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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CBQ\]\s+Mainline\s+sidings\s+\?\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. [CBQ] Mainline sidings ? (score: 1): Author: "qutlx1@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 19:48:10 -0600; I have an operations question that's come to mind recently and all the men I once worked with who could answer are now gone. All along the Q mainline from Chicago to Denver were long sidings used for; /archives/BRHSLIST/2016-02/msg00133.html (12,153 bytes)
2. Re: [CBQ] Mainline sidings ? (score: 1): Author: "Jpslhedgpeth@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 23:04:16 -0500; Leo..I'll take a stab at your question.....I think the double track rules were like D251 etc. At least on the RI and I presume that it was the same on the Q. For example trains of the second class we; /archives/BRHSLIST/2016-02/msg00135.html (16,553 bytes)
3. Re: [CBQ] Mainline sidings ? (score: 1): Author: "Ed Pavlovic cbq168a@comcast.net [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 22:49:14 -0600; I have an operations question that's come to mind recently and all the men I once worked with who could answer are now gone. All along the Q mainline from Chicago to Denver were long sidings used fo; /archives/BRHSLIST/2016-02/msg00137.html (15,492 bytes)
4. Re: [CBQ] Mainline sidings ? (score: 1): Author: "qutlx1@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 23:10:40 -0600; I have an operations question that's come to mind recently and all the men I once worked with who could answer are now gone. All along the Q mainline from Chicago to Denver were long sidings used fo; /archives/BRHSLIST/2016-02/msg00138.html (16,257 bytes)
5. Re: [CBQ] Mainline sidings ? (score: 1): Author: "'John D. Mitchell, Jr.' cbqrr47@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 05:08:31 +0000 (UTC); Leo..I'll take a stab at your question.....I think the double track rules were like D251 etc. At least on the RI and I presume that it was the same on the Q. For example trains of the second class w; /archives/BRHSLIST/2016-02/msg00139.html (20,312 bytes)
6. Re: [CBQ] Mainline sidings ? (score: 1): Author: "qutlx1@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 23:24:21 -0600; Leo..I'll take a stab at your question.....I think the double track rules were like D251 etc. At least on the RI and I presume that it was the same on the Q. For example trains of the second class w; /archives/BRHSLIST/2016-02/msg00141.html (17,821 bytes)
7. Re: [CBQ] Mainline sidings ? (score: 1): Author: "Jpslhedgpeth@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 10:51:04 -0500; John...I think you and are as "knowlegable old heads" are on the same page and as you said.."Don't make this more complicated than it is. and your statement that classification status was irrelevant.; /archives/BRHSLIST/2016-02/msg00149.html (21,859 bytes)
8. Re: [CBQ] Mainline sidings ? (score: 1): Author: "'John D. Mitchell, Jr.' cbqrr47@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 00:49:03 +0000 (UTC); John...I think you and are as "knowlegable old heads" are on the same page and as you said.."Don't make this more complicated than it is. and your statement that classification status was irrelevant; /archives/BRHSLIST/2016-02/msg00154.html (26,661 bytes)
9. Re: [CBQ] Mainline sidings ? (score: 1): Author: "qutlx1@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 22:15:13 -0600; John...I think you and are as "knowlegable old heads" are on the same page and as you said.."Don't make this more complicated than it is. and your statement that classification status was irrelevant; /archives/BRHSLIST/2016-02/msg00158.html (29,635 bytes)
10. Re: [CBQ] Mainline sidings ? (score: 1): Author: "Jpslhedgpeth@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 11:18:22 -0500; Leo...Seems like this is one of those...."The Rulebook giveth, but the Special Instructions taketh away".....Kind of like the old saying which us Claim Agents used to use when confronted with a hypot; /archives/BRHSLIST/2016-02/msg00164.html (31,574 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]