- 1. Re: [BRHSlist] Fwd: [BNlist] NCL detour on MILW (score: 1)
- Author: "Karl L Rethwisch" <karlre@r...>
- Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 13:16:05 -0700
- I do not respond as an expert as to the route that the detoured train was expected to take. I do respond, however, as an expert in the need for a properly oriented lead unit in the event the power ha
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2001-01/msg00273.html (10,030 bytes)
- 2. Re: [BRHSlist] Fwd: [BNlist] NCL detour on MILW (score: 1)
- Author: Ed DeRouin <PIXELS@A...>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:15:54 -0600
- Al and Others: Thanks for the cross post. It is a good reminder, especially for those of us with a halftimers issue. The myth is that the Q always ran E units elephant style. The reality is that elep
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2001-01/msg00285.html (8,383 bytes)
- 3. Re: [BRHSlist] Fwd: [BNlist] NCL detour on MILW (score: 1)
- Author: "M. Thayer" <zephyr@k...>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:19:58 -0600
- Semi-elephant-style was inevitable when one remembers that the BR only owned 5 passenger B units, all E-5s (3 for the CB&Q, one each for the C&S and FW&D)(unless one includes the two shovel-nosed B's
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2001-01/msg00287.html (7,545 bytes)
- 4. Re: [BRHSlist] Fwd: [BNlist] NCL detour on MILW (score: 1)
- Author: Ed DeRouin <PIXELS@A...>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:16:33 -0600
- Sorry 'bout dropping a number. The year was 1958. ed
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2001-01/msg00289.html (7,259 bytes)
- 5. Re: [BRHSlist] Fwd: [BNlist] NCL detour on MILW (score: 1)
- Author: Paul/Celine Kossart <kozys@t...>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:10:09 -0600
- Reliable sources have told me of a memo issued in the fifties directing the preferred order of the E units. Two, back to back; three outer units face outward, middle either way; four, outer units out
- /archives/BRHSLIST/2001-01/msg00315.html (7,440 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu