Re: (rshsdepot) "450-Ton Locomotive at the Waldorf-Astoria"

["Paul S. Luchter" <luckyshow_@_mindspring.com>]

yes, the GN.....I would disagree that replacing smoke with diesel fumes was
one of the solutions...

I realize that changing locomotives in the middle of nowhere is maybe just a
romantic aesthetic, but at least it was that....there is a lot of silliness
in business today, look how the company rate hikes-that absurd $5+ line
maintenance charge on my phone bill -all the railroads needed was good
lobbyists, charge all their expenses to the government..
Seriously if wee subsidize peanuts, paying twice the world price to John
Hancock to not grow the peanuts even, maybe we should privatize Amtrak but
only if we allow them a huge bunch of lobbyists, then we could knock down
that hat box called Madison Square Garden, rebuild exactly the real and true
Penn Station, and get the whole thing subsidized, well, railroads should be
a valuable cultural resource just like wicker and helium and peanuts, no...
I remember when it was said that you couldn't take a picture in the subway
stations because some would be used as bomb shelters and it was national
security. This could be a good reason for national subsidies in largesse to
the subway system (but I guess not the elevated portions)

OK how did I get into this run on pistachio philosophizing, was it trying to
cover up my faux pas of saying C&NW when I meant GN...
Ok some good and some dumb railroad questions:
1. Which station did GN enter in Chicago?

2. Which line had an arrangement with the C&NW for passengers to get to the
west coast?

3. (Maybe a dumb one): Why did CMStP&P have isolated patches of
electrification?

4. There are a lot of catenary railroads in Europe, what would the longest
rout for one be?

5. Are diesel locos much more in need of much more maintenance than electric
power.,, an analysis of costs, was it truly made...it seems at NH the
thought pattern had more to do with trends and who knows what powers behind
the scenes...why else go diesel as you say when the MUs were going
nowhere...I am always amazed that when they finally replaced the GG-1's that
the replacements tore down catenary didn't they, and while GG-1's lasted
generations, I bet none of those GE (right?) power that replaced the GG-1
still are running, but the same GG-1's probably still would be....I lived in
SF when the PCCs from late 1940s were still running in the 80's but they
were replacing them with LRVs (had to for the Muni tunnel, and now other
PCCs run on Market and even on a new line....I forget what type those LRVs
were, I could send matching Market Street pictures of the two...the point is
the new LRVs-I don't think they lasted the decade....


It took me three hours today to see my E mail, pardon my running off at the
fingers....
Paul

- -----Original Message-----
From: Steven Delibert <stevdel_@_prodigy.net>
To: rshsdepot_@_lists.railfan.net <rshsdepot@lists.railfan.net>
Date: Thursday, March 07, 2002 7:38 AM
Subject: Re: (rshsdepot) "450-Ton Locomotive at the Waldorf-Astoria"


>Paul -
>    C&NW didn't have catenary - are you thinking of GN in the Cascades?
>    For GN and MILW to pull down their catenary probably made economic, if
>not esthetic, sense, given their traffic densities at the time -- the
>catenary was installed to solve steam locomotive problems (tunnel smoke,
>lowest efficiency at low lugging mountain speeds) that the diesel also
>solved, without maintaining all that overhead and non-standard locomotives
>and engine changes in the middle of nowhere.   Especially for the Milwaukee
>to maintain catenary (that was aging and needed replacement soon) in 2
>different isolated districts, with a diesel district between, when they
were
>running 1 or 2 through schedules a day near the end, really wouldn't have
>made sense.
>    For New Haven under McGinnis to have planned to dieselize through
>operations was even crazier than most people realize -- if I got the story
>right, they built the FL-9's and scrapped all those electrics on a study
>that showed they would save the cost of maintaining all that catenary, but
>forgot that they still would have to keep the catenary up for the MU
>commuters, only have less use for it.  Given traffic densities, Amtrak has
>finally done now what New  Haven should have done decades ago, extending
>electrification to Boston.
>    Steve Delibert
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Paul S. Luchter <luckyshow_@_mindspring.com>
>To: <rshsdepot_@_lists.railfan.net>
>Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 12:56 AM
>Subject: Re: (rshsdepot) "450-Ton Locomotive at the Waldorf-Astoria"
>
>
>> Was getting rid of the catenary by the Milwaukee Road (and C&NW too?) a
>good
>> move or a bad move..
>
>
>=================================
>The Railroad Station Historical Society maintains a database of existing
>railroad structures at: http://www.rrshs.org
>

=================================
The Railroad Station Historical Society maintains a database of existing
railroad structures at: http://www.rrshs.org

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