....


--
eddie@railnet.nshore.ORG (Eddie Van Huffel)
Railnet BBS +1 216 786 0476
From: BRANDT_JOBST/HP1900_01@HPLOMG.HPL.HP.COM
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Rail links under Alps
Date: 29 Sep 92 15:56:28 GMT

AKA Swiss base tunnels.

The two tunnels will bypass most of the loop tunnels and curves of the
Lotschberg and Gotthard passes.  The Gotthard base tunnel going from
near the Lake of Lucerne (Vierwaldstaetter See) at Erstfeld which lies
at the bottom of the grade to the present tunnel, with the other end
also in the flatlands to the south near Biasca.  Traffic will probably
not go through Lugano because that requires climbing over the Monte
Ceneri pass.  The currently less used line south along Lago Maggiore
to Luino is a likely route and is already seeing a large increase
in freight traffic.  Double tracking is in planning.

The Loetschberg base tunnel will connect near Frutigen, also at the
base of the main climb to the current tunnel and the floor of the Rhone
valley on the shortest bisector of the range, slightly west of the
current mouth of the Loetschen valley.  This will finally bring the
Simplon tunnel up to its potential after 100 years of its stepchild
existence.  Until recently it was connected on the north portal by two
single track lines.  The Rhone valley (SBB) line was finally double
tracked a few years ago and the Bern Loetschberg Simplon (BLS) was
completed last year.

Rather than lower the floor to accommodate TOFC in the 12 mile Simplon
the contact wire was replaced by aluminum buss bars on which the contact
wire is rigidly held practically on the ceiling.  (The Simplon is a twin
bore of two single track tunnels with vent connectors.)  This "invention"
proved so good that it is being used on all tracks under the Zurich main
train station for safety and maintenance reasons.  On the current
Loetschberg, tunnel clearance is so poor that a gantlet track is being
laid in the center of the double track so that standard TOFC won't hit
the ceiling.  This is to haul freight during off hours as a single track
operation.  This is another good reason to build a new tunnel.

The Swiss highways are limited to 28 tonnes whereas the rest of Europe
permits 40 tonnes.  Standard international trucks are also slightly
taller than was the custom on the major tunnel lines.  So in order to
get the trucks off the roads either the larger trucks had to be
accommodated or the load limit on highways had to give.  The votes are
in and the load limits can be held.

Italy has already built a new large freight yard just south of Domodossola
to handle the increased traffic through the Simplon now that it is connected
with the rest of the north by reasonable routes.

jobst_brandt@hplabs.hp.com
From: craig@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Craig Dewick)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Heavy haul lines, was Re: Melbourne to Ballarat
Date: 30 Sep 92 00:06:16 GMT
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: +61-2-837-1183 V.32

bjork@telebit.com (Steven Bjork) writes:

>Not an Aussie, but...

>I'm interested in the Heavy Haul lines down under. I understand that
>there is a mineral line that hauls extremely heavy axle loads.
>The US is moving towards heavier line hauls, with 125 ton double
>stack platforms, and higher capacity coal hoppers.

There are some heavy haul mineral lines in Western Australia that use engines
such as Alco C-628's, EMD SD-40's and SD-60's, as well as some GE Dash-8 based
locos. The trains are huge, the tonnages are immense (not sure of exact
figures), and the volume of ore moved is even more overwhelming. These lines
are the only 'super-heavy' lines in Australia.
 
Almost each state's railway system has some lines exclusively built for heavy
haul of commodities such as coal and ore, but nowhere near the scale of the
iron ore lines in the northwest of WA.
 
Here in NSW, the State Rail Authority are buying a swag of new locos. Most will
be around 3000 hp, but about thirty are going to be 4000 hp jobs. Probably
based on the later version of the SD-60, as the 4000 hp units are being 
fully imported (sounds like a car sales job!), while the 3000 hp units are
being made at Kelso by Clyde Engineering (the AUstralian rep for EMD).
 
The 4000 hp units are to be used exclusively for coal drags in the Hunter
Valley area (west of Newcastle on the east coast).
 
