BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CBQ] Re: Rail length

To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Re: Rail length
From: "John D. Mitchell, Jr." <cbqrr47@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 18:13:22 -0800 (PST)
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
Delivered-to: archives@nauer.org
Delivered-to: mailing list CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lima; d=yahoogroups.com; b=H4isvY3uHGljMtdF7p9/qioDv6MSSUkKPLWUGCBUUqRlTKGfkcLoqW84yBx7KlnHKIeZPole1pznHmcGsfdL9/gRAvBS4ce1n4LsQTlKw2bLEKYYE4ua6TOap1cLPIoS;
In-reply-to: <BAY106-DAV11F4A979DF6AF2E0E77AD8BBFD0@phx.gbl>
List-id: <CBQ.yahoogroups.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Mailing-list: list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com
Reply-to: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Sender: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Before about 1920, rail of all sizes was rolled to a
standard 33 ft. long to fit on the then typical 35 ft.
flat cars. After that, when 40 ft. flat cars (and
gondolas) became common, rail was rolled to 39 ft. The
Q had miles of 85# and 90# that was 39 ft. long. The
reason the double rail was 66ft. long was it was
"relay" rail with bolt hole ends cropped off. The
railroad used the long rail at highway crossing, among
other places. The tight fisted "Q" replaced some of
these crossing without a Burro crane, i.e. by hand.
Two or three section gangs would be bunched. It took
24-30 GOOD men to handle a 66' 90# rail.

--- GLEN HAUG <glenehaug@msn.com> wrote:

> Bolted rail of 100# or less was rolled in 33'
> lengths.  112# or greater was rolled in 39' lengths.
> 
> I had always thought that 110# was rolled in 39'
> lengths, because it is similar to 112#.  However,
> the Q had a standard plan to weld two 110# rails
> together to make longer rails, similar to the 78'
> rails they made using 112#TR and 129#TR.  I don't
> know how prevalent this longer 110# rail was used,
> because I never have seen any of it.  But the plan
> indicates that the completed 110# rail length is
> 66', so I can only assume 110# must have been rolled
> in 33' lengths.
> 
> Glen Haug
> 
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Robert Myers<mailto:rmyers7@mindspring.com> 
>   To:
> CBQ@yahoogroups.com<mailto:CBQ@yahoogroups.com> ;
>
rawolter@optonline.net<mailto:rawolter@optonline.net>
> 
>   Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 3:05 PM
>   Subject: [CBQ] Re: Rail length
> 
> 
>   Dick,
> 
>   > I'm modeling a stack of rails and ties on my
> layout. Anyone know what 
>   > the standard length of rail was before the days
> of welded rail? 
>   > Specifically, this will be placed alongside a
> yard. 
> 
>   39' was standard, but (re someone's comment of
> 33') shorter was fairly 
>   common.
> 
>   Old banged up rail would be pulled up to be relaid
> for spurs and 
>   secondary routes. IIRC, 3' was taken off to get
> rid of the worn joint 
>   areas. So 33' would be second relay.
> 
>   So if you want a stack of rail _and_ a
> conversation starter, build a 
>   stack of fresh looking heavy rail in 39' and
> stacks of lighter stock, 
>   heavily weathered at 36' and 33'.
> 
>   Bob
> 
> 
> 
>    
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
> 
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
We have the perfect Group for you. Check out the handy changes to Yahoo! Groups 
(http://groups.yahoo.com)




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:CBQ-digest@yahoogroups.com 
    mailto:CBQ-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


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