BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [CBQ] Re: Terminal Transfers

To: <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [CBQ] Re: Terminal Transfers
From: "'Douglas Harding' doug.harding@iowacentralrr.org [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 08:23:43 -0600
Delivered-to: unknown
Delivered-to: archives@nauer.org
Delivered-to: mailing list CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoogroups.com; s=echoe; t=1418307824; bh=wxLveMCbmYPjS++oMs5rYLS69GH3yiEMjGdY2GyoNkE=; h=To:References:In-Reply-To:From:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:Date:Subject:Reply-To:From:Subject; b=XLdjh1DRNY/viDwtbcZi09VeVOvvGhnnsmCmgAYLvMocbG1JDypkgyEJLJ4//lhWdV6zyGTjCGcbVtCWUyzchQRv3q0zclyKPrU7tztZEPwNqF/oRUpq6g8J19lgAkzhgFizYr20MYnB5iI37rExVOy+lJAnHA/Nw+hzdozYMzk=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=echoe; d=yahoogroups.com; b=Mf6qGo+ztklVK85Or/irtFu6rnRZWtaoyXWPiYXpmTjdnoBRbB+aHZUUlD4Gx131NS5sUMtqq1bTHWTU6HNVQzxndetuGgpA6QbwcmKUmUZERSMXRI6AJAX8dA1DFLghbMrX5B+ZI9xMCDwQBjzpH5opyxYLwFe/TxENHAboeUg=;
In-reply-to: <5A47B65C-A180-44A5-A9B8-7733E784843F@aol.com>
List-id: <CBQ.yahoogroups.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Mailing-list: list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com
References: <870FE976-7636-45E7-B656-7FBD5E80ADD7@aol.com> <m677b4+1k6lart@YahooGroups.com> <m69vi6+13fqe79@YahooGroups.com> <3C1ADFA4-75F1-4D58-86FA-5ED3BD9F1937@aol.com> <542FFB94-7744-4EDD-A14F-80BB9353EE36@aol.com> <087101d014f5$ebf290f0$c3d7b2d0$@iowacentralrr.org> <5A47B65C-A180-44A5-A9B8-7733E784843F@aol.com>
Reply-to: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Sender: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Thread-index: AQERwyueSCSsbxO5Fj8qNyU8TDQ6dwFF/ePAAg+1fIoBXVP9SAFMMI8QAWOjX1YB3jxd1529DGFQ


Leo, Pete’ answer came in just after my post. What he said is very similar to my first comment on this thread, and is my understanding of how transfers worked. What has me confused is the six month agreement. What was the agreement and how did it impact transfers?

 

 

From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CBQ@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 8:03 AM
To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Re: Terminal Transfers

 

 

Doug,

 

Please see Pete's email on the transfer practice. We're both saying the same thing,but I think he's got it clearer than me.

 

Pete, I swear I've read about the 6 month flipping, but now you have me wondering .........

Also sure seem to recall seeing eastern connections come to Cicero with transfer and also w/c lite. And yes saw them leave with transfers and w/c lite.

 

Leo Phillipp

Sent from my iPad


On Dec 10, 2014, at 9:52 PM, "'Douglas Harding' doug.harding@iowacentralrr.org [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

Leo I am still confused. I do not work for a railroad, so maybe I am missing something. If there is a six-month agreement in place that permits only one railroad to work a certain job, that makes sense, but only if that job does the work of both railroads. But what you have described sounds like only part of the work is being done. If the agreement for six months, allows railroad A to take cars to railroad B’s yard as a transfer run and returns lite, how do the cars from B’s yard get to A’s yard? A is returning lite, ie no cars.

 

You say Railroad B takes cars to A’s yard and returns lite. If each road returns lite, what purpose is there for a six month agreement? Unless it’s only purpose is to determine which railroad gets to deliver cars just prior to midnight. If that is the purpose of the six month agreement that was nowhere indicated in the original message, or subsequent messages.

 

 

From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CBQ@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 7:24 PM
To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Re: Terminal Transfers

 

 

Also this may help clarify the practice. Keep in mind the per diem rules; he who holds the car at midnight gets another days per diem charged to their account. So if A delivers a block of cars to B prior to midnight, the cars in B's yard are not going to make it to A's yard if B depends on A to get them there by midnight.

 

Leo Phillipp

Sent from my iPad


On Dec 10, 2014, at 7:13 PM, qutlx1@aol.com wrote:

Maybe I was unclear. It is my understanding. Supported by numerous photos in the various Q and Chicago focused books and also written material. The 6 month rule prevailed for many decades. Road A took a transfer to B and went home w/c lite. Road B took a transfer to A went home w/c lite.

Then after 6 months they flipped  who brought the cars to each other.

 

Leo Phillipp

 



Sent from my iPad


On Dec 10, 2014, at 11:23 AM, "runextra@gmail.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

>For many decades their was the 6 month agreement on terminal transfers. This applied to all terminals in North America... The agreement stated road A would deliver to road B a transfer and return to their terminal Caboose lite. After that road B would come to road A's terminal w/c lite and pick up the transfer. Of course the flip,side applied also. In essence transfer crews operated Way car lite half the day.

I got to thinking about the above statements and I don't see how that worked? Cars have to be transferred in both directions every day. As I said in my previous post, by the late 1960s we were hauling cars in both directions on transfer runs in Cincinnati. If at some time previous to that transfer crews were only hauling cars from their own yard to another yard then returning cab-hop to their own yard that means the other yard had to be doing the same thing at the same time or else no cars would ever go the reverse direction. So where does the 6 month rule come into play? I can see a 6 month rule if terminal A transfers cars in BOTH directions for 6 months then Terminal B transfers cars in BOTH directions for 6 months. That eliminates the cab-hops.
But cab-hops AND a 6 month rule makes no sense to me. Wh at am I missing?



__._,_.___

Posted by: "Douglas Harding" <doug.harding@iowacentralrr.org>



__,_._,___
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>