HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jsm@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (John Scott McCauley Jr.)
Subject: high-speed turnouts (points)
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 19:40:10 GMT

I have a few questions about turnouts used for high-speed passenger service:

1) What are typical frog numbers? Anything above #20? Do these big switches
   require multiple switch machines?

2) What are typical speed restrictions? Does a train have to slow down 
   through a #8 or a #10 switch if the switch is set to the straight route
   rather than diverging route? Are there different limits for facing-
   point switches (train reaches points before frog) and trailing-point 
   switches (train reaches frog before points)?

3) Does a 'swing-nose' turnout help? I think a swing-nose switch has an
   active frog. Any other types of switches out there?

4) Are wye switches frequently used to save space where large frog numbers
   are used?

	Scott
Newsgroups: rec.railroad,uk.misc
From: daniel@scs.leeds.ac.uk (D N Crow)
Subject: Re: Small Gods Annotations
Originator: daniel@csgi60
Organization: The University of Leeds, School of Computer Studies
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 08:56:57 GMT
X-Posted-From: csgi60.leeds.ac.uk
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu


In article <728033204snx@warren.demon.co.uk>, leveret@warren.demon.co.uk (Nick Leverton) writes:
|> Daniel@scs.leeds.ac.uk (where *has* he been?) writes:
Ohhh... you know... round and abouts.
|> 
|> But just to make you happy, a traction motor from a Networker [the new
|> generation of trains, ordered mid 1980's and - thanks to That Bloody
|> Woman - only being delivered in the mid 1990's] was recently demonstrated
|> running immersed in a tank of water to prove its immunity to the problem.
|> 
|> And I have *never*, *ever* heard of your "wrong kind of leaves" story.
|> Please suppy a reference for it.
|> 

Wasn't it (recalls scratchy and rather inaccurate memory) when they introduced
a new train that was so light (you know, one of them bus-bodies on a rail
chassis) that it didn't have the traction to climb some of the grades over the
Pennines when heavy falls of leaves made the tracks all slippery. I think
that's the incident I was thinking of. Definately happened. For a while they
were talking about putting huge lead weights or something into them so that
they'd have the traction....

-- 
Dan Crow
daniel@scs.leeds.ac.uk
From: jws7@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JEFF W SCHRAMM)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: CSS&SB trip
Date: 21 Jan 93 17:12:02 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University


 The south shore part of the station is sort of back in the dingy corners.
 There are signs posted but you'll have to look for them.  The south shore
 splits off from the IC mainline at Kensington (115th? st.) and most trains
 stop there.  For a real quick trip you could ride the south shore from
 randolph st. downtown to kensington and then catch an IC (Metra electric) train back
 downtown.
 For a longer trip I would recommend going to Michigan City IN.  If my memory
 is correct, There are some resturants within walking distance as well as the
 conrail mainline.  The best "interrurban" scenery is between south bend and
 Michigan City but the train frequency is less than over the portion closer to
 Chicago.  All this info is from memory and may not be entirely accurate.  Its
 been a while since I've rode the south shore.
  
-- 

Jeff Schramm
212 E. Morton St. Apt 1
Bethlehem, PA 18015

Lehigh University
From: pierson@empror.enet.dec.com (dave pierson)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: New York World's Fair Monorail
Date: 24 Jan 93 20:11:53 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <1993Jan22.042337.3361@walter.cray.com>, rl@ferris.cray.com (Randy
Lambertus) writes, in part:

>  Speaking of which, I have been participating in a discussion in the
>alt.tv.simpsons group about the Marge vs. the Monorail episode. During

>  The question I have is who built the thing in the first place? I know
>AMF sponsored it, but did they also construct it? I can't believe a
>sporting equipment company would go to all that trouble for a one off
>system. 

	If memory serves, AMF is(was...) American Machine and Foundry.  They
	made a variety of rail products, i think the may have cast steam loco
	frames at one point.  I know they did RR trucks.  The "sporting"
	incarnation is fairly recent.

thanks
dave pierson			|the facts, as accurately as i can manage,
Digital Equipment Corporation	|the opinions, my own.
40 Old Bolton Rd		|I am the NRA.
Stow, Mass, USA	
01775				pierson@msd26.enet.dec.com
"He has read everything, and, to his credit, written nothing."  A J Raffles
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: roma@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Jon Roma)
Subject: Re: Chicago South Shore general question
Keywords: Chicago South Shore & South Bend
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:14:53 GMT

jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones) writes:

>The South Shore and Illinois Central share a terminal station downtown.  The
>station is under the North end of Grant Park, and is reached by stairs that
>go down on the west side of Michigan Avenue near the old Chicago Public
>Library.

Specifically, the entrance to the terminal is on the southwest corner of
Randolph St. and Michigan Ave.  South Shore trains also stop at Van Buren
and Michigan and a number of other stations along the ex-IC electric line
before diverging toward Indiana.

Anyone who has never ridden the South Shore should try to ride the entire
90-mile route -- the line traverses an interesting mix of residential,
industrial, and rural territory.
-- 
Jon Roma
Computing and Communications Services Office,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Internet:  roma@uiuc.edu      	UUCP:      uunet!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!roma
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879)
Subject: Re: Temperature extremes (was Re: European track)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 20:42:48 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

Here in Iowa, the temperature extremes that matter are the maximum and
minimum, not the average.  I suspect that on a hot summer day, when the
daytime temperature is 100 (F) in the shade (and the humidity is 98%,
although this is irrelevant to this issue), the rail may be heated to
120 (F) in the sun.  On the coldest winter nights, the temperature around
here falls to -20 (F) every few years.  This gives a temperature range of
140 degrees (F) or 77 degrees (C).
					Doug Jones
					jones@cs.uiowa.edu
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: M00209@MBVM.Mitre.Org
Subject: Re: NEC
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, Bedford MA 01730
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:02:24 GMT

In article <C1A9rx.Hww@acsu.buffalo.edu>
yhshowie@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Howard Wharton) writes:
 
>
>In article <3212@tymix.Tymnet.COM>, romeo@niagara.Tymnet.COM (Michael Stimac) writes...
>  Power (motors) were changed at Sunnyside...New Haven's motors that ran
>into GCT were designed to run on NYCs underrunning 3rd rail not on
>PRR/LIRR overrunning third rail. I belive that the FL-9s shoes could be
>changed to over or underrunning.
 
Sorry, I can't let this one go by without comment.
 
I have ridden the trains between Boston, New York and Washington hundreds of
times since about 1953, and I can state unequivocally that I have NEVER been on
a train that changed power at Sunnyside!  In pre-Penn Central days, the PRR
GG1s were swapped for New Haven EP5s (or earlier power) at the station stop in
Penn Station.  Invariably so, as far as I know.  PRR's GG1s were, of course,
serviced at Sunnyside.  New Haven engines, I believe, were serviced only at
New Haven, though I suppose minor repairs could be performed at Oak Point
if they had to.
 
As for the PC era, that was when they started running the GG1s through to
New Haven.  I believe that some (minor) modifications to the overhead were
required.  I seem to remember some early problems with the GG1s pantographs
snagging the wire at "dead spots" and phase breaks (e. g., Cos Cob Bridge).
 
I don't believe that FL9s ever ran into Penn Station until well into the
Amtrak generation, and I don't think Amtrak ever used them routinely there
until the opening of the West Side Connection.  There is a fairly well known
story that has come to be part of "urban legend", and may well be apochryphal,
concerning this.  It is said that sometime after the New Haven had been running
FL9s into GCT for some time, the President of the Pennsy (perhaps Saunders)
was asked what about running them into Penn Station too and saving the
engine change at New Haven for their trains as well.  His comment supposedly
was something like "Not on your life!  If Mr. Perlman wants to blow his
station to Hell, that's his business, but there won't be any engines with
fuel tanks running into my Station!"
 