Queensland railways haul large coal trains using 25 kv electric locos. usually
with four engines split two at the front and two in the middle. I think they
use the Locotrol system to control the mid-train units.
-- 
 Craig Dewick               |      - Railway Preservation Industries P/L -
 Send email to:             |      actively supporting the preservation of
 craig@kralizec.zeta.org.au |           Australia's railway heritage.
From: jaz00@diag.amdahl.com (Joe Zuk)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Salt Lake City
Date: 30 Sep 92 13:34:59 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Cupertino, CA

This is my 1st post so hopefully it will work. I will be spending some time	in Salt Lake City near the end of October. Does anyone have a good hot spot	for trains. Are there any museums in the area that deal with trains. Anything
within 1 to 2 hours drive is ok.
From: alj@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Al Jackson)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 18:13:31 GMT
Subject: Re: Notes from recent transcontinental vacation
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.railroad

Your notes while traveling Amtrak and VIA are interesting and valuable.
Thanks. Here are some comments and answers to your questions:

* The Georgetown Loop used the GE 44 tonner only a few days this summer,
  due to leaky flues on the #14 Shay. You got a rare chance to ride
  behind the growler and a short (four car) train...all that the
  #15 can manage up the 4%. My son worked the Loop, again, this summer
  (fireman & trainman). Glad you liked it.

* That canyon you mentioned near Azure on the Grande is Gore Canyon. Both
  the D&RG and CB&Q surveyed routes thru there. The path on the
  South wall was part of an effort to build a dam in the lower Gore,
  so the Burlington interests could get ROW rights before the Grande.
  The dam never happened, but you can enjoy the canyons every day on the
  CZ.

* I've found it easier to make Amtrak ticket changes via phone
  (1-800-USA-RAIL), even when at a station. Then just have the agent
  print out your new tickets. Some of the station agents are not whizes
  with terminals.

* When you drove to Port Angeles, WA, where did you stay overnight? If not,
  did you see any nice, quiet harbors with lodges or B&Bs for a night's
  stay? I'll be doing that trip soon, too.

alj
From: dfl@panix.com (Danny O'Bedlam)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: NYC color-coding, again
Date: 6 Oct 92 04:04:20 GMT
Organization: Panix, (New Yawk City)

In <91752@netnews.upenn.edu> sfsmith@pennsas.upenn.edu (Sandy F. Smith, Jr.) writes:
>In article <1992Oct2.184015.11147@news.columbia.edu>, brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan) writes:
>> NYCTA plans kindly supplied me by Danny O'Bedlam indicate that the
>> Grand St station on Chrystie St would have a cross-platform transfer
>> to the 2d Ave line, the new 2d Ave tracks being on either side of the
>This sounds interesting, especially since I believe the present Grand Street
>subway station is island-platform already...
>Perhaps a parallel pair of tracks/platform would be built (or already
>exists, given the planned/abandoned services that were to run/ran through
>the Chrystie St connector tunnel?

	Yeah.  (Thanks JOE!)  I am under the belief (cant say I have
real proof) that Grand St is a two island platform station, always
was, built that way.  I also believe that there are two empty track
spaces parralel to the D line up Chrystie to 2nd Ave.  If the document
I have is correct, and I have reasons to believe that it shows a
section of tunnel that WAS built in the late 60s, then the '2nd avenue
line' snakes from CHATHAM SQUARE (station), under Confucius Plaza and
under the Manhattan Bridge Collonade.  They built supports to keep
the new line from interfering with the two sets of track that connect
to Bridge South (D train is Bridge North).  Anyway 2nd avenue line
(without tracks we think mind you) becomes the outer two tracks up
Chrystie St, past Grand St Station, and somewhere north of Delancey
St (kinda close to 'Bowery' Station on the 'M'), dip under the D
tracks, and under 2nd Avenue IND station platforms, to avoid the
curve that the D makes on its way to connect with the inner tracks
on Houston st.

