Re: (erielack) Re: Bridges, numbers,mileposts,oral history, and methods of inquiry.

["Dad" <wsmith5957_@_hotmail.com>]

I was thinking about geting in on the discussion about Bridge 60, but Len
VanderJagt has come up with the best explanation and should be sufficient.
Since the railroads lasted so long, naturally things would change over the
decades or centuries. Probly the best examples of this were when I had to
work on the former B&O  when I was with AMTRAK...........they NAMED every
signal. I inquired about one (Sir Johns Run) and was told that during
Braddock's expedition in the French & Indian war, the little brook was named
for one of the British officers & the B&O kept the name for it's signal. Now
THAT, my friends, is OLD!!! They didn't use the mileposts, just names. Other
B&O names that stick in my mind are BIRDSHIT HOLLOW in W. Va. and DAISY
MAE - at this place there was nothing but a log cabin and a small cornfield
between the base of the mountain & the railroad &Potomac River. You could
faintly see a dirt road weeviling up the mountain but NO electricity - oil
lamps showed in the windows. We'd get a paper when we left Pittsburg & toss
it to them when we went b. THAT goes back a ways.
Regards to all,
Walt Smith----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Len VanderJagt" <lvj911_@_worldnet.att.net>
To: <erielack_@_lists.elhts.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 9:35 AM
Subject: (erielack) Re: Bridges, numbers,mileposts,oral history, and methods
of inquiry.


