Trains.com

First Round of Trumps Rail / Infrastructure Plans

9275 views
187 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 8:44 PM

schlimm

 

 
CMStPnP
Amazing that the guy with no railroad experience is the first to point that out.

 

Not amazing at all that a guy who is in denial of his reading comprehension deficits refuses to accept that his statements are illogical, tangential and contrafactual.

 

Isn't this the same individual that claimed that there were rivers carrying pollution North from Illinois into Wisconsin?

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 8:23 PM

schlimm
Using Metra TTs, there are 29 Metra trains each way (58 total) on the Metra UP-W line daily, which MD-N and MD-W and NCS line trains cross over near Western Avenue. Those 3 Metra routes carry 60, 56 and 22 trains total daily.  That makes a grand total of 196 Metra trains which the Hiawatha service may encounter at different points in transit, not 96.

They specifically mention the problem areas of obstruction.   Western Avenue is not one of them and only very limited mention of the single Wisconsin and Southern train on the way to BRC (not a huge issue from it's limited mention, they are more concerned with METRA trains on the NW line).   They mention specifically a a long coal train on the way to the UP-Line sitting on METRA tracks (lol, ohh you have to chuckle at the intelligence behind that) and extending the UP lead track there.

Amtrak considers a Hiawatha Service ontime if it arrives within 10 min of it's schedule on the timetable, thats why it has a high on time percent.    On the load factor comment earlier,  5 of the 14 trains have capacity issues with standing room only, specifically at the line segment between Sturtevant and Glenview.   So I wonder at how their load factor is calculated now because that is slighly over 30% of the trains on the route.

   Also, 90 mph is a intermediate state in a incremental plan.   They want to reach 90 mph with minimal investment in METRA infrastructure.....can't blame them there.

Amazingly in Milwaukee the CTC does not extend through the Milwaukee Depot and they do not like the fact CP trains are using it as a through route.    They mention extending CTC through Muskego Yard from cutoff tower through the yard and to where it rejoins the main line and using Muskego Yard as a CP Rail train holding area.     They also mention a METRA territory signalling issue where expedited frieght trains have a 60 mph speed limit and "all other" frieght trains have a 50 mph limit and said the issue is just a 12 mile gap in signaling South of Rondout........which is rather interesting but they said it was cheap to fix and would have a positive impact.

And watch your attempts at putting words in other posters' mouths.  You repeatedly do it, so perhaps it is part of your disability.

Oh please you should have been suspended like 20 posts ago for trolling the discussion forum and your cherry picking out of reports, out of context no less.... to support your argument........ thats real grown up.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 6:40 PM

CMStPnP
Figure 32 METRA trains per corridor 96 total.....very rough approximation.    32 split off at the West Line cutoff.......reducing the total to 64 METRA trains North on the North Line, 32 terminate at Rondout or shortly before and 32 continue onto the NW line

Using Metra TTs, there are 29 Metra trains each way (58 total) on the Metra UP-W line daily, which MD-N and MD-W and NCS line trains cross over near Western Avenue. Those 3 Metra routes carry 60, 56 and 22 trains total daily.  That makes a grand total of 196 Metra trains which the Hiawatha service may encounter at different points in transit, not 96.

And watch your attempts at putting words in other posters' mouths.  You repeatedly do it, so perhaps it is part of your disability.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: The 17th hole at TPC
  • 2,283 posts
Posted by n012944 on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 6:07 PM

CMStPnP

 

 
n012944
If you are talking about me, my expertise is in the now.

 

Is that why your posting an article from 1944 in an attempt to support your arguing position?

It wasn't to "support my arguing position".  It was in reference to Balt's post, the "slow to 90" signs.  Nothing to do with you, or Metra's current dispatching style.  There is more than one conversation going on here.

CMStPnP
I know your trying hard to convince me but you haven't.
 

I am not trying to convince you of anything.  As I said in my last post, you are an expert in your own mind, without knowing many facts. There is no convincing people like that.  What I am trying to do is make sure OTHER forum readers understand that is the case. They should know that your ideas are in many cases unworkable, and without institutional knowledge.

An "expensive model collector"

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 1:19 PM

CMStPnP
CMStPnP wrote the following post 2 hours ago: BTW, the WisDOT studies on this Corridor are available via Google.   All you guys pulling stats out of thin air on train frequency, dispatching, etc.   and accusing me of doing so when you haven't used your accusatory fingers to use the tools at hand on the Internet to check your own posts........it's good for comedy but there is a lesson here..... you should make sure your house is not glass before throwing stones.

WisDOT studies?  CSS&SBHegewisch "pulled his numbers" from Metra and other railroad sources, pal. "The METRA Milwaukee District North Line timetable currently shows 30 trains daily in each direction (60 in total).  Add CP freights, a daily Wisconsin & Southern round trip to Clearing, plus Amtrak schedules, and you can see that some pretty sharp dispatching is required for a double track main line.  As has been pointed out by others in this thread, perfect dispatching that keeps everything on time is difficult to achieve for a variety of reasons." You are simply unwilling to admit you really don't know what you are talking about. 

Even the WisDOT study indicates that the current route has heavy freight traffic, as well as the above Metra service.  And the proposed so-called HSR service is nothing of the sort. The speed limit north of Rondout would be raised from 79 mph to 90 mph and cut the running time a whopping TWO MINUTES.  What a joke!!

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 12:31 PM

CMStPnP
BaltACD

So I'll help you out here.   Figure 32 METRA trains per corridor 96 total.....very rough approximation.    32 split off at the West Line cutoff.......reducing the total to 64 METRA trains North on the North Line, 32 terminate at Rondout or shortly before and 32 continue onto the NW line blocking the Southbound main as they cross over from Northbound track and run a short distance on the Southbound track opposing traffic (Schlimm stated earlier this was not factual......so in his case we will say they float across to the NW line).

So double track reverse CTC line can handle what at full capacity?   128 trains, not sure and I didn't Google but it is North of 120 somewhere I think.   A rail guy should know that........right?    What about three tracks?    When was the last time you heard a rail guy bring that up in these forums?     Some point about quality of discussion I am trying to make here and why I continued this argument so long......I am giving much better than I am getting back.

There is track capacity North of CUS, I don't think METRA uses it creatively though and hence you have delayed Amtrak trains.

What is the 'Clear Signal Footprint' in this territory?

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 11:39 AM

CMStPnP
   ..........All I am saying is METRA dispatching gives priority to METRA trains and that is a problem when your attempting to establish HSR.    METRA could do a better job by prioritizing HSR trains but the fact is it won't and that is the issue.........    

Why should it? If these are METRA trains, running on METRA tracks, dispatched by METRA dispatchers,  carrying METRA passengers on METRA schedules,why should METRA change everything to accommodate HSR in the first place? That's the part that looks illogical going into the discussion.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 11:12 AM

BaltACD
Figures you have presented represent a train every 12 minutes through a 24 hour day with just METRA & CP.  In your mind how much time foot print does your HSR train require?  Where does that time come from?  How is that time 'manufactured' within the existing commitments?  Details!  Details!  Details!

So I'll help you out here.   Figure 32 METRA trains per corridor 96 total.....very rough approximation.    32 split off at the West Line cutoff.......reducing the total to 64 METRA trains North on the North Line, 32 terminate at Rondout or shortly before and 32 continue onto the NW line blocking the Southbound main as they cross over from Northbound track and run a short distance on the Southbound track opposing traffic (Schlimm stated earlier this was not factual......so in his case we will say they float across to the NW line).

So double track reverse CTC line can handle what at full capacity?   128 trains, not sure and I didn't Google but it is North of 120 somewhere I think.   A rail guy should know that........right?    What about three tracks?    When was the last time you heard a rail guy bring that up in these forums?     Some point about quality of discussion I am trying to make here and why I continued this argument so long......I am giving much better than I am getting back.

There is track capacity North of CUS, I don't think METRA uses it creatively though and hence you have delayed Amtrak trains.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:50 AM

schlimm
You see these threads as arguments with counterpoints, but most of the rest of us see them as posting of facts.  You have some over-compensatory need to "win" when there is no contest.  

So far a lot of arm chair analysis from the opposing side but very sloppy at best.......not a lot of facts.     Classic railfan discussion though I will admit.    "I'm smart, your not.........here is my crap counter-arguement, with little thinking behind it"

I am enjoying parts of it.   Like the 30 METRA trains on the North Line....not even considering the METRA trains that transit the North line to get to the NW line.    Remember my caution about using just timetables.........Classic railfan tool though and you can't wean everyone away from them.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:48 AM

BaltACD
Figures you have presented represent a train every 12 minutes through a 24 hour day with just METRA & CP.  In your mind how much time foot print does your HSR train require?  Where does that time come from?  How is that time 'manufactured' within the existing commitments?  Details!  Details!  Details!

