[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

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



I have given up the letter to the editors. Even when I edit (yeah I can do
that sometimes) and send well reasoned and annotated letters about "Why not
use the Rockaway Beach branch sitting there unused and still there as a ROW,
to the airport, to both airports even, directly connecting to the LIRR
terminals, [hell from Laguardia you could send people up to New England via
the Hell's Gate, but here you see unedited and run on...anyway they never
print these. maybe it embarrasses the reporters who know nothing of the
alternatives and possibilities...

I still say an external combustion engine surpasses an internal combustion
any day...more efficient.


I also hope to find a photo of that Waldorf private siding, there are
possibly potential articles through 1932 where there are pictures. maybe it
will be shown.

If anyone can find this newspaper: The Jersey Journal from Jersey City on
microfilm--it sometimes has some very interesting rail related items...[this
paper just folded this year by the way)

How long would a list of Class 1 RRs in US and Canada who used electric
traction....Even lower classes. Interurbans excluded or the list gets
bloated....Of course this leads to oddities, like the SP counts in Alameda,
but not the Keyes System, even though both were pretty similar in their
electric commuter lines...and just what is the Chicago, South Shore & South
Bend now, is it just a Class One now?

Did finding proof of the siding ruin the mystery and seeming mythical nature
of the subject?

at the Waldorf-Astoria"


>Oh, Paul, you are just giving me a chance to show off.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Paul S. Luchter <luckyshow_@_mindspring.com>
>> Ok some good and some dumb railroad questions:
>> 1. Which station did GN enter in Chicago?
>
>Via the CB&Q, Union Station.
>
>> 2. Which line had an arrangement with the C&NW for passengers to get to
>the
>> west coast?
>
>UP, until they got royally p*ssed *ff with the Northwestern in about 1956,
>and switched to the Milwaukee.
>>
>> 3. (Maybe a dumb one): Why did CMStP&P have isolated patches of
>> electrification?
>Not so dumb.  They electrified the tough mountain parts first -- over the
>Rockies and the Cascades -- which made sense when there were no diesels,
>electrics really outperformed steam in the mountains, and even 3d-arrival
>railroads in the back country had decent traffic density.  If they hadn't
>run out of money and luck, and if the country hadn't run out of business
for
>railroads, they would have connected the sections up, had a continuous
>electric RR running across the northwest,  and would have been geniuses.
>
>>
>> 4. There are a lot of catenary railroads in Europe, what would the
longest
>> rout for one be?
>
>Yah got me on that one.  Seems like the whole continent is pretty well
wired
>up.
>>
>> 5. Are diesel locos much more in need of much more maintenance than
>electric
>> power.,,
>Loco for loco, yes --  figure they both have pretty much the same electric
>traction motors, then the diesels have that whole diesel motor to maintain
>as well.  The cost differences work out in traffic density -- maintenance
of
>all that catenary and other fixed plant on an electrified line is
expensive,
>and if you apply the cost to only a couple of trains a day, it's cheaper to
>maintain a diesel loco; if you divide the same cost (it doesn't go up
nearly
>directly with the number of trains) to a couple of hundred trains a day, it
>gets  a lot cheaper than maintaining all those individual diesel motors.
>
> 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...
>
>As Jim confirmed, the kindest thing that can be said about the NH study is
>that it was recklessly sloppy -- I don't know if it was sponsored by GM who
>consciously pulled the wool over someone's eyes (they did do bad tricks
from
>time to time), or whether somebody put some $ in the McGinnis pocket (as
Jim
>pointed out, he ended up going to the slammer for his
>"conscientious management" of the B&M a few years later), but it was a
>seriously unfortunate series of events, especially if you think about it
>helping to cripple (economically and politically both) what should have
been
>the viable alternative to the hugely expensive I-95, air shuttles, Big Dig,
>and all the other incredible buckets of money we've spent to avoid giving
>business to railroads.  Isn't the Boston Big Dig alone more money than all
>the subsidies Amtrak has gotten in its entire 30-year history?  In fact,
>isn't the cost OVERRUN on the Big Dig more money than Amtrak has ever
>gotten? Who's got these numbers?  Next time you're in the Times, Paul, look
>this stuff up if no one has it at their fingertips.  It would make nice
>letters to the editor and to Congress.
>
>=================================
>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

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