Classic Railroad Quiz (at least 50 years old).

625463 views
6754 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,838 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, November 1, 2018 9:21 AM

Even though Cleveland Railways (and later Cleveland Transit System) did operate Shaker Rapid Transit, it was owned first by the Van Sweringens (as Cleveland Interurban Railroad) and later by the City of Shaker Heights and operated under contract.  Shaker Rapid Transit became part of RTA in 1975.  The unique aspect of Cleveland's 1910 arrangement was that return on investment was part of the cost used to calculate the fare base.  This was a big contrast with Chicago, where the companies underlying Chicago Surface lines remained in bankruptcy for years after the CSL was organized in 1913.

There was some concern over the years that Shaker Heights was getting too good a deal from Cleveland Railways, with 1200 series cars and others leased at below cost rates.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, November 6, 2018 10:33 PM

Reminder to OM.  Still waiting on you!

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 4,955 posts
Posted by Miningman on Monday, November 19, 2018 10:22 AM

Bumping this up so it doesn't sink into the abyss.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 9,171 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, November 19, 2018 12:07 PM

Thank you. I know I'm lagging.  Someone ask one in the meantime to keep things rolling.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, November 20, 2018 8:01 AM

OK.   Here is an easy stop-gap one.   Go to the Trains General Forum, look at my posting on my "Visit..." thread of Steve Sattler's photo of Chen Millsom (Director of the Israel Railway's Museum) and me at the top station of the Haifa Carmelit, and then Google to find a photo of the original construction in the 50s or failing just a description, one even just before the recent extensive renovation, and describe the obvious technological change.  Maybe you don't need to do any research   The original construction was French.  The recent rebuilding was Swiss-German-Austrian.

After rebuilding, maintenance should be a lot less, and energy costs (electricity for the single traction motor for the line's two trains) much less.   

But what problem might you expect?

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, November 21, 2018 3:57 AM

The Carmelit is a an underground funicular, a subway funicular.  There are six symmetrically-speced stations, single-track with the passing siding in the center, beween stations three and four.   Originally two three-car trains, now two four-car trains, but continuous gangway between car, making each train look line one very long (slanted-stepped) car. 

In the 1950's what distinguieshed French subways from subways in other countries, and still largely does?  So if you wished to reduce energy and maintenance cost and were not tied to French technology, what big change would you make?   (One Canadian city does use French practice in its subway.)

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,838 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Wednesday, November 21, 2018 7:41 AM

daveklepper
So if you wished to reduce energy and maintenance cost and were not tied to French technology, what big change would you make?

Lose the tires.  Montreal's Metro is clean, and pleasant except for the tire dust that's everywhere.  It's also pretty loud.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:43 AM

Montreal was not loud the one time I rode it shortly after opening.  But Toronto is quiet because of good maintenance and the application of sound-absorption on lower tunnel walls and even below platforms in stations.  But then TTC usually does everything right.

Anyway, you got the answer, and the new arrangement is steel wheel on steel rails, but without any sound-absorption.

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,273 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Wednesday, November 21, 2018 9:32 AM

(EDITED): Hope you guys like the pics! I was a bit late to answer the question. Btw, the newest stock in 2018 is the first vehicle in Israel with an automatic turning off mechanism installed in the passenger carriage. CoffeeMovie Have a nice day!

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 9,171 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, November 21, 2018 7:26 PM

daveklepper
if you wished to reduce energy and maintenance cost and were not tied to French technology, what big change would you make?

You would get rid of that approach to rubber tires.  In fact, you could retain the rubber-tire approach and use a better guidance system (like that on at least one Australian busway) instead of horizontal mystery-action wheels.

One thing not a big improvement would be to use Micheline-style unsinkable tread-centric wheels (even with modern run-flat block technology inside to control the situation if one tire in a bogie goes flat).  I think it still remains to be seen whether some form of augmented elastomer wheel (with the requisite amount of vertical compliance and lack of resonance to match a rubber tire, but with hard tread and self-centering profile maintaining concentricity with the axle center) could be provided ... it was 'coming' in the Sixties, and as far as I know is still as distant in 'coming' as then...

Meanwhile, isn't it convenient that we have one of the greatest living authorities on how to do detail design of that sound-attenuation system to make steel-wheel trains as quiet in stations as rubber-tired ones?  Please detail how you'd do it.  It will make compelling (and enlightening!) reading.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, November 22, 2018 5:08 AM

Whom do you identify as "the greatest living authority?"  I do not claim that title.  I did not design the sound-absorbing treatment for the Toronto Subway system.  I did have the opportunity to compare Montreal's brand-new rubber-tired system, then quiet, with Toronto's recent steel-wheel system, also quiet.  Some 50+ years ago.

rc reports Montreal's system is not quiet now.  Well, anything moving does require maintenance.   On this thead, we look forward to rc's next question.

I'll post some ideas in answer to your question sometime next week on the Transit Forum.  I am trying to develop one general efficient approach regarding the application of sound-absorption to subway tunnel interiors.

Thanks for the challange.

I think the B&W photos posted earlier show the original insallation with the concrete for the rubber tires to run on and the oriiginal rolling stock.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,838 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Friday, November 23, 2018 6:20 AM

This shortest of all steam railroad electrifications lasted for decades, until the power source was no longer available.  Name the railroad and the power source.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Saturday, November 24, 2018 10:43 AM

Muskegon (Sp) Electric in Ohio, some 60 miles south of Cleveland, with a big surface coal mine and a power plant?

