HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jbvb@vax.ftp.com  (James B. VanBokkelen)
Subject: Re: Empire Builder Lost? (was: LIRR Joke)
Nntp-Software: PC/TCP NNTP
Reply-To: jbvb@ftp.com
Organization: FTP Software, Inc., Wakefield, MA
Distribution:  usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 16:15:11

In article <16094@mindlink.bc.ca> Steve_Hooper@mindlink.bc.ca (Steve Hooper) writes:

    Train crews MUST be familiar with the territory they are on, otherwise a
    pilot from that particular area MUST be called.
    
My father witnessed at least two occasions where the Salem Tower operator
didn't re-line Beverly Jct. after the previous train and the Newburyport RDC
started up the Gloucester branch.  For this to happen, an experienced engineer
didn't notice that the signal aspect was middle-green instead of high-green.
I was in the cab one time when he did notice the aspect was wrong...

James B. VanBokkelen		2 High St., North Andover, MA  01845
FTP Software Inc.		voice: (508) 685-4000  fax: (508) 794-4488

Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: jsm@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (John Scott McCauley Jr.)
Subject: Re: Diesel vs. Electric Locomotive Maintenance
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 18:18:19 GMT

In article <35601@cbmvax.commodore.com> grr@cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins) writes:
>In article <1992Oct5.233132.27383@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>> 
>> 	I have seen it claimed that electric locomotives usually need
>> much less maintenance than diesel ones. Is there any truth to that
>> claim?
>> 
>> 	This would presumably come about from the much lower
>> mechanical complexity of electric locos as compared to diesel ones (no
>> diesel engine, see?).
>
>Well, the are a couple of problems with your assertions.  First of all
>electric locomotives aren't particularly simple.  In the case of the
>diesel locomotive, you can regulate power output simply by changing
>the engine speed and simple switching of the traction motor series-
>parallel arrangements.
[more details about diesel vs electric deleted]

Several observations:
1) I remember a recent TRAINS article saying than an Amtrak AEM7 electric
   loco logs twice as many hours (or is it miles?) per day as an
   FP40H diesel.  Something like 1000 miles/day I think.

2) AEM7's cost more than FP40H's.

3) The GG1 lasted decades and probably would still be used someplace
   today if it weren't for the PCB problem in the transformers.

4) AEM7's don't stink up stations. Last summer I was in Montreal, and
   the Montrealler had to coast the last 1000 yds when entering the
   station as the FP40H's fumes were bad and the station ventillation
   was poor.

5) Electric equipment usually can accelerate much faster than diesel. This
   is crucial for high-density traffic. It would be impossible to
   run the NEC as-is with all-diesel equipment.

In the US, I think the future for the NEC (and other corridors) will be
european-style electric trains. For freight, the locos will be similar
to a diesel-electric locomotive.  The fuel, however, will be liquified
natural gas (or hydrogen?). The electricity may be powered by external-c
ombustion engines such as turbines or MHD generators that have no
moving parts.

	Scott
From: jps@dworkin.wustl.edu (James Sterbenz)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Europe trip report and signals, part 2
Keywords: SJ, NSB, DSB, signals
Date: 15 Oct 92 15:16:08 GMT
Organization: Washington University,  St Louis MO

A couple of corrections...

In article <30155@dworkin.wustl.edu> I wrote:

>Block signals:
>
>    DSB                NSB                           SJ
>
>                D       H      H+D          D         H      H+D
> 
>     -         ---     ---     ---         ---        -       -
>   | G |      | Y |   | G |   | G |      /\ G /\    | G |   | G |
>   |   |      | G |   | R |   | R |     wht( )wht   | R |   | R |
>   |   |       ---    | G |   | G |      \ /W \/      -     | G |
>   | R |        |      ---     ---         ---        |     | W |
>   | G |        |       |      ---          |         |       -
>     -          |       |     | Y |         |         |       |
>    +-+         |       |     | G |         |         |       |
>    |@|         |       |      ---          |         |       |
>    +-+         |       |       |           |         |       |
>     |          |       |       |           |         |       |
>

The symbol indicator on the DSB block signal was a cut-and-paste typo;
not surprisingly there is no speed modification on a block signal.

