|
Glen The neat part about Congress Park was when we would hump cars out the west end of the yard using the North Wye as a lead with the loco down and around the wye. We would get 300-500 cars a day thru that interchange point in 73-74. That is where I first saw the slab side frames of the six wheel U-boats. It was cool to watch the action of the slabs moving up
the down going thru the switches. Wonder what it did at high speed? Steve in SC former operator at Congress Park On Sunday, December 7, 2014 5:39 PM, "'Charlie
Vlk' cvlk@comcast.net [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com> wrote: Glen- Thanks for the information. I think the calculations are off if you used the current or even post- 1960 figures for the bridge elevation. At some point the bridges were raised over the IHB from their original position. The IHB undercut a number of the tracks under the spans to accommodate autoracks in the late 1950s/early 1960s. The tracks in front of the Congress Park Station was originally even with the floor level of the station. When the CH&W was extended north of the CB&Q the track was raised in front of the station necessitating a number of steps up to the platform/track level. The switch for the South interchange track was at that time west of the front of the station. After a wreck in
1918 destroyed the front of the station a subway under the tracks was installed to provide access to the platforms and the mains and interchange track were raised to clear the subway. It may be at that time the bridge was raised. I would guess that the concrete caps on top of the original stone piers and abutments raised the bridge a good 3-4 feet. The testimony from the CB&Q at the time of the CH&W/CB&Q dispute over crossing at grade stated that the run up to LaGrange was the ruling grade on the CB&Q east of the Mississippi and that trains would not be able to make it up the grade after having to stop for traffic if there was an interlocking at that point. I have an early (1917 or so) AW Johnson photo taken at the bridge which shows it in its original configuration. Thanks, Charlie Vlk From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CBQ@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 4:06 PM To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com Subject: [CBQ] IHB Undercrossing at Congress Park This information may be of interest to the group, but is primarily posted for the benefit of Charlie Vlk.
Charlie and I had a conversation at one of the recent BRHS meets about the profile and grade that likely existed through Congress Park before Bridge 13.44 was built over the IHB. While doing some research of some CB&Q bridge records a while back at the BNSF Structures Department in Kansas City, I ran across an agreement dated February 2, 1897, between CB&Q and Chicago, Hammond and Western (predecessor to IHB). This agreement covered the construction of new Bridge 13.44 by CB&Q over the IHB, which had received permission by the Village of LaGrange to extend it's tracks through the the village. There was no crossing at grade between CB&Q and CH&W or IHB prior to this agreement. I wasn't allowed to copy the agreement, but noticed that it required the CB&Q to raise it's existing grade 8.5' at the location of the proposed bridge. Looking at the track
profile, the CB&Q tracks were at, or very nearly at, the existing (today's) ground line at Maple Avenue in Brookfield, and at the LaGrange Road crossing in LaGrange. I arbitrarily lowered the elevation at Bridge 13.44 by 8.5', and then re-calculated the average grade that would have existed prior to 1897. The results were 0.26% ascending westward from Maple Avenue to the IHB bridge, and 0.62% ascending westward from the bridge to LaGrange Road. The 0.62% grade might at first be considered steep for the suburban territory, but actually would have been similar to the existing westward grade in places between Highlands and Westmont (and less than the grade between Canal Street and Union Avenue). Glen Haug __._,_.___ Posted by: STEVEN HOLDING <sholding@sbcglobal.net> __,_._,___ |