HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.railroad

Andrew Waugh writes:

> To answer the original question, however, it was definitely U.S.
> railroad practice (at least until the introduction of CWR) to
> provide expansion gaps at the end of each rail length and to allow
> rails to expand and contract as necessary.

The use of clearance between rails resulted from a misunderstanding
of rail buckling in hot weather.  In fact it occurred on any average
day as well except that the symptoms pointed toward thermal
expansion.  You will notice that all new rail laid these days is
longitudinally anchored at as many as every other crosstie in some
cases.  The cause of rail buckling in the days after anglebars with
spike holes ended (long ago) rails moved relatively freely under the
rolling action of trains similarly to cookie dough under a rolling
pin if you roll only one way.  Rail piles up at the next switch
because these cannot move.  Buckling invariably occurs at such a
rail feature.

> There is actually a subtle difference between angle bars and
> splice bars.  Splice bars are flat steel bars which lie against
> the web of the rail.  Angle bars, a latter development, are
> similar to splice bars but the bottom angles out and sits on the
> foot of the rail.  This makes the joint more rigid. In Victoria,
> we use 'fishplate' for both types.

Neither kind of angle bar makes a strong joint as is evident from
the depression of rails at rail joints.  The rail profile is a fairly
efficient I-beam and since the bending stiffness of a such a beam is
roughly proportional to the cube of its height, angle bars that have
a height of about half the rail are about eight times more flexible
than the rail.  The stress at this junction is severe and highly
concentrated.  I am amazed that any mainline is still operated with
this kind of rail today.  The local "high iron" of this type looks
like so many arched rails with hinges at their ends.  This is a
common sight in telephoto shots down the track.

> According to the PWI book, during a typical yearly routine for a
> track gang, they would spend about 3 weeks greasing the
> fishplates.  In addition to greasing the fishplates and bolts, the
> gang would check the ends of the rails for cracks, burns, etc.
> They would also adjust the expansion gaps if necessary.

This must be from the days of undocumented foreign labor when such
useless activities were the norm.  The far greater problem was in in
some cases still is maintaining track circuits with rail bonds.
The best solution to this was the old method with two rigid wire
inserted through the neutral axis of the rail web beyond the ends of
the angle bar with a 3/4 coil for elasticity and threaded behind the
angle bar.  These seldom failed but were inordinately expensive.
Modern signaling avoids track circuits anyway.

Welded rail, today is generally joined at a central welding site and
brought to the installation site for in place welding that is
still done by the Thermit or Boutet method although mobile
resistance butt welding machines are the preferred method.

jobst_brandt@hplabs.hp.com
From: elw4@po.CWRU.Edu (Evan L. Werkema)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: 79mph
Date: 28 Jan 1993 17:28:23 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: elw4@po.CWRU.Edu (Evan L. Werkema)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, roma@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Jon Roma) says:

>The ICC had ordered signal improvements in the past, notably the 1922 order
>that required a number of large railroads to install cab signals on one
>crew district.  However, the 1947 order marked the first time the ICC
>issued a blanket order regulating train speeds -- prior to that time, 
>speeds had been entirely at the discretion of the railroad operating
>department.  A more recent regulation sets standards for the physical
>track structure for various ranges of operating speeds.
>
>The 1947 ICC order intended to improve rail safety by mandating new signal
>and cab signal installations.  The net result was the lowering of speed
>limits on many roads who were unwilling to make the huge investment for
>the benefit of comparatively few passenger trains.  A number of the major
>roads (Chicago & North Western, Santa Fe, etc.) did install cab signals
>in order to maintain existing passenger train timings.

  Santa Fe, to my knowledge, only had one section of cab signals, on the
Illinois Division between Fort Madison, IA and Pequot, IL.  Its installation
was mandated by the ICC in 1925, and, although the order was rescinded in
1928 (just after the installation was completed!) the system lasted into the
1970's.  
  
