Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CBQ\]\s+No\s+way\s+to\s+run\s+a\s+RR\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CBQ\]\s+No\s+way\s+to\s+run\s+a\s+RR\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [CBQ] No way to run a RR (score: 1): Author: "qutlx1@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 21:35:27 -0500; Adding to Steves comment about the test to convert the mainline from AuroraGalesburg to single track while EHH, was Supt of the combined Chgo and Aurora Div. I seem to recall two distinct stories aro; /archives/BRHSLIST/2017-07/msg00192.html (11,047 bytes)
2. Re: [CBQ] No way to run a RR (score: 1): Author: "STEVEN HOLDING sholding@sbcglobal.net [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 03:02:27 +0000 (UTC); Adding to Steves comment about the test to convert the mainline from Aurora- Galesburg to single track while EHH, was Supt of the combined Chgo and Aurora Div. I seem to recall two distinct stories; /archives/BRHSLIST/2017-07/msg00193.html (15,733 bytes)
3. Re: [CBQ] No way to run a RR (score: 1): Author: "Don Brown dbrown02@rochester.rr.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 23:25:32 -0400; I don't doubt the first one a bit. However I was at one time a qualified track inspector and don't recall offhand that the FRA had any regs on tonnage. The various parameters of track maintenance d; /archives/BRHSLIST/2017-07/msg00194.html (14,935 bytes)
4. Re: [CBQ] No way to run a RR (score: 1): Author: "LZadnichek@aol.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>; Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:23:34 -0400; July 31, 2017 Group - EHH has replied to the Railway Age editorial criticizing his actions at CSX. For the retired/active professional railroaders on this List, here it is: http://www.railwayage.com/; /archives/BRHSLIST/2017-07/msg00215.html (14,938 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]