Re: (erielack) Athearn EL SD45-2

[William Shultz <wshultz1_@_twcny.rr.com>]

Donald,

Not likely. Consulting a late era Lackawanna ETT, the most restrictive 
point on the mainline was the Bergen Tunnels tracks 1 and 2. Even that 
had a clearance of 15 feet 3 inches. If a Train Master would have fit 
I'd bet an SD-45-2 would. Besides, by the time the SD-45-2's showed up, 
there wouldn't be much reason for them to go through the Bergen Tunnels.

Regards,

Will Shultz


donald kern wrote:
> How about running the Lackawanna side?
> 
> Paul R. Tupaczewski wrote:
> 
>>
>>I don't think we ever got (or for that matter, ever will) an "official"
>>reason for this. We've heard as reasons:
>>
>>* Maybrook runthroughs
>>* Cleveland "tunnels" (those big low bridges)
>>
>>All seem logical enough, but it doesn't explain why run-through power with
>>"standard" rooftop appliances also ran on trains in these circumstances. I
>>personally would love to see the clearance profile that justified the
>>low-profile appliances.  Was it just pure paranoia on someone's part?
>>
>>	- Paul
>>

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

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