-- 
   ----__________,,_-------     -------_,,___________----     
  _IooI ==          ~~~~~~I     I~~~~~~           == IooI_   I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I
|_II__I____Santa Fe_______I_| |_I_____Evan Werkema___I__II_| Ielw4@po.cwru.eduI
`-~O==O~=============~O==O~-`~`-~O==O~==============~O==O~-`~~o==o~~~~~~~~o==o~
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: roma@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Jon Roma)
Subject: Re: 79mph
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 05:50:50 GMT

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.

Your assumption is correct.  On June 17, 1947, the Interstate Commerce
Commission ordered United States railroads ``... to install on that part
or parts of its lines over which any passenger or freight train is operated
at a speed of 80 or more miles per hour an automatic train stop or automatic
continuously controlled cab signal system ...''

This order also provided that an automatic block signal system be installed
on lines ``over which any passenger train is operated at a speed of 60 or
more miles per hour, or any freight train is operated at a speed of 50 or
more miles per hour.''

Had the Commission used the wording ``in excess of 80 miles per hour'' and
so on, the speed limits would have been more natural.  When the ICC
signaling order went into effect, most railroads placed their maximum speed
at 79 mph.  Other roads opted to round the legal speed limit down to 75 and
one working timetable I have uses a maximum speed of 78 mph for some
reason!

The ICC had ordered signal improvements in the past, notably the 1922 order
that required a number of large railroads to install cab signals on one
crew district.  However, the 1947 order marked the first time the ICC
issued a blanket order regulating train speeds -- prior to that time, 
speeds had been entirely at the discretion of the railroad operating
department.  A more recent regulation sets standards for the physical
track structure for various ranges of operating speeds.

The 1947 ICC order intended to improve rail safety by mandating new signal
and cab signal installations.  The net result was the lowering of speed
limits on many roads who were unwilling to make the huge investment for
the benefit of comparatively few passenger trains.  A number of the major
roads (Chicago & North Western, Santa Fe, etc.) did install cab signals
in order to maintain existing passenger train timings.

There is today very little cab signal territory left in the United States.
Currently, there is some debate going on as to whether the 79 mph limit
is obsolete and whether it should be adjusted or eliminated.

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!

The flip side is, of course, those countries that require some sort of
cab signaling system on EVERY line having passenger trains.
-- 
Jon Roma
Computing and Communications Services Office,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Internet:  roma@uiuc.edu      	UUCP:      uunet!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!roma
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: X2000 on CNN, Film at 11:00 (and 12:00 and 1:00...)
Date: 28 Jan 93 21:45:00 GMT
Organization: LLNL


	I saw that CNN blurb also.

	The CNN folx even went so far as to show computer-graphics
diagrams of the swiveling axles of the X2000 trainset that enable it
to go around curves more easily. CNN also showed some tilting of a
stationary car. Inside the train, the ride seemed smooth; at least the
camera's view didn't bounce around.

	They also showed a map of possible future high-speed
corridors. It was shown only briefly and I caught only part of it.

	The Pacific Northwest: Portland -- Seattle -- Vancouver

	The California Coast: Santa Barbara -- Los Angeles -- San Diego

	were the ones that I caught.

-- 
/Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
/lip@s1.gov
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: elw4@po.CWRU.Edu (Evan L. Werkema)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Old Trains magazine
Date: 24 Jan 1993 00:08:54 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: elw4@po.CWRU.Edu (Evan L. Werkema)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


  I was looking through a 1957 Trains magazine I have recently.  It's
really amazing how much has changed in the railroad scene since then.  The
cover has a picture of the X-plorer train with the cover story being, "How
Fast is the New York Central?" referring to NYC's new passenger timetable. 
The ad on the inside front cover is from EMD itself, toutting their 
remanufacture of Inland Steel's SC's into SW900's.  A few pages on is an ad 
for the Erie Railroad, "It's the men who make the Erie DEPENDABLE!"  There are
also ads for Monon and L&N.  In the editorial section, they talk about Rock 
Island's new "Convert-A-Frate" piggyback cars.  The article begins, "If the 
railroads don't come up with an ideal piggyback car, it won't be for lack of 
trying."  It's hard to imagine piggyback was ever experimental.  In the 
Railroad News Photos, the Virginian's E33 "bricks" were just being delivered.
CB&Q 4000, "Big Alice the Goon," was running a fan trip for the Railroad Club 
of Chicago.  GE had just built its first UD18, the very first GE road freight 
diesel.  And Pennsy 2-10-0 had somehow gotten away and crashed through the 
back wall of the Elmira, NY roundhouse.  The Photo Section is mostly NKP Berks,
with the heading "Steam: still going strong."  There's also a picture of a Boy
Boy meeting a Challenger in Wyoming, another view of "Big Alice," and, oh yes,
one token shot of a B&O F7.  The back cover is an ad for N&W's passenger trains.

