MidlandMike jeffhergert MidlandMike AEP528 That's an interesting question. There are photos of line poles with 3 or 4 dozen wires on them, putting them in a conduit (in an era before plastic conduits) seems unlikely. Going over the road seems unlikely as well. Where the railroad crosses on a bridge longer than the pole spacing, the telephone/code wires were routinely run thru a conduit. A lot of bridges had crossarms attached to the bridge structure. A few of our bridges still have the derelict crossarms in place. Jeff I knew some wooden trestles had attached crossarms. Was it common on steel bridges?
jeffhergert MidlandMike AEP528 That's an interesting question. There are photos of line poles with 3 or 4 dozen wires on them, putting them in a conduit (in an era before plastic conduits) seems unlikely. Going over the road seems unlikely as well. Where the railroad crosses on a bridge longer than the pole spacing, the telephone/code wires were routinely run thru a conduit. A lot of bridges had crossarms attached to the bridge structure. A few of our bridges still have the derelict crossarms in place. Jeff
MidlandMike AEP528 That's an interesting question. There are photos of line poles with 3 or 4 dozen wires on them, putting them in a conduit (in an era before plastic conduits) seems unlikely. Going over the road seems unlikely as well. Where the railroad crosses on a bridge longer than the pole spacing, the telephone/code wires were routinely run thru a conduit.
AEP528 That's an interesting question. There are photos of line poles with 3 or 4 dozen wires on them, putting them in a conduit (in an era before plastic conduits) seems unlikely. Going over the road seems unlikely as well.
That's an interesting question. There are photos of line poles with 3 or 4 dozen wires on them, putting them in a conduit (in an era before plastic conduits) seems unlikely. Going over the road seems unlikely as well.
Where the railroad crosses on a bridge longer than the pole spacing, the telephone/code wires were routinely run thru a conduit.
A lot of bridges had crossarms attached to the bridge structure. A few of our bridges still have the derelict crossarms in place.
Jeff
I knew some wooden trestles had attached crossarms. Was it common on steel bridges?
Yes. The UP (former C&NW) bridge across the Missouri River at Blair NE still has the derelict crossarms. The soon to be replaced UP bridge over the Elk Horn River at Waterloo NE (24 miles west of Omaha) still has some crossarms remaining.
I'd go to a bar and grab a few little straws for cocktails and glue them to the sides of the two poles where the road passes over the tracks. You can then run the lines from the crossbars into the straws, and just plant the straws along with the poles. It will appear like you are using conduit to get down and back up again.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Here's an assembly where some high voltage lines go from overhead to underground. Be careful on that ladder there!
20041009 87 near Prairie Ave. & 16th St. by David Wilson, on Flickr
Cheers, Ed
Railroad communication and signal lines went over public roadways all the time. The OP's post has a special condition that happened from time to time. If they can't go under they have to go over. They might even go wider on the right of way to minimize the height of the poles needed to go over the road way depending on circumstances.
That's one of the short comings of most commercially available poles. There all the same height. There are many instances where they had to go over roads or tracks and needed higher poles. Plus that most only have two or three crossarms and often on main routes you can see, yet today on derelict poles that at one time there were five or six crossarms in use once upon a time. That's why I have some homemade poles in use with the commercial ones.
My guess is that a RR or a utility company would have to get an easment from the Highway Dept/Road Commission to put wires over a roadway. I am also assuming RRs would often put their wires in a conduit below the bridge to avoid the hassle.
This wasn't the spot I was thinking about, but it does show where the pole line went over the roadway at one time. The tracks are in a bit of a cut and the pole line starts moving towards the top to go over the road. The pole line in the picture is derelict, not used since 1980 and some poles are now missing. There are enough left to see the route the pole line was going.
IAIS Railfans Photo Gallery :: Dave Kroeger's Photos :: IMG_4011_0031
At Ingalton on the CGW the line side poles ran on top of the grade over rt 59 and down the other side kinda like you describe so it is prototypical.
Mike
Assumptions are just that: assumptions. Not always based on documentable fact unless someone did the necessary homework first, I still believe an intelligent person can make reasonable assumptions and remain on solid ground.
That said, I'm going to make an assumption: if what you envision was ever possible to do in the real world, then it was done at least once, in this scenario likely more than once.
My career is in historic preservation. I mention that because it means I've spent A LOT of time looking closely at the built environment. My interests in railroading meant I've been looking very closely at such stuff for over half a century.
I can't cite a specific example for you, of your idea as built in the real world. But I know I've seen dozens of such real-world constructions, done both well and poorly. Sometimes they were temporary jobs awaiting a better, more final solution. Sometimes they were obviously a disaster waiting to happen. Sometimes they were the result of a lack of road, rail and utility company builders' imagination or a failure to prepare for a probable need in advance. But they're out there, a lot of them, in every permutation you can think of and then a few more. For that reason, which I dare to put forward as fact, you should let your imagination go and have some fun. You could hardly end up being wrong, as in 'there's no prototype example.'
With the near-certain large number of people who had to plan, create and construct such solutions as you are in need of, and the at least century-old period of time in which such situations arose, you pretty much have free reign over whatever solution you select to install. You could even have some fun and create a solution that ended up not exactly working as desired. By that I mean, build a bad solution that still works enough to live with, and then have a lineside crew standing there arguing over how to improve or replace it with something better. You could create a fascinating mini-scene telling such a story at a glance. Work under way could include flag men, slowed-down traffic, and era-appropriate work materials, machinery and a crew on site. I love the thought of two construction engineers in an argument. Dueling clipboards?
I don't recall encountering this before in our modeling world, but you could also create a scene and solution that is dynamic, meaning build it initially as the poor solution that needs improvement, and do so in a way that lets you add to the scene whenever you please, as a better solution is gradually set in place. Make it adjustable, meaning that the original bad idea is evident, but people and materials are handy to set in place a revised scene to represent the gradually built fix. The real world does not lack for such dynamism.
After all, there aren't many of us who ever tried to build a layout who haven't at least once encountered a situation where we're looking at a scene we built, with a head full of better ideas.
You're building a story to be told. Is it necessary to lock everything into one single ending? Enjoy yourself. That's the whole point.
Seems to me I have seen lines put into a condiut under the bridge and back up to the next pole on the other side, but can't think of one around here to check.
Have fun,
Richard
I don't have a picture, but I've seen it done that way.
BEAUSABRE "There is a prototype for everything" We won't report you to the prototype police
"There is a prototype for everything" We won't report you to the prototype police
Thanks, but I have to live with myself too !
Mark.
¡ uʍop ǝpısdn sı ǝɹnʇɐuƃıs ʎɯ 'dlǝɥ