[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
RE: (erielack) Portage Bridge near Hornell (2)
I don't know when the speed restriction was implemented, but there have always been tourists on that
bridge. There were also steam powered fan trips on it, and they mention the crossing at a slow
speed. Due to the restriction, or due to the fans? Dunno.
But I know that they go far back into EL days.
I see that I didn't mention below that the line reconfiguration was done at the time the wooden
bridge burned.
SGL
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dlw1el2_@_aol.com [mailto:Dlw1el2@aol.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 10:27 PM
> To: erielack_@_lists.railfan.net
> Subject: Re: (erielack) Portage Bridge near Hornell (2)
>
> To all
> Did the Erie and EL have this 10 MPH speed restriction?
>
> Bob
>
>
> In a message dated 8/18/2008 10:01:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> schuyler.larrabee_@_verizon.net writes:
>
> Several points:
>
> This bridge was discussed by someone, AKA, me, a few months ago, discussing
> how the alignment at the
> west end involves a sharp curve to the north, followed by some zig-zagging
> before it returns to a
> straight line, and that there is, in Google Earth, a visible alignment which
> is a broad curve from
> that straight alignment into the bridge. The reason for the line change
> (the broad curve was
> original) was to reduce what was apparently a pretty tough grade in exchange
> for curvature to create
> a longer line at a lesser grade.
>
> This is not the replacement bridge someone else mentioned built after the
> fire destroyed the wooden
> bridge; there was an earlier Very Spidery Bridge, mostly cast iron, which
> was incrementally replace
> with a stronger steel structure. That was many years ago, and bridges do
> have a service life, that
> is, they don't last forever. This bridge is tired.
>
> The 10 mph limit is due to the curves at the west end. It's also a good
> idea because the bridge has
> a walkway on which vacationers (and Henry, for his sad chore) go out onto
> the middle of the bridge.
> There is no feasible way to keep them off, and the walkway is wide so that
> they can stand there (if
> they're brave) and not be pushed off into the river below (aka, to their
> death).
>
> Conrail had begun plans for a replacement bridge to be built to the south.
> It was/is an arch bridge
> design, and would straighten out the curve and eliminate the speed
> restriction. I believe that NS
> will likely begin construction of this bridge soon, especially now that the
> rest of their railroad
> is getting stressed to capacity. They need this line, as someone else noted
> with the trains every
> 45-60 minutes. I would also guess that there will be manifold fences to
> keep nitwits off that
> bridge.
>
> I would guess that the existing bridge will remain as a platform for
> photographers who won't have to
> worry about those pesky trains interrupting them all the time.
>
> SGL
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rich Behrendt [mailto:rbehrendt_@_columbus.rr.com]
> > Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 9:10 PM
> > To: EL Mail List
> > Subject: Re: (erielack) Portage Bridge near Hornell (2)
> >
> > The Portage Bridge has slowly been deteriorating ever since the EL used it,
> > and although some remedial repairs have been done since then under CR and
> > NS, the bridge structure and substructure continue to deteriorate, and at
> > some point minor repairs and band-aids won't help...
> >
> > There has been a 10mph speed restriction for as long as I can recall, and
> my
> > understanding is that NS is working on plans for a new span The last
> that I
> > heard they were working through the environmental issues, but the price tag
> > will be substantial for not just building a new span, but for acquiring ROW
> > as well, plus add in the fact that the span is within Letchworth State
> > park...
> >
> > Rich Behrendt
> > ELHS #384
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Don" <donaldliotta_@_gmail.com>
> > To: "'EL Mail List'" <erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>
> > Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 9:39 AM
> > Subject: (erielack) Portage Bridge near Hornell
> >
> >
> > >I was just reading the August Railpace and there's a blurb in the middle
> of
> > > page 47 claiming that a bridge on the north of Hornell on the old Erie
> > > line
> > > to Buffalo, referred to as the Portage Bridge, is in bad shape and the
> > > viability of the NS line from Binghamton to Buffalo is in jeopardy.
> > >
> > > Does anyone else know the story behind this? I doubt the line is in
> > > "jeopardy". I would think the state of New York and NS would work
> together
> > > to get it fixed; the state is the main reason the line survives to this
> > > day.
> > >
> > > Does anyone have a picture and/or stats on this Portage Bridge?
> > >
> > >
> > > The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
> > > http://EL-List.railfan.net/
> > > To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > Checked by AVG.
> > > Version: 7.5.526 / Virus Database: 270.6.3/1613 - Release Date: 8/15/2008
> > > 5:58 AM
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
> > http://EL-List.railfan.net/
> > To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html
>
>
> The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
> http://EL-List.railfan.net/
> To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html
>
>
>
>
>
> **************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
> deal here.
> (http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
>
>
> The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
> http://EL-List.railfan.net/
> To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html
The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
http://EL-List.railfan.net/
To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html
------------------------------