 
Len Bachelder        Archives Committee, Boston and Maine RR Historical Society
MITRE Corp.           Secretary, Massachusetts Bay Railroad Enthusiasts
Bedford MA 01730      Member, 470 Railroad Club
<M00209@mbvm.mitre.org>
 
"Amazing love, how can it be that Thou, my God, should'st die for me!"
                                                 - Charles Wesley
From: FBCB@iunsys.iun.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Conrail SD60M's
Date: 8 Jan 93 20:00:48 GMT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA12105; Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:12:00 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com; id AA09514; Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:11:57 -0800
X-Received: (from user FBCB) by IUNSYS.iun.indiana.edu; 08 Jan 93 14:00:47 CST
X-To: rec.railroad.usenet

Amtrak train 370, the "Pere Marquette" (engine 203: cars 43027, 44557,
54008, 54054) derailed on Wednesday night (12/30) at 8:20 pm in St. Joseph,
MI, resulting in 12 injured. Police are investigating rail sabotage,
since similar attempts to derail a train were found west, but
after I read the paper and talked with a restaurant employee nearby, it
appears that the derailment may have been set up by a grade crossing
accident just 1.5 hours before, involving train CSX S203 (CP 505-X)
(CP 5555, CP 3259 (NS-GATX), CP5563, CP 5401, CP 4247, CP 5538)
dragging some debris.

No CSX traffic was detoured, however, trains that were called out
continued to run, and stored in sidings, and trains not yet called
were not called. As of January 1, however, service had not been
restored, but the scheduled 370 for Dec. 31 (AMT 411, AMT 658)
came on time.

CSX R200 (CP 500) (Obscured) Stored at Livingston siding

CSX R202 (CP 502) (CP 5541, SOO 6450, SOO ????) Stored at Sawyer siding

The track was inspected and restored to service as I approached the scene.
The cars were rerailed before I got there, so I only have a newspaper
picture of the accident.

On January 2, after the New Year's break, regular freight service continued.
On that day, there were at least 15 trains, including those stored.
The derailed consist was pulled by engine 658 to Union Station.
Cars were then added to the train the next day and they ran
normally on train 352 with no visible damage.
From: rl@ferris.cray.com (Randy Lambertus)
Subject: Re: NEC
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 21 Jan 93 03:02:25 CST

  Very nice article Len. About the Poughkeepsie bridge, what was
the extent of the fire. In all the literature I read they allude to
the damage by the fire, but never describe the circumstances or
the actual results. Was this a wooden bridge that was completely
burned or a steel structure that warped and feel. If it was steel
how could a fire destroy it unless it was the ties that contributed
to the blaze. 

  Just where was the bridge located in relation to the Bear Mountain
auto bridge? North or south, and could you see the old New Haven 
bridge fom there? I am interested because I feel the demise of
the Erie-Lackawanna was probably accelerated due to the loss of
New England traffic from/to Maybrook.


Randy Lambertus               Cray Research, Region 4            rl@uk.cray.com
*******************************************************************************
         _________u_______
     ___//()()()() ()()() \____________________________________________________
    /\o 52-----//----------- _                  |                _             
   |  |========  Amtrak     |O| ()()()()()()()  |  ()()()()()() |O| ()()()()()(
    \/_________\\___________|_|_________________|_______________|_|____________
    /___/o==o\________________________________/-o-\____________________________
===============================================================================
**[]****[]****[]****[]****[]****[]****[]****[]****[]****[]****[]****[]****[]***
From: yhshowie@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Howard Wharton)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: NEC
Date: 23 Jan 93 01:37:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <3212@tymix.Tymnet.COM>, romeo@niagara.Tymnet.COM (Michael Stimac) writes...
>In article <1993Jan21.223109.5326@ryn.mro4.dec.com> pierson@empror.enet.dec.com (dave pierson) writes:
> 
>>	Actaully, they were pretty compatible, from 1920ish on.  The power
>>	didn't run thru because that "wasn't done", at the time.  Earlier, Penn
>>	Staion was third rail, 600VDC, overrunning third rail, so either
>>	PRR DD1 e-loks or NH power with thrid rail shoes (also used elsewhere)
> 
>		^^^^^^
>		BLECHHH!
> 
>>	ran into Penn Station.
> 
> 
  Power (motors) were changed at Sunnyside...New Haven's motors that ran
into GCT were designed to run on NYCs underrunning 3rd rail not on
PRR/LIRR overrunning third rail. I belive that the FL-9s shoes could be
changed to over or underrunning.
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: M00209@MBVM.Mitre.Org
Subject: Re: Fort Devens as a container terminal?
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, Bedford MA 01730
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:26:33 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.002941.27181@oz.plymouth.edu>
j_dietz@oz.plymouth.edu (John E. Dietz) writes:
 
>
>
>        I read a while back (I think it was in Trains magazine) that
>there was some talk of turning Fort Devens at Ayer Massachusetts into
>a container terminal. I haven't heard any recent news about this, and
>was wondering if anybody else has.
>        If the base is converted, will this finally convince Guilford
>to widen the clearences of the Hoosac Tunnel? Would Guilford be able
>to compete with Conrail's former Boston and Albany line to the south?
>I know that Conrail has taken much traffic away from Guilford,
>especially the auto racks bound for Ayer. When Ford decided to use
>triple decked, protected racks, they were shifted to Conrail's line
>because Hoosac Tunnel was too small and Guilford didn't want (couldn't
>afford?) to make adjustments.
 