  David P. Morgan was still editor, and the magazine's cover price was 50 cents.

-- 
   ----__________,,_-------     -------_,,___________----     
  _IooI ==          ~~~~~~I     I~~~~~~           == IooI_   I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I
|_II__I____Santa Fe_______I_| |_I_____Evan Werkema___I__II_| Ielw4@po.cwru.eduI
`-~O==O~=============~O==O~-`~`-~O==O~==============~O==O~-`~~o==o~~~~~~~~o==o~
From: S_KOEHLER@iravcl.ira.uka.de (|S| Tobias Koehler)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: turntables
Date: 28 Jan 1993 12:59:25 GMT
Organization: University of Karlsruhe (FRG) - Informatik Rechnerabt.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: irav1.ira.uka.de
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.23

In <59221@dime.cs.umass.edu> pop@cs.umass.edu (Robin Popplestone) writes:
 
> > 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?
 
> The english term has always been "turntable". I presume T. Koehler was
> transliterating a german term.

That is right. The German term is `Drehscheibe'. This term was chosen because
the first turntables were plate-shaped. I didn't want to say `turntable',
because I thought that this means `record player' ....

So long

Tobias B. Koehler

>>>> NO HATRED IN THE WILD SOUTH <<<<
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: petit@augsburg.edu (Noel J. Petit)
Subject: Info Req: Fairmont Speeders
Followup-To: rec.railroad
Organization: Augsburg College
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 19:27:42 GMT


Would like info on Fairmont model F-7979 section motor car. I am restoring
it for the Minnesota Transportation Museum, to be used at the Osceola and
St. Criox Valley Railroad. Would like technical and historical info. 

Noel J. Petit
Associate Professor of Computer Science
Augsburg College, Minneapolis, MN 
(petit@augsburg.edu) 612-330-1061
From: pierson@empror.enet.dec.com (dave pierson)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: NEC
Date: 28 Jan 93 17:10:26 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <1k70i8INNmss@digex.digex.com>, zbang@access.digex.com (Carl P.
Zwanzig) writes...
>Unless I'm mistaken, the entire NEC uses 11kv AC 25Hz.
	Well, this gets into the "Argument" about what is the corridor.  The
	thru route, DC-Boston USED to be 11KV/25Hz DC-NH, albeit on two
	different RRs.  A portion of the ex NHRR is now 60Hz commercial power
	(roughly Woodlawn-NH, tho they are extending third rail partially,
	so Woodlan is no longer right.)

>  This, of course, is a pain to the local power utilities because they have to
>maintain 25Hz generating and transmission equipment.
	The generating equipment, while on power compnay property, is "owned" by
	the RR (I expect AMTRAK picked up ownership when the bought the
	corridor).  The transmission lines are largely on RR proerty, and, i
	suspect all RR owned and maintained.  The rate paid the power companies
	is low, but i doubt the power companies are loosing money.  (same
	applies to the large rotary frequency convertors that are also part of
	the system.)

>  If you ride the WashDC Metro red line, you can follow the power lines from
>the NEC mainline into PEPCO's Benning Road Station (oil fired boilers?).
	hmmmm  I know that between Bridgeport and NH, the local power company
	rents tower space and runs 100odd kv transmission circuits on the rr
	catenary supports.  This dates to the 30's.  The wiring has nothing to
	do with the RR, it was just a hand place to run the wires.  I don't know
	if the DC area lines are the same, or if there is a 25 Hz feed there.

>There is 1500 vdc and 600vdc around for "local" service, but all long-haul is
>AC.
	I don't think there was ever any 1500Vdc on the corridor, proper.
	Lackawanna used to have some commuter service at 3KVDC in NJ, which
	terminated in Hoboken.  This was converted to 25KVAC/60Hz about ten
	years back.  There was not an electrifed connection to the NEC proper,
	tho that has been proposed over the years.

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
From: andre@king.slc.mentorg.com (Andre' Hut)
Subject: Re: Chicago Burlington and Quincy (was: the proposed T line in Boston
Organization: /slc/home/andre/.organization
Date: 25 Jan 93 14:22:21

In article <1993Jan25.170627.27315@news.uiowa.edu> jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes:
   >From article <1993Jan25.093203.2635@merrimack.edu>, by gemmellj@merrimack.edu:
   >> Hi, I have a question on the name of an old railroad.
   >> Was the Burlington, Chicago, and Quincy the name of an old rr?

   >The Chicago Burlington and Quincy is one of the corporate ancestors of the
   >Burlington Northern, a very large railroad by any standard.  The other
   >ancestor of today's Burlington is the Great Northern.

Actually BN is the result of the merger of the Northern Pacific, Great Northern and
the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy.  Initially, the new name was going to be
the Great Northern Pacific and Burlington, but they settled on Burlington Northern.
The BN also is composed of some smaller roads too, like Colorado & Southern,
Forth Worth & Denver, Spokane Portland & Seattle and
St. Louis-San Francisco (Frisco).
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
My opinions are solely my own, and do not necessarily reflect those
of my employer.

Andre' Hut       andre@slc.mentorg.com  or  utah-cs!caeco!andre
Mentor Graphics, Suite 300, 5295 South 300 West, Murray, Utah 84107
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: Re: European track
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:10:52 GMT

In article <63601@mimsy.umd.edu>, mangoe@cs.umd.edu (Charley Wingate) writes:
> It might be pointed out that the range of AVERAGE daily temperature in the
> american plains is on the order of 100 degrees F (~55 degrees C).

Nope.  Try ~38 degrees C.  Recall that: C(F) = (F - 32) / 1.8.

-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
From: nickn@eskimo.com (Nick Nussbaum)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: NE Corridor
Date: 26 Jan 93 04:40:11 GMT
Organization: -> ESKIMO NORTH (206) For-Ever <-


I can't offer the detail that Len provided, but for contrast consider
that in 1937 the PRR operated 645 scheduled trains during a typical
24 hour period in and out of Pennsylvania Station in New York City.
.... Michael Stimac
  
Any idea how many trains were running out of Grand Central Station at
that time? I assume that a fair number of the new trains are descendants
of trains that stopped there.
-- 
Nick Nussbaum		nickn@eskimo.com	PO 4738 Seattle,WA 98104
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: jbvb@vax.ftp.com  (James B. VanBokkelen)
Subject: Re: Question/ the proposed T line in Boston
Nntp-Software: PC/TCP NNTP
Keywords: MBTA extensions
Reply-To: jbvb@ftp.com
Organization: FTP Software, Inc., North Andover, Massachusetts
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:31:42

In article <1993Jan25.093203.2635@merrimack.edu> gemmellj@merrimack.edu writes:

    ....  Last Sat. I read in the Boston Globe that the MBTA was going to
    constuct another subway line that begins in South Station, goes to
    Boston City Hospital (through Roxbury), continue towards the Longwood
    Medical District, and go to Cambridge.

This idea has been around for years - A routing proposed in the '70s
was from South Boston to Dudley, up Ruggles St. to the BU Bridge, then
along the CR RoW past MIT to Lechmere.  A variant went underground
along Main St. to allow an interchange with the Red line at Kendall,
then along 3rd St.

The current requirement that any trip from one quadrant of metro Boston
to another go through at least one of four downtown interchange stations
is most of the motivation (the Boylston St. tunnel is seriously
overcapacity with current 2-car LRV train limits and the increased
signal spacing).  The new thing in this proposal was the terminal at
South Station, presumably a political concession to Roxbury residents,
who've been hurting ever since the Orange line was moved away.

	.... Wouldn't it make sense if this line terminated
    at the Bodwen (sp?) subway station on the Blue Line ...

