BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [BRHSlist] Re: U25B's

To: BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [BRHSlist] Re: U25B's
From: "John D. Mitchell, Jr." <cbqrr47@y...>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2002 15:02:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-reply-to: <005801c2417f$deb4fb50$0f05460a@m...>
Add drainage to the things that are more important
than rail size. Frost heave and mud pumping, on
jointed rail were killers. Of course, it is all tied
together. You can't have good surface and line without
good drainage and vice versa! Ask any oldtime section
foreman, what the three most important things for good
track are and the answer will be: drainage, drainage,
and DRAINAGE. In the old days, it was "low joints and
high centers" all the time. The section hands spent a
good part of the time "nipping joints".
John D. Mitchell, Jr.
--- Russell Strodtz <vlbg@p...> wrote:
> Glen,
> 
> Was always my impression that the 90RA and 112TR
> were
> pretty good rail. Most of the line from Savanna to
> Prescott
> is 112TR. The 132RE seemed to shell a lot and
> needed a
> lot more grinding. I will acknowledge that 112RE
> was junk
> although most of the yard at Northtown was built
> with it.
> 
> Always thought that surface and anchoring were more
> important
> than rail size anyway.
> 
> BTW, the 75 mile Napier Sub Division now has 25 10
> or 25
> MPH slow orders on it. Running time is a little
> over 5 hours.
> That is sort of the way they do things on the
> Nebraska Division.
> 
> The Lester Sub Division is a mixture of 75 and 90
> and shuttle
> grain trains are operated on it with 286GWR cars. 
> Of course
> it is all 10 MPH.
> 
> On the line between Albia and Des Moines loaded
> grain trains
> have to be preceded by a track inspector.
> 
> Oh Well,
> 
> Russ
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "zephyr98072" <glenehaug@m...>
> To: <BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, 11 August, 2002 02:41
> Subject: [BRHSlist] Re: U25B's
> 
> 
> > It seems odd to me that the U-25B's were not
> allowed west of 
> > Sheridan, but I won't dispute it. The U-25B's
> were heavier than the 
> > previous four axle power, but not by much.
> > 
> > If they were not allowed all the way to Laurel,
> however, it was 
> > probably due to rail size and not deferred
> maintenance. This line 
> > was in decent enough shape for the limited traffic
> that it handled, 
> > but there was still a lot of 90# bolted rail in at
> least two long 
> > stretches between Sheridan and Huntley. The speed
> of six axle 
> > freight locomotives was reduced on the 90# rail.
> > 
> > Of course, no one contemplated what would happen
> to this railroad in 
> > the next few years. The unit coal trains tore the
> 90# and 112# 
> > bolted and burnt shale ballast up in a hurry.
> > 
> > Glen Haug
> > 
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>