> Hi folks,
>
> First thing I am going to do here is apologize.  I think I'm going to be a
> little grumpy, since I am ill and unable to work, so I'm lying here
thinking
> about these topics and spewing into my speech recognition software..
>
> Speculation can certainly be fun, but you ill considered speculation tends
> to be counterproductive.  Railroads evolved, typically very quickly, and
in
> a manner which was always nonrational to some degree, with various aspects
> of rationality.  Knowing, either through experience or study, the more
> typical conventions or foibles engaged in on  the railroad helps a great
> deal in learning "how to think" about what are the meanings of various
> things, and how they evolved.
>
> Many times when I read this list, I are reminded of how fluid the railroad
> world was in terms of names and places.  The railroad was a dynamic
cultural
> organism, which virtually inundated employees (and much of the public) in
> the "old days."  Both railroaders and the public interacted constantly,
and
> affected each other's perceptions and taxonomies.
>
> For example, various Drills, Huals, Gangs, Ordinaries, etc. reflected not
> only traditional local usage of terms, but could be influenced greatly by
> one individual..  The extraordinarily laconic and studiedly
> cynical/sarcastic Bob Collins, who will always have a very personal and
> special place in my heart, virtually redefined how operations and  moves
> were identified and talked about over the course of his decades in the
> dispatcher's chair.  Similarly, DL&W man Howard Oakley to whom I am also
> indebted for teaching me much about responsibility and competency during
his
> tenure as M&E dispatcher, influenced more than a generation of us to
respond
> only in the affirmative-positive, and  40 years later I still cannot say
> "OK" in any form other than "all right, okay."  No one is ever going to
open
> up a Main line switch on me because when they told me that was what they
> wanted to do I told them "OK" I understood (but hadn't given permission
> yet).
>
> Please permit me to ramble a bit more.  Find some old head DL&W or EL guys
> and ask them where "cherry tree bend" is.  This location was not referred
to
> frequently, and to my knowledge did not appear in any timetable.  On the
> other hand, up on the Graham Line ,  Red Onion Switch
> made the timetable, but I am willing to bet major body parts that when
that
> track was first constructed, it was not officially designated that way.
>
> I have no idea if the red apple restaurant still exists on Route 17 south
of
> tuxedo.  Any EL or Erie man knows the location, however, and that will
> forever and would have forever been red apple, as in "New York 97 to NJ
> (tower) (later dispatcher) coming by the red apple."  This radio
> announcement allowed the operator and Newburgh Junction to get on the wire
> and get clearance for lining up the westbound before they would see and
have
> to respond to the distant approach signal for the interlocking, slowing
them
> down.  That section of railroad was "dark" to the dispatcher, of course,
and
> about a minute or so after the red apple, at track speed, the train would
> hit the approach indicator in N. J. tower..
>
> The knowledge base, jargon, history, and language of "railroad talk" often
> is virtually indecipherable to ordinary folks, and somehow I never cease
to
> be amazed by this, which reflects my growing up around railroaders and
then
> working on the railroad.  It always just seems like plain English to me,
> until I stop think about it. Shows up in model where I rode into, when
> during operations I am speaking concisely and clearly, and nobody knows
what
> I am asking for or communicating.  I think we need to teach this, and
teach
> it quickly before we are gone.  That's before we start talking about have
we
> dropped off the brakeman in the right place, and figured out who is going
> where before we start shuffling the train back and forth like a fruit fly
on
> acid.
>
> Now before I really get grumpy, I want acknowledge my appreciation to some
> of the folks that are sharing and passing along so much that would
otherwise
> be lost, such as Walter Smith, Rich Pennisi, and, within his lifelong
> penchant social skewness, my college buddy Bill Shepard, as well as the
> other old railroaders.
>
> The grumpy part is, to sound really nasty, is that the quality of
> information coming from someone who was a railroader, if they had a room
> temperature IQ and the insight of a floor lamp 50 years ago, will tend to
> reflect those enduring assets or lack thereof.  The positive formulation
of
> this, includes the memory of hundreds of hours of sitting around in signal
> towers, offices, or engine cabs, discussing, debating, and BSing about
what
> was,  is, or some such. I was a kid during the hurricane of 55.  Although
I
> remember the storm.  Similarly, the runaway cement hoppers from Port
Morris
> well predate my employment, but I knew everyone who was directly involved
> with that incident, particularly the engineer and conductor.  I heard
those
> stories so many times, each story being a reiteration, revision,
> collaboration, etc..  An evolving sense developed of what was most likely
> most true.  What of course was invaluable, was being able to "size up"
just
> who it was who was telling their version of the story, taking into
> consideration fundamental assets as it were, mediated by undeniable
> psychological needs to shape those memories into a palatable form.  I can
> tell you, that I have at least one story of my own that I don't believe I
> will ever tell, that still haunts me regularly, of major catastrophe
> averted, that potential tragedy being of my own making.  I am sure that I
> could not tell that story, no matter how hard I tried, in a purely
objective
> descriptive manner.  That too reminds me of Artie Erdmann's story about
the
> fateful grade crossing accident one night on the Erie main when he was
> dispatching the West End.  I was the operator at NJ.
>
> Well, back to the point., or whatever..
>
> Br  60 Tower has nothing to do with Bridge 60 other than that it is
located
> at the bridge..  If the tower had not been named Bridge 60, nobody would
> notice that the bridge was the old number 60 Bridge in the Department of
> engineering scheme at the turn-of-the-century, before the cutoffs were
> built..  Somebody decided to start counting somewhere, and counted
bridges.
> This is particularly curious, in that that individual apparently did not
> consider what to do about the building of additional bridges necessitated
by
> realignments, washouts, etc..  Moreover, that particular numbering system
is
> of virtually no use to operating department employees.  I'm sure many of
you
> have heard the old phrase "missed by a mile".  It is not going to help an
> engineer, conductor, or dispatcher to only be within a mile of a specific
> point.  This is why traditionally all points on the railroad are specified
> to the hundredth of a mile, if possible.  No one has a measuring tape out
> there, but you develop a pretty good "eye" or sense of just where it is
> you're talking about.  This convention also allows you to specify the
length
> of the location of interest more precisely.
>
> After the building of the Nicholson cut off, although almost certainly
prior
> to that also, the bridge locations would be specified by mileage location.
> In the engineering department, however, they had their files set up, at
> least initially, with their nominal Bridge numbering scheme.  Hence, the
> cross-references seen on various internal documents to direct folks to the
> original information.  Hey, those engineers didn't get out that much, and
we
> all know how flexible and social engineers are (vbg). Logical and
practical
> ain't synonymous.
>
> Bridge 60 tower was commonly considered to be the single most important
> point on the DL&W. There was an optical alignment -- checking mechanism on
> the bridge, to detect any shifting.  Think about its location in the track
> scheme.  That baby goes out of service, and the railroad was done.
>
> I never met a starter in Hoboken terminal.  I truly believe they existed,
> because I was told when a train was being momentarily held by the starter
> because of one or more passengers, often due to a ferry connection event
or
> some such.  If I recall correctly, the starter closed the gate and then
> changed the train board and signal lights.  Maybe this was some other
> person, and the starter only monitored starting.  In any event, what ever
> the official name or official capacity, there definitely was someone down
> there who we all referred to as the starter.  Rich Pennisi has such a
> shockingly good memory for detail, he may be able to help out on this.  It
> sure did make a difference in terminal Tower or Grove Street Tower if a
> scoop was held up for one or two minutes.  The action was hot and heavy,
and
> the challenge, working essentially alone at Grove Street (lever man
drunk),
> was really fun, at least as a carefree youth with his full-size model
> railroad to run.  Ate stress for dinner. Listened to the Mets win the
World
> Series in Grove Street Tower.
>
> If I could be sure that the people to be mentioned at all passed on, and
> there would be no harm, there are so many stories to tell about life on
the
> railroad.
>
> I hope this hasn't been too much of a rant, or too rambling. Let's all
study
> our timetables and book of rules to learn or remember how the railroad
felt
> and ran, and continue to keep alive an accurate understanding of what life
> was like during the classic days of railroading..
>
> Regards,
>
> Len VanderJagt
>
>
>
>
>
> 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

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