This would require another Charles River crossing, presumably underwater
due to the heavy use of the river and the land on either side just
there.  I think this is unlikely due to $$.  The crossing at BU is
likely to be a bridge, since the RR already has one there.

It has also been proposed for quite a while that the Blue Line be
extended from Bowdion 1/4 mile down Cambridge St. to meet the Red Line
at Charles/MGH.  This has gotten enormous NIBMY resistance from MGH and
Beacon Hill residents.  Much of the necessary tunnel is already there,
dating from the days when the harbor tunnel was used by trolleys.

    ... Shouldn't this new line just be an extension of the Blue Line???

They want to use Light Rail to reduce the cost - I don't know if they'd
actually gotten themselves worked up enough to consider grade crossings
as a real possibility, though.  If one was to build it to heavy-rail
standards, you'd do better using Red line clearances (wider, longer cars)
and have it share equipment via South Bay.

Anyway, I've always kind of hoped that the Blue line would someday be
extended out through Somerville to W. Medford or Winchester via the
Boston & Lowell RoW...

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: pierson@empror.enet.dec.com (dave pierson)
Subject: NYNH&HRR & Penn Station, NYC
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: 27 JAN 93 08:30:36    

	OK, i Cheated and looked it up.  New Haven RR Power, 1838-19??
(it was a friend's book...).

The first two clases of NH electrics on the thru route to Penn Station were the
300's and the 351's.  Neither ran thru, the trains changed power "near
Sunnyside"  (probably near Harold.)  After the catenary went up into Penn
Station, NH power ran thru, being equipped with PRR ATS for that purpose.
(Still puzzling about the rake off blocks, tho...)

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
From: cal@ee.ryerson.ca (Calvin Henry-Cotnam)
Subject: Re: used RDCs
Organization: Ryerson Polytechnical Institute, Toronto
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 23:06:38 GMT

CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CZ94) writes:
>CN sold its RDCs to VIA Rail in 1978, as did CP.

CP still has 2 RDC's, #90 (RDC-1 nee #9069) and
#91 (RDC-2 nee #9108) used for maintenance of way crew
transport.  #91 has been (still is?) used as a railway
technology exhibit car.  They are usually stationed at
the Toronto Yard in Agincourt.


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: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Why is SEPTA so horrible?
Organization: LLNL
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 01:55:32 GMT


	I've seen some comments about how the Southeastern
Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA: the Philadelphia area)
is supposedly one of the worst managed systems around. How is that???
-- 
/Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
/lip@s1.gov
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
From: ajw@squid.mel.dit.CSIRO.AU (Andrew Waugh)
Subject: Re: South Short railroad crash
Organization: CSIRO, Division of Information Technology, Melbourne
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 22:11:51 GMT

In article <1993Jan28.124305.13301@ulysses.att.com> smb@research.att.com (Steven Bellovin) writes:
>I just saw a news story that said that the operator of the South
>Shore Railroad -- the one that experienced a crash on a gantlet
>trestle -- was warned that their signal system was susceptible to
>false green signals.  Apparently, the FRA told them that their
>AC system could have such problems, so they're in the process of
>converting to DC.  Can anyone explain that?

Signalling circuits usually consist of long wires. These wires
are susceptible to induced currents from EMR. This is particularly
so on electrified lines where large traction currents are present.
A suitably large current could cause the signalling relays to
incorrectly pick up, showing a false clear.

To prevent this signalling equipment on electrified lines must be
immunized. One common way of doing this is by using AC circuits
and relays and designing the relays to respond only to currents of
a particular frequency. This frequency is chosen to be different to
that used for the traction current (and any harmonic of it).

(Readers may remember the kerfufle about the Channel tunnel
locomotives and signalling equipment in the U.K. The unsafe condition
was that the solid state traction control equipment on the
locomotives could generate a whole range of AC frequencies for the
motors; including the frequency used by the signalling system.)

Another possiblity -- possibly coming more into favour these days --
is to use DC relays and to design the relays (or the circuits) to
be immune to AC current.

Whole books (well, booklets :-) have been written about signal
immunization.

andrew waugh
Newsgroups: rec.railroad