[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: (erielack) Akron Questions
Thanks so much for this information; the most valuable source is firsthand from an ex-employee. By the way, what's your name? I've included my original questions below. Specifically regarding clearances, the map indicates clearance restrictions on three consecutive underpasses through downtown: Market (JO), Park and Perkins Streets. The restriction is up to 19'0" on the WB track, and up to 17'9" on the EB (due to Perkins). I don't know the exact date of the map, but the TOFC ramp at McCoy St yard places it in 1954-1960. Since you don't recall reverse moves for clearance, at least the EB track must have been undercut. The doublestack configuration initially used in the early 1980's to the east coast paired a tall container (9'6") with an 8'6" to give a clearance requirement of 19'4" (the same as a fully-enclosed bilevel) so yes, doublestacks would have been restricted from here without further undercutting. The initial CR stack route to North Jersey was NYC-Buffalo-Erie, and by 1987 they were also going down the West Shore.
Steve's response indicates the derails at Sterling were removed prior to the January 1965 collision. I wonder if there was discussion on reinstalling them after this event, and if planned removal at JO was cancelled.
Paul B
- ----- Original Message -----
From: krinmich_@_aol.com
To: Smtimko_@_aol.com ; doctorpb@bellsouth.net
Cc: erielack_@_lists.elhts.org ; caltrains@cboss.com
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 12:05 AM
Subject: Re: (erielack) Akron Questions
I didn't see your original question, but from Steve's email I've gathered you had some questions about clearances. I don't remember any height problems through Akron. Anything that could run on the 2nd Sub of the Mahoning Division could run through Akron. You have to remember that we just never had too many clearance problems on the EL. Now there may have been something around Akron where a particular track might have had to be used at Akron, but I don't remember anything. Any regular high cars - tri-levels and hi-cubes - had no problems. I can't tell you if there would have been a clearance problem if double stacks had been running then.
-----Original Message-----
From: Smtimko_@_aol.com
To: doctorpb_@_bellsouth.net
Cc: erielack_@_lists.elhts.org; caltrains@cboss.com; KRinMich@aol.com
Sent: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 9:11 PM
Subject: Re: (erielack) Akron Questions
Paul and List----
First, let me remind you that I'm a Mahoning Division guy, and Akron was on the Marion Divn so my knowledge of JO is limited to my dealings with it when I was Supervisor of Operating Rules for Conrail's Youngstown (and later Pittsburgh) Division. By the time that I took that position (1984) JO was closed except for when trackwork was being done, we called an extra operator.
Second---The B&O did not own the route! The Erie crossed the PRR's Akron Branch at JO Tower. The B&O had trackage rights over the PRR from AY (Arlington--a few miles north of JO) to Warwick (about 12-15 miles south of JO). Actually, the operator at JO never saw a PRR or PC train under normal circumstances. The PRR had a yard at Akron, and the trains operated south from Akron to Warwick, over the M&C Secondary from Warwick to Mace and then to Conway via Canton, Alliance, etc. The only time a PRR train would traverse JO Tower is when there was a derailment on the M&C or P-FW-C Line and the AC-4 would operate Akron-Hudson-Alliance-Conway. That was rare.
Third--The derail on the EL had a guard rail so if the train passed the stop signal, the engine would derail toward the EL EB main and remain upright. Normally, the derail would derail the equipment to the right, but in this case, it would foul the PRR traffic (read B&O) and also the signal equipment between the two roads. By the time I hired out (1965) most all of the interlockings had the derails removed. You still had to throw the levers in the tower to make the proper locking in the locking bed, but there was no physical derail. SN Jct was that way as was Deforest, Shenango and others. There may have been a couple of locations that the derails were left in but I do not remember.
As far as the clearance is concerned. I don't know. EL frequently moved cars up to 18'6" high. Not certain what restrictions were involved at Akron. Perhaps Keith Robbins can assist or maybe Cal Banse knows. Hopefully they will respond.
SMT
Here's a couple of Akron questions, I'm hoping Steve Timko in particular can help. Steve Twarogowski kindly sent along some Akron materials. Here are links to two photos taken in 12/75 looking west from the Market St bridge in Akron (location of JO tower which is to the left of the photographer). One is EL train NY-100; the train on the parallel Chessie/PC line is probably a Trailer Jet. Note the derails on both westbound mains, EL's with a guardrail and Chessie's without. Presumably these protect the movable-point crossing (obviously Erie was here first!) and presumably there are also derails on the eastbound tracks. I don't think I've previously seen derails on such busy mainlines, and I wonder if they were installed after the fatal near head-on collision of B&O and EL freights at Sterling OH in January 1965. This crossing was about 25 miles to the west and had an almost identical configuration. IIRC the accident occurred one night when the B&O crew fell asleep and ran the red signal. Presumably at that time the Sterling crossing was not protected by derails, so the wreck would have been prevented or at least mitigated. It appears the Chessie derail would keep a wayward train away from the crossing as well as from the EB main, but the guardrail on the EL derail would keep the train aimed squarely at the crossing, which raises the question, what was the speed limit approaching the crossing? The third crossing of Erie/B&O mains was at Kent, but was an Erie overpass.
The second question involves clearances through downtown Akron. The second highway overpass east of Market St was Perkins Ave, which in Erie years had a 17'9" restriction on the EB track only. This clearance permits TOFC and loaded bilevels, which have a maximum height of 17'. However loaded trilevels (in the non-fully-enclosed years) were in the 18'6" range. It appears the bulk of loaded trilevels on EL were WB Fords from Mahwah. Was the EB track undercut at Perkins Ave after 1960 to accomodate loaded trilevels, or did EB trains with these cars use the WB main through here? If the latter, was there an occasion where EL inadvertantly created convertibles as happened once in Binghamton? Fully enclosed racks first appeared in 1975, but I've never seen a photo of these on EL.
Paul B
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
Sponsored by the ELH&TS
http://www.elhts.org
To Unsubscribe: http://lists.elhts.org/erielackunsub.html
------------------------------