[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: (erielack) June Photo

Ed, Paul,

A group of the SDs, 3621 to 3653 I think, purchased under Dereco were
equipped for dual control.  These units certainly would not have had any
speed restrictions imposed upon them while running long hood forward.  That
notwithstanding, I don't recall ever seeing anything in print (ETT, Safety
Rules, etc.) about any restrictions on other units.  I have a photo
(somewhere?), I think in May 1974, of a WB piggyback through Rutherford, NJ,
with a pair of SDs running long hood forward.  It ran west during the
morning rush hour.

Regards,

Vinnie

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tupaczewski, Paul R (Paul)" <paultup_@_lucent.com>
To: "'Montgomery, Edward T'" <Edward.Montgomery_@_fcps.edu>;
<erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 1:03 PM
Subject: RE: (erielack) June Photo


> > Here's another thought on the May Picture.
>
> You mean the June photo, right? :)
>
> > First of all, I never saw
> > the SDP"s ever running long hood forward in the New York area.  They
> > probably did but it seemed to be more common in Ohio.  That's a real
> > long hood.
>
> I have a roughly equal number of long-hood-running units on the east and
west end. It certainly wasn't common - like you said, that's a real long
hood - but in a pinch, it was done. Talk about crew protection, though! :)
>
>
>
> > Were there any speed restrictions for running long hood
> > forward?
>
> None that I could find in the ETTs or Book of Rules.
>
> In reality, other than slightly worse visibility, these units were no
different in reverse than in forward. N&W and Southern have proven safe
operation of long-hood-forward units for decades.
>
> - Paul
>
> The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
> Sponsored by the ELH&TS
> http://www.elhts.org


	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	Sponsored by the ELH&TS
	http://www.elhts.org

------------------------------