To: | <CBQ@yahoogroups.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es |
From: | "Edwardsutorik@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com> |
Date: | 12 Jan 2018 01:09:19 +0000 |
Authentication-results: | mta1004.groups.mail.ne1.yahoo.com from=yahoogroups.com; domainkeys=neutral (no sig); from=yahoogroups.com; dkim=permerror (bad sig) |
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=1515719369; bh=k8Da+5xBWJomH7mDSjV7y+U3P0oDliiDIlr+sSVy02Q=; h=To:References:In-Reply-To:From:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:Date:Subject:Reply-To:From:Subject; b=WnovDOvvIts4lzkkWQaJZ4KWaMixwYxu7ImyMyaamtcxekx9I29bMtUfKT7JuCZQhPsRTHwjoTEIHmbhBabsUU3paPfP2fDARPTTMoqBjbwj0RTiDXr1QYOjOsxg1QQGULQjypGUFnVmLex0O+EVkGksfFzGMe/nGI8S9uIMmyE= |
In-reply-to: | <5A57F8E5.7040207@rochester.rr.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: | <o2mdk9+jm9ull@YahooGroups.com> <9F02FF44-9685-4D70-97EC-12B8A00465B9@optonline.net> <o2op1b+j78ef9@YahooGroups.com> <033601d25577$eb86e0c0$c294a240$@comcast.net> <58505D8A.1070701@optonline.net> <456C314C-9716-422A-977B-66FC233512A3@aol.com> <p38s6u+1fbbor0@YahooGroups.com> <5A57F8E5.7040207@rochester.rr.com> |
Reply-to: | CBQ@yahoogroups.com |
Sender: | CBQ@yahoogroups.com |
I agree there is less wind resistance at the connection between when two E's are coupled back to back. But note that the car behind them has a goodly bit of flat frontal area. And it is hugely exposed by that facing nose. It's not just the engines that have wind resistance. I certainly can see that the engine house forces want to pick what was most convenient for them. And, with all of the units facing "properly", that number would be increased by elephant-style. There would be no juggling the wrong facing unit out from in front of the next one. ANY one would be facing correctly. I have no idea if Burlington elephant-style was some form of official policy. I was merely stating two possibilities explaining why it might have been a good idea. And, sometimes, management actually acts on a good idea. I am told. Ed Edward Sutorik
__._,_.___ Posted by: Edwardsutorik@aol.com __,_._,___ |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es, Edwardsutorik@aol.com [CBQ] |
---|---|
Next by Date: | [CBQ] Re: Elephant Style Es, David Leasure denverdave49@gmail.com [CBQ] |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es, Don Brown dbrown02@rochester.rr.com [CBQ] |
Next by Thread: | RE: [CBQ] Elephant Style Es, 'Tom Kline' TKline@airmail.net [CBQ] |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |