Trains.com

Weight Of US Mainline Rail?

10794 views
42 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, July 27, 2017 7:28 PM

Norm48327
Chuck,

You have been through the latter and witnessed the consequences of management's inept decisions. It remains to be seen what Hunter's decrees will work and which will fail. CSX is not the railroad he is used to working with. It is a spiderweb of coal mies that would not survive should he decide to abandon some  lines.

I'm waiting with bated breath to see the outcome. I can't help but think Harrison has taken both the investors in CSC and their employees for an underserved ride in the nameof profits for a corporate raider disguised as a edge fund. Hedge funds have on one goal, and that is quick turnover on Wall Street. 

It isn't just the spider web of coal lines the EHH doesn't understand.  He doesn't understnad the multiplicty of merchandise routes and the traffic they carry.  The North-South routes on CSX are all nominally single track - close one and the rest become gridlocked with the extra through traffic.  CSX operates as a interconnected Network.  Discount a single part of the whole and you end up wrecking the whole.  CSX is not the straight line operation the EHH mastered on IC - CN - CP.  He is an old dog and unlikely to learn the new realities required to keep CSX fluid.

The quick financial raping of CSX for Mantle Ridge's benefit will result in a mess that will take years to set right.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 1,568 posts
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Friday, July 28, 2017 11:45 AM

142 Lbs per what Length  ? Again everyone assumes what "the smart guys" are talking about

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Friday, July 28, 2017 10:02 PM

zugmann
 
Paul_D_North_Jr

Said another way, the PRR track looks more like narrow gauge than the NG itself !

- PDN. 

 Laugh Thanks, buddy! 
"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Friday, July 28, 2017 10:15 PM

BaltACD
Back in the days of the Chessie System they were getting their rail from Japan - I believe their standard then (1970's) was 122 pound.  I believe there is a sunken barge load of rail somewhere at the bottom of the Chesapeake Bay.

122 CB was/ is a rail section unique to C&O/ B&O / Chessie- as I recall "it wouldn't play well with others", though I'd have to study a dimensional table a bit to confirm that (pgs. I-3 and I-4): 

http://www.harmersteel.com/hs/wp-content/catalog/harmer-steel-catalog-2015.pdf 

Some interesting comments on it here, esp. its design history in the 2nd-to-last post:

https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?2,2663962  

See also the post by 'shoretower" near the end of this thread - includes a nice mention of the 155 PS:

https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?2,2672334 

- PDN. 

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • 2,366 posts
Posted by timz on Sunday, July 30, 2017 3:34 PM

Looks like 155-lb rail was 8 inches tall-- not 8-1/2 inches like shoretower said.

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • 25 posts
Posted by lidgerwoodplow on Monday, July 31, 2017 11:16 PM

CandOforprogress2

142 Lbs per what Length  ? Again everyone assumes what "the smart guys" are talking about

 

Per yard—36 inches.  A 142# rail 85 feet long would weigh 4,023 pounds.

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Monday, July 31, 2017 11:58 PM

CandOforprogress2

142 Lbs per what Length  ? Again everyone assumes what "the smart guys" are talking about

 

Google railroad rail weight and the following is the first item, not hard to find.

 

Rails in Canada, the United Kingdom and United States are described using imperial units. In Australia, metric units are used as in mainland Europe. Commonly, in rail terminology Pound is a contraction of the expression pounds per yard and hence a 132–pound rail means a rail of 132 poundsper yard.

  • Member since
    April 2016
  • 1,447 posts
Posted by Shadow the Cats owner on Tuesday, August 1, 2017 9:41 AM

BaltACD

 

 
Norm48327
Chuck,

You have been through the latter and witnessed the consequences of management's inept decisions. It remains to be seen what Hunter's decrees will work and which will fail. CSX is not the railroad he is used to working with. It is a spiderweb of coal mies that would not survive should he decide to abandon some  lines.

I'm waiting with bated breath to see the outcome. I can't help but think Harrison has taken both the investors in CSC and their employees for an underserved ride in the nameof profits for a corporate raider disguised as a edge fund. Hedge funds have on one goal, and that is quick turnover on Wall Street. 

 

 

It isn't just the spider web of coal lines the EHH doesn't understand.  He doesn't understnad the multiplicty of merchandise routes and the traffic they carry.  The North-South routes on CSX are all nominally single track - close one and the rest become gridlocked with the extra through traffic.  CSX operates as a interconnected Network.  Discount a single part of the whole and you end up wrecking the whole.  CSX is not the straight line operation the EHH mastered on IC - CN - CP.  He is an old dog and unlikely to learn the new realities required to keep CSX fluid.

The quick financial raping of CSX for Mantle Ridge's benefit will result in a mess that will take years to set right.

 

 

If they ever do recover with as mad as certain IM shippers are with him right now he might have lost certain ones forever.  The big shots at UPS are royally angry at him as they are getting fined by their own customers for late deliveries so they are losing money on those.  JB Hunt had late deliveries on those trains and faces issues with their own customers now.  You going to see how a one man and his ego can totally screw over a company here.  He got rid of the people that knew how to keep the company fluid in a crisis brought in his own lackeys that 1st off know nothing of the territory and only know how to say Yes Hunter to him.  

 

This meltdown is going to make UP's look like nothing.  He potentialy could jam up NYC Washington DC Baltimore Chicago Louisville Atlanta Miami Jacksonville and several more cities all on his own and the damage to the economy is going to be epic.

 

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Wednesday, August 2, 2017 9:02 AM

Buslist

 

 
CandOforprogress2

142 Lbs per what Length  ? Again everyone assumes what "the smart guys" are talking about

 

 

 

Google railroad rail weight and the following is the first item, not hard to find.

 

Rails in Canada, the United Kingdom and United States are described using imperial units. In Australia, metric units are used as in mainland Europe. Commonly, in rail terminology Pound is a contraction of the expression pounds per yard and hence a 132–pound rail means a rail of 132 pounds per yard.

 

 

Australia adopted the Metric system in January 1973, so a lot of rail carried "pounds per yard" weights and some still does today.

In the national system, new main line rail is AS (Australian Standard) 60 (kg/m), basically similar to European UIC 60 section. Prior to that section, AS 107 Pounds per yard was widely used, and some was rolled after 1973 marked as 53 kg/m. Another standard was 47kg/m mainly rolled as 94 pounds per yard. This was widely used in the 1960s but was found not to be suitable for the much heavier trains that ran after diesels replaced steam.

Because of these relatively small sections, axle loads were limited to around 22 long tons, 24 US tons. Currently, 25 long tons are allowed on track with 53 kg/m on concrete ties. 30 long tons is allowed on 60kg/m, but with speed restrictions, and this standard applies to the Hunter Valley export coal traffic.

The Metric system measures axle loads in kiloNewtons, so we are talking about loads in the order of 250 to 300 kN, but rail engineers are still using long tons, 44 years after conversion (at least colloquially).

A few years ago, a celebration was held of the one millionth concrete tie inserted into main line track. This was on the Melbourne Sydney line in a small town called Gunning. I visited the location. The gold paint on the tie had pretty much been removed by the brooms on the ballast regulator, but the rail over the tie was marked "100lb/yd 1931"

Peter

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, August 2, 2017 9:59 AM

What did PRR use for switches with its 155#?

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Wednesday, August 2, 2017 2:32 PM

That's a PDN question. It would be in his backyard,

The only 155 special trackwork I've seen is in Cincinnati (Norwood) which is now all IORY (Indiana & Ohio) and was a crossing frog (PRR/CL&N crossing B&O/M&C) that was 155#, now removed just below McCollugh Yard. extra bizzare because the 155 was boutet step-welded directly to 90# rail and the welds were hardly square or level. That crossing frog most likely came from somewhere else to this low-speed jerkwater location on PRR. When GM shut down the Fisher Body plant at Norwood (last cars were Camaros and Firebirds); the reason for the crossing frog went away.

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 123 posts
Posted by IslandMan on Friday, August 4, 2017 3:16 AM

Why did the Pennsylvania RR use 155 pound rail, and why isn't this used for new track today?  The long-term trend for rail weight has been upwards, as other things being equal heavier rail can handle greater axle-loads and increased dynamic forces. 

Cars have tended to become heavier over the years and the increasing number of double-stack container trains (high axle load + high speed) would indicate that stresses on rails are higher on Class Is than they used to be.

 

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, August 4, 2017 7:53 AM

I'm not absolutely sure, but I would think that PRR used the heavier rail because of the general conservatism of its engineering staff plus heavier traffic loads.  It went out of favor because it was a nonstandard weight and the advent of the diesel locomotive eliminated dynamic augment as a factor in stresses on the rail.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy