As promised some months ago, here's a start on a little collection of photos of these in the Philadelphia area. I grew up seeing them fairly often, so I thought it was no big deal - evidently it is unusual, though.
First - ''The King of All Towers'', from: http://www.flickr.com/photos/48838227@N02/4474002591/
A view from the other direction, at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/48838227@N02/4478085864/sizes/l/
The track is the NS - former Reading, then ConRail - Philadelphia-Reading main line along the Schuylkill River and the Schuylkill Expressway, on the west side of both, opposite the Manayunk section of Philly.
And one of the towers over the SEPTA ex-Reading Manayunk-Conshohocken-Norristown Branch, on the opposite/ east side of the river, at the School House Lane grade crossing, at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/48838227@N02/4478124502/sizes/l/
- Paul North.
Paul,
Great shots! Fascinating to see this type of construction. Thanks for sharing.
I saw a similar photo recently, with an Amtrak(?) passenger train running down the track. I wondered what happens if thetrain derails and hits one of those towers? How do you erect a tower like that over an active rail line?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Siding I saw a similar photo recently, with an Amtrak(?) passenger train running down the track. I wondered what happens if thetrain derails and hits one of those towers? How do you erect a tower like that over an active rail line?
Dan
The prospect of having that electrical line come down on you in a derailment does seem a bit ominous. Maybe there is an automatic system to shut the power off if a tower begins to topple. Those towers would surely come down fast in the case of any contact with derailing cars. And when trains derail, they tend to slide cars out over a substantial area adjacent to the track.
I am thinking about this electric line / freight train coexistence extending for hundreds and hundreds of miles out west on the BNSF, as has been proposed. The longer the train and the electric line run next to each other, the greater the odds of a conflict between the two. It is quite possible that high voltage lines could drop onto a train without jeopardizing the crew, but there are all manner of possible scenarios where the lines could kill.
I believe it would be possible to run such a high voltage line along a rail corridor with the use of crash walls to protect it from derailing trains, but I don’t see that kind of protection in the photos above. Power line derailment protection would cost a lot over the long distances.
There is an attraction to the idea of using rail corridors for new power lines. Such lines will be needed, and they will especially be needed in the vast reaches of the west because that is where the wind farms will be built, and wind energy is a major component of the renewable energy revolution.
The attractiveness of using rail corridors for the new electric lines is the avoidance of the need to acquire a new right of way for the electric line. Right of way acquisition these days is a killer. So adding these lines to railroad corridors seems like a slam-dunk. There is free space above the trains.
I believe there is also the possibility of adding power lines to rail corridors and placing them underground. This would seem to offer natural protection to the electric lines in case of a train derailment. But there are electrical issues that flow from the choice of lines being aboveground versus belowground. Maybe somebody could chime in on those electrical issues.
Bucyrus The attractiveness of using rail corridors for the new electric lines is the avoidance of the need to acquire a new right of way for the electric line. Right of way acquisition these days is a killer. So adding these lines to railroad corridors seems like a slam-dunk. There is free space above the trains. I believe there is also the possibility of adding power lines to rail corridors and placing them underground. This would seem to offer natural protection to the electric lines in case of a train derailment. But there are electrical issues that flow from the choice of lines being aboveground versus belowground. Maybe somebody could chime in on those electrical issues.
Who has the "say" in the rights above and below grade? Would the RR be the entity that could sell or rent that right to the utility?
Wind is not the answer. Currently, wind generated electricity is about 35% efficient. We have a lot of "wind farms" (read: boondoggles) out here in Montana. Those in Toole County sell all of the power to San Diego (CA) Electric & Gas at exorbitant prices. 8% of the power is lost during transmission to California. Another 6-8% is lost at sub-stations and transformers. Not a good deal at all! We do like the local taxes it generates.... Underground transmission of AC power is not technically feasable for long distances. There may be some hope for buried High-Voltage Direct Current (HVDC). It is an emerging technology, subject to the whims of Bubba on the backhoe. I hope to hear more about this topic.
Hays -- source: Montana Electric Cooperatives' Association
BNSF Watcher,
I have heard about the belowground alternative as being D.C. I imagine that this is a really complex issue of electrical transmission with lots of tradeoffs. It would be interesting to learn more about HVDC power transmission.
CNW 6000,
The actual rights to a corridor is an interesting question, especially when you consider that there is volume of the corridor both below and above the surface plat.
My assumption would be that the railroad companies are in the driver’s seat for calling the shots in any offer to split off special rights to utilities to run power lines on those rail corridors. However, this idea has “public good” written all over it. Private railroad companies may therefore feel an unusual pressure to acquiesce to the addition of power lines to their corridors. I should think that private railroad companies would feel rather defensive about the possibility of their corridors being commandeered for the public good.
I don't think you will see to much of power lines along the right of way unless its very straight or provides power to the RR. Unlike track, power lines are usually run in a straight line for as long as possible, not feasible along most rights of way.
[EDIT on Friday, 92:0 AM - tried to fix/ insert paragraph breaks - PDN]
Thanks for the comments and compliments ! To respond to some of the questions and concerns:
Derailments is one of those things that seems to be commonly mentioned, but doesn't occur very often, and when it has, does not result in a catastrophe.
For example, during or just after World War II, the PRR's Congressional derailed at speed from a hotbox just past the North Philadelphia passenger station, resulting in something like 47 fatalities and extensive damage. Photos that I've seen of the aftermath show that a couple of the tower poles bent quite a bit, but everything remained standing, and there was no mention of deaths or damage from electrocution.
As a slight contrast, when the Amtrak Colonial collided with the 3 errant ConRail locomotives at the GUNPOW interlocking at Chase, Maryland in January 1987, one of the poles was broken off just above the base. An ex-PRR, then Amtrak, power official said that was the only time in his long career - something like 30 years - that he saw that happen. The result was that both the signal and traction power lines were instantly shorted out or were grounded, and the high-speed circuit breakers performed as intended - the effect was that both systems at that end of the railroad went 'dark' and the train and power dispatchers knew immediately that something was seriously wrong. But again, I'm not aware that the power lines injured anyone or caused any more damage.
Note that both of these instances involved the PRR's electrification and overbuild, which is different and 'lighter' in construction in that it is essentially single steel H-section columns/ poles on each side of the tracks, connected by a cross-member to carry the catenary wires; the power lines are up much higher on vertical extensions. ( I'll post a photo of one of those sometime in the next couple of days - hopefully before the 'outage' for site maintenance starts tomorrow). Accordingly, those kind are much less substantial than the huge towers I've pictured here - I'm not aware of any derailments that have ever involved them.
Keep in mind that poor track conditions under these catenary systems and electric company 'overbuilds' were present - even on some of the main lines - for the PRR and then Penn Central, or the Reading, and after that either ConRail, Amtrak, or SEPTA, etc. There must have been occasional derailments of freight trains less spectacular than the passenger train wrecks that I've mentioned above - I have seen poles/ towers at oher locations along the former PRR that are bent or kinked but still in service. Yet, I've never seen an account that the electric lines caused any kind of problem - other than more complications in replacing the washed-out bridge on the SEPTA R-5 line over the Sandy Run Creek at Fort Washington in 2002 or so. So I believe that the reality of about 80 years of experience over several hundred route-miles of this kind of construction with what has to be several million trains indicates that is a safety problem in theory only, not in actual fact.
Murphy - usually they were erected with cranes, typically running on the rails but not always - sometimes from the side of the tracks and still on the R-O-W. Most of those projects - something like 19 separate ones, up and down the NorthEast Corridor - were done by a local utility contracting firm known then and now as Henkels & McCoy. One of the founders wrote a book - at the moment, I don't recall which one or the title - that had a page or so on these jobs, so that's my source. He related one instance where railroad steam crane they had rented suffered a mechanical failure and dropped a piece of steel on a passenger train, causing considerable damage but no deaths as I recall. Unfortunately, due to the indemnification clause in their contract with the railroad, H&KM was responsible for reimbursing the PRR's damages from any and all causes - including the railroad's own negligence and failures - so H&KM had to pay for that, and chalk it up as a bitter lesson.
