I am in agreement with Bob. I know similar splits have taken
places on other lists, and both of the lists become less interesting
because of it.
Certainly the Texas Zephyr (the Denver-Dallas version) along
Harry Hines Blvd. in Dallas was a very Burlington sight to behold.
So, today, is a BNSF freight curling around the Courtyard Inn
by Marriott in Boulder.
Not to mention the interesting view of the still-existing
grade for the Santa Fe's never-completed cutoff curving away
from the one-time C&S at Mount Dora (the cutoff used the C&S
between Clayton and Mount Dora).
Or the interesting instruction in the employee timetables
giving the equivalent C&S and FW&DC (later FW&D) milepost
numbers for the state line at Sixela/Texline, and the note
that the C&S operated over the FW&D into Texline. (Less than
two miles, as I recall...don't have the ETT timetable handy.)
(The yard limits were defined by C&S milepost at the
north end, the FW&D milepost at the south end.)
Or the beautifully manicured B-RI through central Texas
that we used to follow on a farm-to-market road for perhaps
100 miles before the central section of I-45 was completed
between Dallas and Houston.
And, yes, the heralds were all "Burlington Route."
Wes Leatherock
wleath@s...
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Bob Webber wrote:
> While I would be happy to set up a group for the C&S & the FW&D and Lines
> West, i wonder if it is needed.
>
> I haven't seen anyone complain about the content when there are notes on
> these topics, and I'm not sure they would be un-welcome. I hate to see
> splintered groups, because topics can be started on a very finite scope and
> become quite broad in nature. So, the answer to that is to subscribe to
> both groups. Which somewhat defeats the purpose.
>
> I could see topics ranging from the Denver Zephyr, to the Sam Houston or
> texas Zephyrs starting on the FW&D & C&S site be of common interest. Or
> the Colorados. Or the C&S 2-8-0s...
>
> Is there a compelling need? Will there be enough traffic? Will there be
> problems with information being in one when both would beneift?
|