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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CBQ\]\s+Re\:\s+CBQ\s+Commuter\s+Operations\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [CBQ] Re: CBQ Commuter Operations (score: 1): Author: "William" <TrainGG1@aol.com>; Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 08:19:18 -0600; Regarding Scott Walker's inquiry regarding CB&Q suburban operations. It is true that CB&Q got the first bi-level (or gallery) cars -- although if you read the C&NW's promotional material from the mid; /archives/BRHSLIST/2011-06/msg00133.html (11,729 bytes)
2. Re: [CBQ] Re: CBQ Commuter Operations (score: 1): Author: STEVEN HOLDING <sholding@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 10:22:06 -0700 (PDT); To add to Bill's text See Railway Age April 21, 1958 "CNW Plans 'Push-Pull' Commuting" Bilevel cars would seat 172vs 235 on the Q. As Operator at Aurora Tower the last half of 1973 most of the dinkys; /archives/BRHSLIST/2011-06/msg00134.html (12,362 bytes)
3. Re: [CBQ] Re: CBQ Commuter Operations (score: 1): Author: "cvlk" <cvlk@comcast.net>; Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 20:30:11 -0500; Another reason for the CB&Q not jumping into push-pull and HEP was the pooling of Zephyr power with the commuter operations..... they didn't want to add any non-standard stuff to the fleet of E8s and; /archives/BRHSLIST/2011-06/msg00137.html (10,472 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]