Block signals:

    DSB                NSB                           SJ

                D       H      H+D          D         H      H+D
 
     -         ---     ---     ---         ---        -       -
   | G |      | Y |   | G |   | G |      /\ G /\    | G |   | G |
   |   |      | G |   | R |   | R |     wht( )wht   | R |   | R |
   |   |       ---    | G |   | G |      \ /W \/      -     | G |
   | R |        |      ---     ---         ---        |     | W |
   | G |        |       |      ---          |         |       -
     -          |       |     | Y |         |         |       |
     |          |       |     | G |         |         |       |
     |          |       |      ---          |         |       |
     |          |       |       |           |         |       |
     |          |       |       |           |         |       |

Thanks to Jan Pedersen for finding this.

[...]

>1959 DB Signalbuch, 1947 SJ rules, and 1951 JV (Finnish) rules (these

Ott-Vill asks what on earth the JV is?  Other than an acronym I use
for something totally unrelated to railroading, I've no idea.  I know
that it is the VR, and still have used JV several times.  I'm pulling
my foot out this very moment :-|

James

--
James Sterbenz  IBM HPCC       (High Performance Computing and Communications)
                472 Wheelers Farms Rd. MS93           jpgs@watson.vnet.ibm.com
                Milford CT 06460-1844 USA                      +1 203 783 4380
From: zephyr@cory.Berkeley.EDU (COIFMAN)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Michigan applies for High Speed...
Date: 16 Oct 92 02:39:03 GMT
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley

In article <1992Oct14.234231.1@uwovax.uwo.ca> baer@uwovax.uwo.ca writes:
>In article <16088@umd5.umd.edu>, gurd@next04wor.wam.umd.edu (Daffy Duck) writes:
>> The following article also appeared in the October 5, 1992 edition of  
>> Passenger Transport.  Copyright, 1992 American Public Transit Association.
>> 
>> "Michigan Files for High Speed Rail Corridor Designation"
>> 
>>    DEARBORN, MICH. -- High speed rail travel in Michigan received a hefty  
>> boost recently when the Michigan DOT filed an application with the U.S.  
>> DOT requesting the rail corridor between Detroit and Michigan be  
>> designated as a high speed rail corridor.  It is the first step in the  
>> eventual development of trains going in excess of 150mph along the route.
>[... stuff deleted]
[dito]
>
>Gee, funny thing.  The Amtrak line (I believe Amtrak took it over from
>Conrail, but I could be wrong) from Detroit to Chicago used to be double
>track.  It runs through Ann Arbor, MI. 
> I was surprised when they removed the 2nd track about 3-4 years 
>ago (this track appeared to be in reasonably good condition).
>Why would they do this if they want high-speed rail travel??  I suppose
>more passing tracks will help, but why on earth didn't they leave the
>double tracks in?

 It costs a lot to maintain track. Unless you are going to run A LOT of
trains over a section of track, it makes good economic sense to single
track a line. Though... I would much rather see two tracks instead of
one. Now that they are thinking about upgrading, all I can say is, why
didn't they leave those great LRT lines in the street back in the 50's
and 60's?



   _ -----------  -------------  ----------- _  -------------/^^^^^^^^\----
  /^____________||_____________||____________^\|[] ==== ====  ___ ___   == |
 'o-o ------ o-o  o-o ----- o-o  o-o ------ o-o o-o ------------------- o-o
Way of the Zephyrs         zephyr@cory.berkeley.edu             Benn Coifman
Xref: sparky rec.railroad:7903 rec.models.railroad:1957
From: dawdy@tellabs.com (Dan Dawdy)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad,rec.models.railroad
Subject: More Railroad GIF's Posted - Set 3
Date: 10 Oct 92 12:22:24 GMT
Organization: Tellabs, Lisle, IL

Below are 4 new orginal GIF's which are being posted to alt.binaries.
pictures.misc.  These were taken by Bruce Fingerhood, who posts here
occasionally, and scaned by me.  I am sure these will be picked up
and placed on an FTP site.  (Hi -D-)  

Enjoy,

Dan
*******************************************************************
File Name.....AMK_152
Resolution....798x550x256
Size..........258,180
Description..:
               Amktrak Turbotrain running as the "Empire State
Express" just east of Rochester NY on the Conrail mainline in
November 1982.

*******************************************************************

File Name.....CO_4211
Resolution....785x596x256
Size..........303,681
Description..:
               Chessie #421 is just about to enter the West
Portal of Sand Patch Tunnel at the summit of Sand Patch on a
rainy day in October 1985.

*******************************************************************

File Name.....CR_2749
Resolution....775x508x256
Size..........84,384
Description..:
               Conrail #2749 idles away the night in the yard at
Binghamton NY in April of 1989.

*******************************************************************

File Name.....SF_5076
Resolution....800x600x256
Size..........299,571
Description..:
               Santa Fe #5076 leads six units up the grade to
Palmer Lake CO on the "joint line" in April 1983.


-- 
************************************************************************
  |\\                                   *
  |  \ \                                *   Internet: 
  J    \ \         --------|            *      dawdy@tellabs.com
         \ \     / [] ZORRO|            *   Compu$erve:
           \ \  |  ||      |            *      70661,2422
             \ \|  ||      |            *
               =============            *        "O" Scale
     ____________()______()__________   *       King of Scales
   The painters last day on the job :-) *
From: romeo@niagara.Tymnet.COM (Michael Stimac)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Diesel vs. Electric Locomotive Maintenance
Date: 15 Oct 92 21:20:23 GMT
Organization: BT North America (Tymnet)

In article <Bw6BLI.5EF@access.digex.com> terryfry@access.digex.com (Terry Fry) writes:
>
>From what I understand, a GG1 and some other unit were tested, the G fully

That would be the R-1.

>expected to be out-performed (something of its heritage, being a New haven
>based design..).  They however ignored politics and ran with that design.
>
>
>I would liked to have seen an American electric
>passenger loco, but I have come to respect and down right like the 


There were many "American" electric passenger locos: on the
Pennsy you had the O-1 (and sisters), the P-5 (and sisters),
the R-1, the GG-1, the DD-1. On the New Haven you had the "Jets"
(I don't recall the class designation). These all were designed with
passenger service intended. Even the lowly BB-1 (and B-1) were
intended for passenger service, albeit station and yard rather
than mainline work.

The New York Central also had several electric classes designed
for passenger work.

I expect some of the northwestern railroads with electrified
mains also had passenger electrics, but am not qualified to
make a definite statement.

Michael Stimac
-- 
Michael Stimac
(415) 355-8889
romeo@tymnet.com
These opinions are not necessarily anyone's but my own.
From: pgifford@reis36.alleg.edu (Pete Gifford)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Reading and Northern
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:56:28 GMT
Organization: Allegheny College

I noticed some information about the Reading and Northern Railrod in the  
current issue of Railfan Magazine.  I had not heard of this before.  Their  
engines seem to have a paint scheme similar to the old yellow and green  
Reading diesels.

Can anyone offer some information or suggestions about where to find  
information about this road?  The article mentioned expanded service to  
the Eastern PA coal regions.  Do they haul anthracite coal?  Does anyone  
still mine or use anthracite?  If so, I'll bet old Frank Gowan is spinning  
in his grave!

Pete Gifford
pgifford@alleg.edu
From: tom@drutx.ATT.COM (MaddenTC)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Diesel vs. Electric Locomotive Maintenance
Keywords: Re: Who killed the GG-1s?
Date: 16 Oct 92 19:32:11 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Denver

In article <1992Oct16.130045.3330@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, jadams@vixen.uucp (22475-adams) writes:
> I had heard (from a colleague at work) that the final death knell was the
> environmentally dangerous effect of disposing of the transformer oil
> in the GG1s

Maybe I'm missing some obvious point, but wouldn't there have been a
problem disposing of the PCB-laden transformer oil no matter when or
for what reason the GG-1s were set aside? Maybe the real issue was that
the GG-1s were mobile PCB carriers, with the attendant increased risk
of an "uncontrolled release to the environment" in a crash.

> which was laced with carcenogenic PCBs.  Can anyone corroborate or refute this?
> 
> Jack (John) Adams		| Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
> (908) 758-5372 {Voice}		| (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile}
> jadams@vixen.bellcore.com	| kahuna@attmail.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>          -- If it's a good idea, go ahead and do it.  It's much easier to 
> 	 apologize than it is to get permission. -- Grace Murray Hopper (1906-1992). 