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 9,171 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, November 24, 2018 12:47 PM

Muskingum is the spelling, isn't it?

I first realized I was getting old when I heard this was shutting down (due to exhaustion of the nearby coal mine, as I recall); I was already 'all grown up' enough to read Trains Magazine when they first announced this 'new' electrification was going to be built in the early Sixties...

Can't be this, though, as Hoosac is much shorter.  (And I think first GN was shorter still...)  And question implies that the electrical power source is the reason for abandoning electrification, not the advent of diesels or other 'better' motive power...

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,838 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, November 26, 2018 6:32 AM

The one I'm looking for is much shorter than Muskingum and was actually replaced by steam.  Probably the only "electrification" shorter was the section of 600V overhead at Western Pacific's shops to service Sacramento Northern motors from 1957 to 1965.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, November 27, 2018 5:04 AM

B&O on either the Philly or Balt. waterfront, with one small switcher locomotive and and a power line with meter attached to the nearest streetcar overhead.  Switched back to steam when the streetcar line was abandoned or bus substituted.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,838 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Tuesday, November 27, 2018 8:41 AM

Baltimore's Fells Point operation was actually about 2 miles total, where the one I'm looking for is about 1.1 mile.  Two electric switchers were used by B&O at Fells Point before the switch to rubber-tired tractors (well, technically steam was used, since the famous Dockside 0-4-0Ts showed up once in a while when the electrics were out of service...)

This was further north, and passenger-only.  Tank engines were involved here, too...

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, November 27, 2018 10:29 AM

Peerhaps you are thinking of the NYCentral's Putnam Div. Gettys Square Branch.  But when the short electrification was removed, so was all service on that branch.  

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,838 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Tuesday, November 27, 2018 11:05 AM

You have arrived at the correct system, but the wrong electrification.  This one lasted just over three decades.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 9,171 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, November 28, 2018 2:38 PM

Considering how short the South Brooklyn was, this has to be short indeed...

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,838 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Wednesday, November 28, 2018 4:12 PM

South Brooklyn was BMT/MTA, Getty Square was ... System.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 9,171 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, November 28, 2018 4:47 PM

[quote user="rcdrye"]South Brooklyn was BMT/MTA, Getty Square was ... System./quote]

Awww, go ahead and say NYC.  I'm aware of this; the point is that South Brooklyn is pretty darn short.  You are getting into tethered-truck shop-switching territory if you want to go much shorter...

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 1,888 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Wednesday, November 28, 2018 6:52 PM

I like Milwaukee's version better:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5c/08/25/5c0825180da1c0ba5f954efb80394beb.jpg

I wonder how many times both examples ran over their extension cord...

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, November 29, 2018 2:42 AM

The South Brooklyn did not own any tracks of its own.  It still is the freight-only s subssidiary of the New York City Transit Authority, originally the freight-only of the Brooklyn Rapid Transit, then the Brooklyn Manhattan Transit, and then, after June 1940 unification, the NYCTA.  Go to the Trains Transit Forum and get a clearer picture, along with pictures.  The "main line" of the South Brooklyn could be considered from the 39th Street yard and pier and connection with Bush Terminal through the lower level of the Ninth Avenue station, then the surface tracks under the Culver elevated structure, including the interchange with the Bay Ridge branch of the LIRR, to the Coney island Yard complex and the commercial tank farm there,  About five or six miles.  Electrifcation replaced with diesel, not steam.

Was Niagra Junction a NYCentral subsidiay ry?  But was the electrification replaced by steam of by diesel?  But you said passenger service was involved.

There was one electrication of steam-road trackage even shorter than anything di discussed so far:   The DL&W's Brooklyn Freight Terminal, connected by car float to Hoboken.  It was 600 volts with a direct power line to the BMT's nearby DC 600 volt generting station, and had only one electric locomotive.  It was replaced by a steam switcher when the BMT switched to purchased power and closed the generating station.  It was located on the East River near the Williamsburg Bridge.  I believe there was at one time a track connection with the BMT (B&QT) Graham and Crossown streetcar lines, but curves and clearances prevented South Brooklyln interchange freight service.  I think a diesel eventually arrived before the freight house was closed.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, November 29, 2018 3:33 AM

Was not there a West Shore electrification using one or more interurban cars, underrruning third rail?

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,838 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, November 29, 2018 6:21 AM

daveklepper

Was not there a West Shore electrification using one or more interurban cars, underrruning third rail?

 

That was between Utica and Syracuse - a bit longer.  The line I'm looking for branched off a line was sold and electrified some years after the last passenger service on this line - almost 20 years after the electrification was shut down.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, November 29, 2018 11:03 AM

Was it i n Cleveland?  Part of the track now used by the Green and Blue lines to reach the waterfront?

I assume the new electrification is for a city's light rail system.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,838 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, November 29, 2018 11:09 AM

daveklepper
I assume the new electrification is for a city's light rail system.

It was, but they didn't call it "light rail" then.  The line sale was long enough ago that it, too still fits the Quiz time frame.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, November 29, 2018 12:41 PM

Well then, the Highland Branch became a branch of what is now the Green Line subway system and had a branch to Neeham Center.  Possibly the Central had an experimental electrification of this branch with power from a nearby short-lived Bay State (later Eastern Mass) trolley line?

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,347 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, November 29, 2018 12:51 PM

or was it Newton Highlands to Newton Center?

SUBSCRIBER & MEMBER LOGIN

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

FREE NEWSLETTER SIGNUP

Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter