Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CBQ\]\s+Double\s+Heading\s+Steam\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CBQ\]\s+Double\s+Heading\s+Steam\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [CBQ] Double Heading Steam (score: 1): Author: Ray bedard <tczephyr@hotmail.com>; Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:39:25 -0700; I have always wondered how the railroads, I mean the engineers & firemen, operated a double header. I know that each engineer operates his engine separate from the other engineer, but how did they co; /archives/BRHSLIST/2009-06/msg00116.html (12,665 bytes)
2. Re: [CBQ] Double Heading Steam (score: 1): Author: Jpslhedgpeth@aol.com; Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 17:57:06 -0400; Ray...I'm not an engineer...let alone a steam engineer....but I've read quite a few of the old RAILROAD MAGAZINES and have some idea of the procedures used....I don't have time now, but later this ev; /archives/BRHSLIST/2009-06/msg00118.html (13,364 bytes)
3. Re: [CBQ] Double Heading Steam (score: 1): Author: Jpslhedgpeth@aol.com; Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:12:13 -0400; All right let's have a try at the details of steam double heading and answer some of the specific questions originally asked on this post. What I'm positing here is what I recall from some of the old; /archives/BRHSLIST/2009-06/msg00124.html (19,595 bytes)
4. Re: [CBQ] Double Heading Steam (score: 1): Author: "Russ Strodtz" <normansen@groundcontrol.us>; Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:29:25 -0500; Correct.... Not by rule but the normal way it was done in the past. At current places some only use a one Engineer pusher. The have air setups that get it done and still run by rule with train still; /archives/BRHSLIST/2009-06/msg00125.html (12,719 bytes)
5. Re: [CBQ] Double Heading Steam (score: 1): Author: "Ralph W. Brown, Jr." <cbq682@grics.net>; Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:43:45 -0500; Reading about the use of the air brakes as a signal reminded me of something an old head engineer told me. Back before the crews had packsets, they would go south of Galesburg to the coal fields. I w; /archives/BRHSLIST/2009-06/msg00126.html (12,607 bytes)
6. Re: [CBQ] Double Heading Steam (score: 1): Author: "Russ Strodtz" <normansen@groundcontrol.us>; Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:53:55 -0500; That was not a rule by the IHB. Had no radios at all so that was the only moves that could be used. Radio agreement did not happen until Engineers got it in 1977. Even then many still did everything; /archives/BRHSLIST/2009-06/msg00128.html (13,039 bytes)
7. RE: [CBQ] Double Heading Steam (score: 1): Author: Ray bedard <tczephyr@hotmail.com>; Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 06:57:09 -0700; Pete, Thanks for the get detailed information. You left nothing unanswered. I appreciate yours and everyone elses responses. Ray _________________________________________________________________ Inse; /archives/BRHSLIST/2009-06/msg00131.html (22,566 bytes)
8. Re: [CBQ] Double Heading Steam (score: 1): Author: archie hayden <kliner@mywdo.com>; Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:02:18 -0500; Russ, I remember those days of no radios and the moves we made in the blind with only air and the engineer's knowledge of where he was. We would bring a train into the yard at East StLouis from Hanni; /archives/BRHSLIST/2009-06/msg00132.html (15,278 bytes)
9. Re: [CBQ] Double Heading Steam (score: 1): Author: "Russ Strodtz" <normansen@groundcontrol.us>; Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:48:24 -0500; Archie, All sounds good to me. The IHB had a few tricks they used that made it even safer and more easy. It took more time but the more time made the more money so why hurry. There were many IHB crew; /archives/BRHSLIST/2009-06/msg00134.html (15,209 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]