Whether power lines could be installed above or below the railroad tracks - with or without the permission of the railroad and/ or the underlying property owner, if any - generally depends on the nature of the rights that the railroad holds for its R-O-W. Very simply, if the railroad owns the R-O-W in fee simple, it is the only one whose permission is needed, and has an absolute veto, unless an easement in condemned = taken by eminent domain. If the railroad has broad R-O-W rights, it may not have to obtain permission from the owner of the underlying land - but he may have to obtain permission from the railroad, which is entitled to have its R-O-W unencumbered and free from interference. But if the railroad has only the lesser 'use' rights to run a railroad, it might not have any say at all on the power line question - it may not be able to even grant such rights to a utility, even if it wanted to - but again, permission may still have to be obtained from the railroad, which is nevertheless entitled to have its R-O-W unencumbered and free from interference. There are other variations and nuances, but these are the principal ones.
I read a thingie, somewhere, about the Norwegians ("Uff da!") having some success with HVDC transmission from/to North Sea oil/gas rigs. I'll look it up, during our "spring break" this weekend. Ha en fin dag!
Hays
john_edwards I don't think you will see to much of power lines along the right of way unless its very straight or provides power to the RR. Unlike track, power lines are usually run in a straight line for as long as possible, not feasible along most rights of way.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Here are a few more:
Also from Manayunk, but on the former PRR's electrified line to Norristown, which parallelled the Reading's - and SEPTA /ConRail kept only the latter, from: http://www.flickr.com/photos/48838227@N02/4477438085/sizes/l/in/set-72157623738170256/ Although the catenary wires are long gone - like 20 years now ? - the several sets of higher wires are still live. Some may be PECo's 60 Hz. commercial AC circuit 'overbuild', but I believe that several are also Amtrak's ''22'' (?) and/ or ''38'' (?) 25 Hz. traction power supply transmission circuits from the special 25 Hz. generator at the Safe Harbor Dam to the NorthEast Corridor, which is now supposed to be rebuilt and replaced with Amtrak's share of the ARRA 'Stimulus Act' funding - blue streak 1 here is more familiar with all that than I am. Note also the X-shaped cable tension bracing, and the PRR's later-style cross-member known as a 'K' brace, because it looks like that letter, only laid over on its back. See the caption at the photo site for a few more details.
Another photo of the same line, about 1/2 or 3/4 mile further south, where its Pencoyd Bridge crosses over the Schuylkill River and the Schuylkill Expressway, I-76. Note how the short intermediate pole/ tower is devoid of wires, but the higher ones still have the power lines described above - from http://www.flickr.com/photos/48838227@N02/4477463963/in/set-72157623730247740/ The comment posted is interesting, too
Finally, one at the Lansdale station of SEPTA's R-5 line, looking south, showing a less dramatic 'overbuild', from: http://www.flickr.com/photos/48838227@N02/4478038626/in/set-72157623613915527/ Sadly, the elevated 'shack' for the crossing watchman and signal controls was removed a year or so later, when the adjacent 'DALE' interlocking and road crossings were completely rebuilt and re-signalled.
How many years did the North Shore operate the high-speed Skokie Valley line with adjacent-integral power transmission towers and never had the describe problem?
The situation with the North Shore Line and similarly with the South Shore Line on the East Chicago bypass was that the railroad and Commonwealth Edison or NIPSCO did not actually share a right of way but had parallel rights of way.