____________________________________________________________________ 
Thomas C. Madden  tom@drutx.att.com  AT&T Bell Laboratories  Denver                                                  
These are my opinions only!! 
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: msb@sq.sq.com (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Tramway/trolley gauges
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 16:14:31 GMT

>   The Landport and Southsea Tramway Company was authorized in
>   1863 to lay a line from Portsmouth Town Station to Clarence Pier, a
>   distance of a little over a mile.  It was opened in 1865 with grooved
>   rails and a gauge of 4ft. 7 3/4in., this being chosen so that ordinary
>   railway wagons and carriages could use it.  Though there is no
>   evidence that in fact they did so ...

But this doesn't make sense, unless (a) the gauge is being measured in
a way different from railway practice, or (b) the wheels are riding on
the tracks in a nonstandard way.

I wonder if the gauge is being measured between the centers of the
grooves.  Railway practice, of course, is to measure between the
inside edges of the rails.  I wonder if this also accounts for the
conflicting citations of the Toronto gauge as 4'10" and 4' 10 7/8".
-- 
Mark Brader			"Great things are not done by those
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto		 who sit down and count the cost
utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com	 of every thought and act."  -- Daniel Gooch

This article is in the public domain.
From: rap@nnsgs50.nt.co.uk (Richard Porter)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: incommunicado
Date: 16 Oct 92 12:31:44 GMT
Organization: BNR Europe Limited
NNTP-Posting-Host: bnsgs50.nt.lon40.co.uk

Apologies to anyone who has tried to contact me recently, including
signalling mailing list. I have no access to net mail at the moment,
and news has only just been restored. This is due to the reorganisation
of our internal communications.

Richard Porter
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: pierson@cimcad.enet.dec.com (Dave Pierson)
Subject: Re: Diesel vs. Electric Locomotive Maintenance
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 17:34:09 GMT

In article <377@ccscola.Columbia>, kwyatt@ccscola.Columbia (Kershner Wyatt)
writes...
>>> >>3) The GG1 lasted decades and probably would still be used someplace
>>> >>   today if it weren't for the PCB problem in the transformers.
>>> >	(more stuff deleted)
> 
>Forgive my ignorance.  I wasn't aware that the GG1's had been taken out of
>service.  When did that happen?
	About 3 years ago.  (In the best tradition the demise was postponed
	several times...)

>I thought they were still working the corridor.  I expect that the metal
>fatigue referenced was a big contributor, but did the environmentalists go
after PCB's as well?
	Nothing for the "environmentalists" to do.  Its a matter of federal
	law, effectively.  The PCB's have to be handled certain ways.

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@msd27.enet.dec.com
"He has read everything, and, to his credit, written nothing."  A J Raffles
From: rambler@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Dan Meyer)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Empire Builder Lost? (was: LIRR Joke)
Date: 7 Oct 92 03:45:02 GMT
Organization: People-Net [pnet51], Minneapolis, MN.

lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>
>	Carl Sagan, in the _Broca's Brain_ chapter "Night-Walkers and
>Mystery-Mongers", tells us how he once asked a question about
>mysterious disappearances on the Dick Cavett show. He asked why is it
>that it is ships and airplanes that disappear, and not trains. To
>which Dick Cavett responded that "I can see you haven't waited for the
>Long Island Rail Road..."
>
>	Carl Sagan's point was that it is easy for a ship or an
>airplane to "disappear" in the middle of an ocean, while it is much
>harder for a train to become misplaced.

This supposedly happened, shortly after Amtrak took over the actual operation
of their own trains in this part of the country.  The westbound builder didn't
throw a manual switch to get on the BN line to the west coast, and ended up
traveling up some industrial trackage on the Minneapolis - St.Paul border.

when the train did't show up, the dispatcher got worried and called by radio,
asking about the train's whereabouts. they replied that they went through 
park junction about 20 minutes ago; the dispatcher said that they hadn't shown
up on his ctc machine so he asked somebody ( probably a frieght waiting for
amtrak to pass ) if they had seen the train. finally, the dispatcher asked the
amtrak crewmember to describe what they saw around them, and this is when they
figured out that they were seriously lost and took the train the wrong way!

-- Dan Meyer

Remember: " Buffalo never Oink " Seen on a South Dakota travel brocure.
Advertisment: Try the Railway Post Office , a railfan BBS ! (612) 377-2197.
UUCP: {crash tcnet}!orbit!pnet51!rambler
INET: rambler@pnet51.orb.mn.org
From: teague@acavax.lynchburg.edu
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: For Sale: 611,1218 & N/S,CSX videos
Date: 12 Oct 92 10:38:30 -0500
Organization: Lynchburg College

I am offering for sale two video tapes assembled from my private
collection.  All video was shot by me in the central Virginia area
over the last several years.

The first tape is all steam, mostly the N&W 611 and 1218 but also
includes rare pacing and runby video of the Chessie Safety Express (614)
shot in 1981 west of Lynchburg.  Also included in the first tape is a
1989 Roanoke-to-Lynchburg steam tripleheader (587,611,1218) along with
coverage of the Asheville NRHS convention.

The second tape is mostly N/S and CSX diesel action in this area along
with some Amtrak footage.  N/S footage includes many units still in
N&W or Southern paint, along with many Conrail and NYS&W runthru trains.

Camerawork is of high standard, with many tripod shots.  Original video
is shot on a mix of VHS, 8mm and Hi-band 8mm and was edited to an ED-Beta
master.  There are no graphics and there is no narration.  The tapes I am
selling are VHS with Hi-Fi sound and I am asking $39.95 apiece.  Each runs
over an hour and a half.  Postage and handling is $3.50.  (In addition to
VHS Hi-Fi, I can also produce a SuperBeta or ED-Beta copy - E-Mail me to
arrange such a copy).

Send your check or money order to:
	Kipp Teague
	5901 Rhonda Rd.
	Lynchburg VA  24502

Be sure to include your E-mail address with your order so that I may
advise you when your tape has been shipped.

E-mail inquiries to teague@acavax.lynchburg.edu
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: sathomas@athena.mit.edu (Stephen A Thomas)
Subject: Re:  Diesel vs. Electric Locomotive Maintenance
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 17:11:29 GMT

In my last posting I made the statement "It's hard to believe that anyone doesn't
know that the GG1 isn't running anymore" or something to that effect.  

I got myself into all sorts of trouble for a simple statement of suprise.  I
personally apologized to an obviously offended poster and I'll apologize publicly
for not considering the effect of my statement.  I have to say however that I
feel that a person should be able to put a little personality and feeling into a
posting without having to apologize for it.  I've gotten replies back to
questions I've asked in groups which treat me like I just fell off the proverbial
turnip truck.  But remember - none of us knows the background, personality,
education, etc. of other posters so we try to treat them like we'd treat a
friend;  in a casual, conversational manner.  Certainly there are things I don't
know about rail - I'm sure I'd be amazed at the things I don't know.  But, I
guess there are some things that some of us take for granted that we shouldn't. 
All this adds up to the possiblity of offending someone without even realizing it.

But this is a RAIL group not a philosophy group.

I agree with Terry that there is basically terrible coverage of the Northeast
Corridor.  I'm not sure of the figures, but Amtrak does a large percentage of its
business on the NEC - and I believe it even makes a profit (?).  Where is all the
coverage of the AEM7 that the new diesels seem to get?  If there ever was an
article on it, I haven't found it (and I've looked hard - now someone will tell
me "of course there's one in the (month)/(year) of Trains and you didn't see
it?").  Or how about the planned electrification/improvements to the NewHaven - 
Boston section?  Or about Amtrak's Pennsylvania service (Philly-Harrisburg under
electric power, but is it part of NEC, and does Amtrak use electrics on it
anymore?  I know they used E60CP's on it pulling Metroliners with dead motors for
a while)  There was one article in TRAINS about 1985(?) which did a good job on
going thru Corridor issues then, but certainly things have changed since then.

Could this be a Diesel conspiracy to keep the "scourge" of the "awful
European-like electrics" out of the public eye?  (note saracasm)  Or do the
publishers think that because there are no mountains to cross or no deserts to
fly thru that people wouldn't be interested in the pictures.(If that's true
they've never seen an AEM-7 pass over the Susquehanna river bridge in Maryland)
It's probably more that they just haven't had authors who are interested in
covering the Corridor.

STEVE THOMAS

MIT Aero/Astro