As far as I know, the plan is still on.  The idea is to run double-stacks
from the west to Fort Devens, re-package the trains there to single-level
container jobs and run them to Moran Terminal at Mystic Wharf in Boston.
Yes, the plan includes reaming out Hoosac Tunnel so double-stacks will
fit, and yes "State" (translated "taxpayer's") money will pay for it.
Guilford and the politicians backing the project hope that the result
will be a route competitive with Conrail, but I personally wouldn't bet
the family farm on it.  Guilford does too lousy a job of getting the trains
over the road even where clearances aren't a problem.  Another reason for
the project is the hope that (a relatively small number of) jobs will be
created in the Ayer area to ease the loss of Fort Devens as an employer.
I should add, though, that there are persistent rumours of CP money being
involved in the project and of CP eventually taking over the B&M's "West
End".  Just rumours, I repeat, no facts - yet.  That, however, could well
IMHO produce a true competitive situation.
 
>        While on the subject, does anyone know how many trains
>Guilford is running between Ayer and Schenectady? Last I knew it
>wasn't much, but I've been away at school for a while and I don't know
>if the purchasing of Delaware and Hudson by CP Rail has influenced
>traffic on this line.
 
Last time I looked, one train a day each way was scheduled.  Those and
the coal trains are about it.  How the mighty have fallen!  East
Deerfield looks like a "ghost town" these days!  Most through runs now
come off of Conrail at Worcester.
 
 
Len Bachelder        Archives Committee, Boston and Maine RR Historical Society
MITRE Corp.           Secretary, Massachusetts Bay Railroad Enthusiasts
Bedford MA 01730      Member, 470 Railroad Club
<M00209@mbvm.mitre.org>
 
"Amazing love, how can it be that Thou, my God, should'st die for me!"
                                                 - Charles Wesley
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: cal@ee.ryerson.ca (Calvin Henry-Cotnam)
Subject: Re: 79mph
Organization: Ryerson Polytechnical Institute, Toronto
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 18:16:36 GMT

roma@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Jon Roma) writes:
>brom@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (David Bromage) writes:
>
>>Could somebody please explain why some US railroads limit their trains to
>>the strange maximum speed of 79mph? I assume it has something to do with
>>the legal requirements of running at 80mph and above.
>
>I find it interesting that Canada has no generic speed limit comparable
>to the 79 mph limit and, in fact, there are no cab signal installations
>on ANY main line railroad in Canada.  Moreover, on certain Canadian
>lines, passenger trains travel at speeds exceeding 90 mph in unsignaled
>territory operated by timetable and track warrant!

This is very true.  The Smith Falls sub of CN, from Ottawa to Smith Falls
Ontario, is currently used only by VIA rail.  (CN wanted to abandon it
a few years back, but VIA paid to upgrade it in order to shave some time
off the Toronto-Ottawa run; CN of course still own it).

Anyhow, this section of track operates under OCS rules.  This stands
for "Occupancy Control System" and basically means that a train is given
exclusive clearance to enter the section, kind of like train orders.  The
speeds over this section are typically 90 mph and there is no signalling
at all (there does exist track with OCS/ABS operation).


This brought to mind something else regarding maximum speeds.  With GO
Transit's F59PH's, their top speed is 83 mph which of course is due to
gear ratios and mechanical constraints.  The question is, why was this
(somewhat arbitrary) value chosen?

I suspect that as 83mph is *very close* to 130 km/h, that the provincial
government gave the specs in metric (because *everything* here is) and
as the railroads still use imperial measurements (mileposts, signal numbers,
and speed limits are all imperial on the railways), the actual markings in
the cab must be in mph.

Anyone know this for sure?


Calvin Henry-Cotnam, CATE          | "...My brain IBM"
Ryerson Polytechnical Institute    | "So if you see me, acting strangely..."
Toronto, Ontario, Canada           |                  STYX, Mr. Roboto
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: cal@ee.ryerson.ca (Calvin Henry-Cotnam)
Subject: Re: ? about engine sets
Organization: Ryerson Polytechnical Institute, Toronto
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 23:21:33 GMT

maral@repare.EBay.Sun.COM writes:
>The question is why do trains utilize various engine types when pulling
>a string of cars and why do some point forwards and some backwards?

I'll attempt the second part about why some point one way and some
the other.  Basically, turning around an engine involves a "dead-head"
move.  Although short, it does take crew time and produces no income
for the railroad. The engines are simply coupled together in the
orientation that they are found. 
 
When running multiple units, (generally) only the front unit need
have the cab face the front, mainly for headlight and (here in
Canada) ditchlight purposes.  Although I have seen the odd peddler
with the front unit actually backwards.

Now for the first question about why differnt types of engines are
used.  Someone else could probably do a more concise job of explaining
this than me, but I would suggest reading the section called,
"The Jobs Locomotives Do" in Kalmbach's "The Contemporary Diesel
Spotter's Guide", pages 315 to 329. (ISBN: 0-89024-088-4)

It gets a little techincal, but does give a good explanation about
this area.


Calvin Henry-Cotnam, CATE          | "...My brain IBM"
Ryerson Polytechnical Institute    | "So if you see me, acting strangely..."
Toronto, Ontario, Canada           |                  STYX, Mr. Roboto
From: romeo@niagara.Tymnet.COM (Michael Stimac)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: NEC
Date: 23 Jan 93 06:05:30 GMT
Organization: BT North America (Tymnet)

In article <1993Jan22.214104.19789@news.columbia.edu> brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan) writes:
>In article <3213@tymix.Tymnet.COM> romeo@niagara.Tymnet.COM (Michael
>Stimac) writes:
>>>routing off all the commuter lines into the station, but some, at least the
>>>Paoli Local don't (obviously) tread on the corridor.

>>This cannot pass unchallenged!

>The point, and worth making I think, is that 30th St upper level to
>Main Line does not share any track with Northeast Corridor (30th St
>lower to New York), and can be operated separately.  Sure, in one
>sense the Zoo triangle is on the corridor-- for train watching as an
>example, and if one were to diagram the trackage I'd like to see all
>of Zoo shown-- but for operations, part of it isn't.


Zoo Junction *is* part of the corridor! What do you think, that
they have a different set of tower operators for some tracks than
others, and that they are on different payrolls, and that they
buy the electricity for the different wires from a different
electric company!

Zoo is all one plant; and the switches that the Paoli local goes
over are interlocked with the switches that the Metroliners go over.
So, for operations, they cannot be "operated separately".

If you're trying to say that there is no piece of rail N feet
long over which both the Metroliners and the Paoli local pass,
that may well be so. That is very different from trying to say
that a few of the tracks in Zoo are part of the corridor and
a few of them are not.

Next you'll tell me that 0 track and 5 track, et al, are not
part of the corridor either! Get real!

Michael Stimac
-- 
Michael Stimac
(415) 355-8889
romeo@tymnet.com
These opinions are not necessarily anyone's but my own.
From: romeo@niagara.Tymnet.COM (Michael Stimac)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: ? about engine sets
Keywords: turntables
Date: 26 Jan 93 07:13:27 GMT
Organization: BT North America (Tymnet)

>In article <1k10miINNqc2@iraul1.ira.uka.de> S_KOEHLER@iravcl.ira.uka.de (|S| Tobias Koehler) writes:
>
>    Are there still turning plates used in America for turning Diesel
>    locomotives?
>

Just a sidelight - perhaps the best-known and most-loved turntables
in "America" are the tables for the San Francisco cable cars, used
for the single-ended cars (have grip lever and brake controls one
end only).

We call them turntables here. I'm curious why they would be called
"plates" on the other side of the pond? Are the pits planked over
so they appear plate-shaped?

Michael Stimac

-- 
Michael Stimac
(415) 355-8889
romeo@tymnet.com
These opinions are not necessarily anyone's but my own.