From: chalup@presto.ig.com (Michael Chalup)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation,rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Grade Separations (was Re: CalTrain scheduling musings)
Date: 11 Jan 93 09:16:39 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: IntelliGenetics, Inc., Mountain View, California USA

In article <01LM02pw31ca01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> czl30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Chris Lee) writes:
>In article <1993Jan5.131932.1468@ryn.mro4.dec.com> pierson@empror.enet.dec.com (dave pierson) writes:
>>
>>	While grade seperation with third rail may be a "good thing" (tm), it is
>>not necessary.  Both LIRR and NYCRR have operated with highway crossings at
>>grade thru thrid rail territory.  One simply leaves a longish gap.  (Works best
>>with EMU equipment...)  (This was true in the past,  Unknown if such crossings
>>remain...)
>
>I agree. You can see this all over southern England. But when I posted 			
>this I was told that nobody cared if they used dangerous  and unsafe
>practice over there. This is the USA after all.
>>
>>
>>thanks
>>dave pierson			|the facts, as accurately as i can manage,

If memory serves me correctly, the State of Connecticut has / had laws
prohibiting the use of third rail power distribution.  This legal
situation came out of some experieces on early New Haven branchline
electrifications from around the turn of the century.  The prohibition
was one of the factors that caused the New Haven to adopt
catenary-supplied 11 KV AC for their mainline electrification program.
Info from a reprinted (Westinghouse?) book on the New Haven
electrification program originally issued ~ 1920.  Will dig up the
reference if desired.

Practices in California regarding 'protecting' the public from the
third rail varied tremendously depending on the line.  The extremes
ranged from completely grade-separated and securely fenced (Bay Bridge
Key System, BART, etc.) to rather unprotected rural interurban ROW
(example: Northern Electric / SN, CCT).

I grew up on Long Island and was in elementary school when the LIRR
extended electrification out the Pt. Jefferson branch in the late
1960's.  The railroad sent a rep to schools in all the communities
where the project was occuring to warn the 'kiddies' about the lethal
nature of the new third rail.  Still remember the assembly where the
guy showed the remains of a bicycle that had gotten mostly vaporized
by 600 VDC at some very large number of amps.  Made a large
impression!

Somehow, given the length of the San Francisco / San Jose route, the
urban nature of where the line runs through the center of many
Penisula communities, and the large amount of at-grade ROW, I imagine
that when Caltrain electrification does occur it will be using
catenary-supplied, high voltage (25 KV) line frequency (60 HZ)
traction power.  Not sure what's the weight penalty of having to include
a step-down transformer and rectifier pack per MU / locomotive as
compared to 600 VDC traction, but you should be able to save a pile on
the 10-15+ substations a DC line would require.  Gee, now I sound like
an ad for Westinghouse circa 1910!

			Happy (electric) Railroading,
			Mike Chalup
		
			Part-time motorman
			Part-time brakeman
			Part-time electrician
			Western Railway Museum
			Rio Vista Junction, California
Newsgroups: ba.transportation