Paul_D_North_Jr Here are a few more: Also from Manayunk, but on the former PRR's electrified line to Norristown, which parallelled the Reading's - and SEPTA /ConRail kept only the latter, from: http://www.flickr.com/photos/48838227@N02/4477438085/sizes/l/in/set-72157623738170256/ Although the catenary wires are long gone - like 20 years now ? - the several sets of higher wires are still live. Some may be PECo's 60 Hz. commercial AC circuit 'overbuild', but I believe that several are also Amtrak's ''22'' (?) and/ or ''38'' (?) 25 Hz. traction power supply transmission circuits from the special 25 Hz. generator at the Safe Harbor Dam to the NorthEast Corridor, which is now supposed to be rebuilt and replaced with Amtrak's share of the ARRA 'Stimulus Act' funding - blue streak 1 here is more familiar with all that than I am. Note also the X-shaped cable tension bracing, and the PRR's later-style cross-member known as a 'K' brace, because it looks like that letter, only laid over on its back. See the caption at the photo site for a few more details.
Paul is correct. The top three conductors are the standard 3 phase 60 Hz high voltage service (probably 115Kv each wire to ground or 208Kv wire to wire) with a small non current carrying ground wire beside or above for lightning protection. Below those wires are 2- two pair wires (one set on each vertical pole on the short horizontal arms ) that are the PRR now Amtrak power supply. That power is very similar to the power to your house that has 110/120V on each power leg with the neutral in between. that gives 220/240V between the power legs. So the High voltage CAT power is +69 Kv and -69Kv (giving 138Kv wire to wire) however there is no neutral wire with the RR just using the rails as the ground. The power for the CAT was originally 66/132 Kv that was boosted to 69/138Kv sometime after WW 2. None of the PRR transformers were changed so that boosted the nominal CAT voltage from 11.5 KV to 12 KV (which is what Amtrak advertizes their power). This enabled PRR to avoid some shutdowns of CAT power as all equipment taking power from those lines were able to operate on as low as 11 Kv (do not know actual low figure). Now equipment produced in the last few years especially AC traction equipment operates at even lower voltages. The latest Septa Silverliner 5s were specified to operate to maximum performance on as low as 11Kv and operate at reduced performance to voltages as low as 9.8 Kv (?).v
Note: The reason for the differences in 110, 115,120 house voltages are that most electrical equipment is now built for 130/260V. Check specification plates for older motors with a motor built today. Various power companys have slowly boosted their voltages - (mine is now 125.5V) - as the higher voltage supplys power better (same HP motors can be smaller with less copper). But you need to check your incadescent light bulb ratings. Remember Europe is on 220/440 V as the standard there. Thomas Edison and Telsa argued about this endlessly Edison wanted 110V DC and Telsa wanted 220V 100Hz power.
Great Pictures!
I hate Rust
Paul (or anyone else that wants to tackle this),
If I understand matters correctly, wouldn't the incentive for BNSF to give a power utility overhead power line rights on the ex-Santa Fe Transcon be an agreement that the railroad could get all the juice it wanted to for FREE to power its electric locomotives?
K.P.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.
K. P. Harrier Paul (or anyone else that wants to tackle this), If I understand matters correctly, wouldn't the incentive for BNSF to give a power utility overhead power line rights on the ex-Santa Fe Transcon be an agreement that the railroad could get all the juice it wanted to for FREE to power its electric locomotives? K.P.
I would find that to be highly unlikely, especially considering the amount of electricity which would be consumed by the railroad. Since electric utilities are still regulated, there may also be legal restrictions to such an arrangement.
The CNS&M as a portion of Insull's utility empire utilized this philosophy for the Skokie Valley Route, in the days prior to the Supreme Court divestiture ruling separating power generation from transit, which I always thought was a stupid idea insuring that the taxpayer solely gets clipped for public transit.If the railroads, utilities and the government triangulated their mutual interests perhaps we could move off the mark , help the environment, reduce costs and shared the cost since peak oil is about 2-4 years away. But that would be a smart thing to do IMO, so maybe they will burn paperwork to fuel the railroads instead.
Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.
And another one (my photo) - electrical details unknown to me, though:
PECo monopole transmission line (from Limerick Nuclear Generating Station, so probably installed mid-1980's or so) along NS Reading - Philadelphia line (ex-RDG, CR) just NW of Royersford station, looking NW - Thurs., 08 Sept. 2011.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.