	The problem with the above conjecture is that we laack
documentation of what is really there.  I keep meaning to check
out what may be available in the Transit Museum's Archives, now
that they have one. 
-- 
***********************************************************************
* Danny O'Bedlam  = dfl@panix.com = cmcl2!panix!dfl = Danny Lieberman *
* PO Box 3131 Church St Station, New Yawk, New Yawk, 10008-3131 (usa) *
***********************************************************************
From: Steve_Hooper@mindlink.bc.ca (Steve Hooper)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: locomotive cables
Date: 5 Oct 92 05:12:11 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

> Ernest H. Robl writes:
>
> As far as I know, the hoses on either side of the coupler are
> symmetrical, and between two units only one set of hoses needs to be
> connected, though often both sets are used.
>
> -- Ernest


Forgot to mention that...yes, you are correct.  Only ONE SET of the three
smaller hoses need to be connected to operate properly.  Also, lots of units
have TWO trainlines, one on either side of the coupler.  Only one of these
needs to be connected as well.


--

 steve_hooper@mindlink.bc.ca   []  Conductor on the High Iron of
 OR      a777@mindlink.bc.ca   []     CP Rail - Cascade Sub
 The Great White North in      []
 Vancouver, BC CANADA          []   Opinions are mine, NOT CP's
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: prodok@prodok.ch (prodok)
Subject: Re: Three-phase electrification (was something about tunnels
Organization: PRODOK Engineering AG
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 14:24:36 GMT

In article <26512@dog.ee.lbl.gov> wbrown@bevsun.bev.lbl.gov (Bill Brown) writes:
>In article <1992Sep26.090938.1547@prodok.ch> prodok@prodok.ch (prodok) writes:
>>The TGV uses only one pantograph when running under DC. But, they need a
>>high-voltage cable through the whole train to feed the other power car.
>>This could be accepted with an articulated train (with all it's 
>>disadvantages). As the ICE is not an articulated train, but has individual
>>cars, it would be extremely difficult to couple a high-voltage line. So,
>>the research the German industry had to do is the price for operational
>>flexibility and simplicity.
>
>Gosh - a number of railroads solved this problem years ago.  The Reading
>comes to mind.  In the 30's they electrified their commutter operations
>out of Philadelphia (11KV, 25 Hz).  Had gizzies, sorta looked like buffers,
>sticking out from the ends of the cars that were somewhat above roof level.
>Made contact with the gizzie on the next car.  I'm sure I've seen photos
>of similar schemes on other roads.
>
>Disclaimer:  These opinions are my own and have	    |
>    nothing to do with the official policy or the   |  -bill
>    management of L.B.L, who probably couldn't      |   wlbrown@lbl.gov
>    care less about employees who play with trains. |

This type of transmitting power through open air couplings _is technology
from the thirties_. I know that the German class 403 sets (the ones which
are now running as Lufthansa Airport Express) had a high power coupling,
but this one was feeding two additional cars at the maximum.

The mentioned kind of coupling is still in us for coupling HEP-lines on
some secondary railroads (if one counts the Chur - Arosa line as secondary 
line). I doubt that it is reliable enough to transmit 6000 kW (or so) 
at high speeds.

OK, for commuter operation this type might have worked 60 years ago, but
for high speed operation now ... ?

Max Wyss, PRODOK Engineering AG, Bonstetten, Switzerland
From: gurd@next04wor.wam.umd.edu (Daffy Duck)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Anybody how Metrolink is coming along?
Date: 28 Sep 92 18:08:42 GMT
Reply-To: gurd@wam.umd.edu

Charles P. Hobbs writes
> Your Metrolink ticket serves as a transfer for service to and from
> the stations. There will be trackside shuttle bus service available
> at Union Station, and additional bus service will be provided at
> other stations. In June 1993 (perhaps as early as October 1992), the
> Metro Red Line will be operating between Union Station and other
> Downtown points.

Will the Metrolink tickets be good on the Metro Red Line?  Or just on bus  
lines... BTW what type of fare/ticketing system will the Metro Red line  
use when it begins operating?
From: jordan@IMSI.COM (Jordan Hayes)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Chicago Rapid Transit reference.
Date: 25 Sep 92 23:17:37 GMT
Organization: Investment Management Services Inc., NYC

Ron Newman <rnewman@bbn.com> writes:

	But New York is a different story--you'd have to use most of
	the colors in a Crayola 64 box to name those lines...

1,2,3,9		red
7		purple
4,5,6		green
A,C,E		blue
B,D,F,Q		orange
G		light green	# only non-shuttle train that doesn't go
				# to manhattan
J,M,Z		brown
L		gray
N,R		yellow
S		black

Notably missing is the 8 train (did they ever have one?), the "H"
(ex-orange?) and "I" trains, as well as the K (which was blue, but was
stopped a few years ago and merged with the C).  There's no "O" train,
for obvious reasons, and there's that story about why there's no "P"
train, but what about T,U,V,W,X,Y,Z?  Room for expansion?  Was the 2nd
Avenue (unfinished) line ever given a hypothetical name?

/jordan
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879)
Subject: Re: Three-phase electrification (was something about tunnels)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 14:15:10 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

From article <1992Sep29.143137.4830@ee.ryerson.ca>,
by cal@ee.ryerson.ca (Calvin Henry-Cotnam):
> 
> Has anyone ever seen a system (using a pantograph, not a trolley pole!!)
> where there was more than one wire???

	The Gornergot Bahn, Zermatt, uses twin pantographs.
> 
> But for higher speeds where a pantograph is used, how does one control
> where the pantograph comes in contact with the catenary?

	Gornergrot is not a high speed line.  Cog operation tends to
	be slow!  They have fairly wide pans, though, and the wires are
	supported fairly frequently so they follow curves with some
	precision.
				Doug Jones
				jones@cs.uiowa.edu
From: dfl@panix.com (Danny O'Bedlam)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: garbage trains, money trains, and other novelties for out of towners.
Date: 2 Oct 92 13:16:32 GMT
Organization: Panix, (New Yawk City)

In <1992Oct2.040229.23632@news.columbia.edu> brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan) writes:
>It's in the westbound tunnel used by the N R trains just west of
>Lawrence St station.  Whether it is still used, I don't know.
>--Joe Brennan

	Yes Im sure it is.  Apparently there is also a location
within JAY-BORO that connects to the building upstairs (370 Jay) as
well.

-- 
***********************************************************************
* Danny O'Bedlam  = dfl@panix.com = cmcl2!panix!dfl = Danny Lieberman *
* PO Box 3131 Church St Station, New Yawk, New Yawk, 10008-3131 (usa) *
***********************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan)
Subject: Re: NYC: Grand Concourse-Jerome Ave. track connection
Reply-To: brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: rec
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 18:15:59 GMT

In article <RABIN.92Sep26175703@epic.CS.Yale.Edu> rabin-dan@cs.yale.edu writes:

>I have a set of contract drawings for the northern end of the IND
>line.  These drawings show a third track diverging from between the
>two tracks of the IND line directly under E. Mosholu Parkway and
>heading west under Van Cortlandt Ave. toward Jerome Ave.  I don't have
>any information as to its further course, nor do I know that the line
>was built as drawn (I have not inspected the site).  

There is a wye in tunnel at that point.  The main line runs north and
then turns 90 degrees east to reach the terminal at 205th St.  Two
other tracks turn 90 degrees west, and a third, as you describe,
permits access from 205th St terminal running straight west, meeting
the other two.  These three tracks emerge into the north end of a
large trainyard set below street level west of Jerome Ave, known as 
Concourse Yard.  

The IRT has a separate, smaller, older trainyard at street level
adjacent to Concourse Yard.  Much of this is now covered over by part
of "Tracy Towers", that tall ugly concrete apartment block you see at
the corner of Jerome and Mosholu.  The trainyards are not connected.

Near the south end of Concourse Yard is a ramp rising up to join the
IRT line in Jerome Ave.  This is the interdivisional connection used
for work trains and other special moves.

>Tangential remark: The drawings explicitly allow for an extension
>under Burke Ave. in a future construction phase.  The extension was
>never built; the books I have read attribute this to the fact that the
>Dyre Avenue line was later developed to serve the same general area.

Right.  The Dyre Ave line, already built as part of the New York
Westchester and Boston Railway, was available cheap when the NYWB
failed, and so it was purchased as an IND Line instead.  Interesting
question: how would the Burke Ave line have crossed the Bronx river?
Possibly by bridge.

Trivia: The "north" end of 205th St station is at 204th St, the "south"
end at 205th St, but it really runs east and west anyway!

--Joe Brennan

Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: pierson@empror.enet.dec.com (dave pierson)
Subject: Re: Three-phase electrification (was something about tunnels
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 19:18:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.154944.332@Princeton.EDU>, jsm@phoenix.Princeton.EDU
(John Scott McCauley Jr.) writes...
>In article <9209251644.AA05061@hplomg.hpl.hp.com>
>BRANDT_JOBST/HP1900_01@HPLOMG.HPL.HP.COM writes:
>>There have been many electric RR's that operated on 3-phase current,
>>the largest of which was the Italian National (FS) until about 1960
>>or so.... 

>How does two-wire overhead handle switches (turnouts)? Like a trolleybus
>switch? Did this limit high-speed operation through switches? 

	Main line three phase installations usually used pantographs, so the
	overhead was not quite like trolley bus.  Speeds (for the time) were
	adequate, say 60-70 mph (FS probably held/holds the record...).
	Generally pan's are better for hishg speed work than trolley poles.

thanks
dave pierson			|the facts, as accurately as i can manage,
Digital Equipment Corporation	|the opinions, my own.
146 Main St			|I am the NRA.
Maynard, Mass	
01754				pierson@majsty.enet.dec.com
"He has read everything, and, to his credit, written nothing."  A J Raffles
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: BART 20th. Anniversary
Organization: LLNL
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 02:09:28 GMT

In article <schumach.718329114@convex.convex.com> schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher) writes:

@ and the Colma Station project in San Mateo County.  The Colma Station will  
@ be the link to the San Fransisco Airport Extension, which is scheduled to  
@ begin in late of 1994.  The extension program is running about four years  
@ ahead of schedule.

>? Does this mean that it's been open since 1990, but no one knows about
>it?

	I think it may not have been written very clearly. The
_current_ schedule is at least a year ahead of the _original_
schedule, as far as I can tell. The Colma station is set to open in
late 1995; the SFO extension in 2000, at least according to the
current schedule.

Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: ardie@UIUC (Richard D. McClary)
Subject: Wabash #574
Summary: Response to info request
Organization: Department of Plant Pathology
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 12:01:29 GMT

More than you should want to know about Wabash #574:

1.  Wabash class F-4, built Sep '99 by Rhode Island
2.  Originally WAB #762, it was scrapped Dec '31
	(some F-4's were used until '55!)
3.  64" drivers, 190 lb boiler pressure, cylinders 19 x 28",
	6" valve travel; engine total wt 123525 lb; 25507 lb
	tractive power
4.  Tender capacity - 10 tons coal, 6000 gal water
	(engine  + tender wt 215825 lb)

If someone actually wants to SEE a Wabash F-4, #573 is in the
	National Museum of Transport near St. Louis, MO

			Richard Mc
			Wabash Goeqe*
			ardie@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu

	*Academically Correct spelling of "geek"
From: dave@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (David A Rasmussen)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: North Carolina Rail spending?
Date: 1 Oct 1992 17:45:28 GMT
Organization: UW-Milwaukee Computing Services Division
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: dave@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


Does anyone have any info on the $95 Million NC has budgeted over the
next 5 years for rail programs, possibly written up like Adrian Brandt
does with the California stuff?

Members of WisARP are interested in collecting said info as fodder for
our state to consider developing both the Chicago <> Madison and 
Chicago <>Green Bay projects, currently estimated at around $30M each.

A friend of mine requested this info, although I'm sure it's of interest
to others.

-- 
Dave Rasmussen - SysAdm/Hacker/Consulting Manager, UWM Computing Svcs Div.
Internet:dave@uwm.edu, Uucp:uwm!dave, Bitnet:dave%uwm.edu@INTERBIT
AT&T:414-229-5133 USmail:Box 413 EMS380,Milwaukee,WI 53201