Where did you get that figure from?, it's three tracks to the West Line.    So you calculated one track and threw in the 10 Amtrak trains, maxed out the CP trains at 24, then presumed Metra runs 24 by 7?     Thats your analysis on time available?   Good Lord, man......you can do better than that.

 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:28 AM

CMStPnP

 

 
schlimm
Not amazing at all that a guy who is in denial of his reading comprehension deficits refuses to accept that his statements are illogical, tangential and contrafactual.

 

Ah your just mad and pouting because you lost the argument a long time ago and have run out of counterpoints that make any sense.

 

Your entire set of postings is based on your irritation with delays to your busy life.  You have a grudge against Metra and Illinois. It is obvious to all but Bucky (a relative, perhaps?) that you are wrong about the entire matter and refuse to examine facts.

You see these threads as arguments with counterpoints, but most of the rest of us see them as posting of facts.  You have some over-compensatory need to "win" when there is no contest.  

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:27 AM

CMStPnP
CSSHEGEWISCH

I am not arguing for "perfect dispatching", nor am I arguing that traffic is light in METRA territory.   All I am saying is METRA dispatching gives priority to METRA trains and that is a problem when your attempting to establish HSR.    METRA could do a better job by prioritizing HSR trains but the fact is it won't and that is the issue.    Also the issue in the NEC where Metro North owns the track.

As for moving passenger trains to a freight line.     The suggestion has been made to move CP trains to that line but seriously CP trains are not the big issue here.   CP trains conflict with the Empire Builder schedule (specifically the former Ford Expeditor to Twin Cities) and thats probably why it is padded.     However I think I read 24 CP trains max on the line in good economic times, so compared with the 96 Metra trains I think you'll see again.........METRA is the immediate issue.

Additionally, CP holds it's trains at Rondout at the edge of METRA territory.    They either have an agreement with METRA to only run at specific times on METRA territory or else the METRA dispatcher holds them for hours waiting.

Figures you have presented represent a train every 12 minutes through a 24 hour day with just METRA & CP.  In your mind how much time foot print does your HSR train require?  Where does that time come from?  How is that time 'manufactured' within the existing commitments?  Details!  Details!  Details!

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:22 AM

BTW, the WisDOT studies on this Corridor are available via Google.   All you guys pulling stats out of thin air on train frequency, dispatching, etc.   and accusing me of doing so when you haven't used your accusatory fingers to use the tools at hand on the Internet to check your own posts........it's good for comedy but there is a lesson here..... you should make sure your house is not glass before throwing stones.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:12 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH
The METRA Milwaukee District North Line timetable currently shows 30 trains daily in each direction (60 in total).  Add CP freights, a daily Wisconsin & Southern round trip to Clearing, plus Amtrak schedules, and you can see that some pretty sharp dispatching is required for a double track main line.  As has been pointed out by others in this thread, perfect dispatching that keeps everything on time is difficult to achieve for a variety of reasons. Unless Amtrak wants to move its trains to the UP New Line, it is going to have to co-exist with a suburban operation on a congested main line.

I am not arguing for "perfect dispatching", nor am I arguing that traffic is light in METRA territory.   All I am saying is METRA dispatching gives priority to METRA trains and that is a problem when your attempting to establish HSR.    METRA could do a better job by prioritizing HSR trains but the fact is it won't and that is the issue.    Also the issue in the NEC where Metro North owns the track.

As for moving passenger trains to a freight line.     The suggestion has been made to move CP trains to that line but seriously CP trains are not the big issue here.   CP trains conflict with the Empire Builder schedule (specifically the former Ford Expeditor to Twin Cities) and thats probably why it is padded.     However I think I read 24 CP trains max on the line in good economic times, so compared with the 96 Metra trains I think you'll see again.........METRA is the immediate issue.

Additionally, CP holds it's trains at Rondout at the edge of METRA territory.    They either have an agreement with METRA to only run at specific times on METRA territory or else the METRA dispatcher holds them for hours waiting.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 7:44 AM

CMStPnP
Amazing that the guy with no railroad experience is the first to point that out.

Not amazing at all that a guy who is in denial of his reading comprehension deficits refuses to accept that his statements are illogical, tangential and contrafactual.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 7:08 AM

The METRA Milwaukee District North Line timetable currently shows 30 trains daily in each direction (60 in total).  Add CP freights, a daily Wisconsin & Southern round trip to Clearing, plus Amtrak schedules, and you can see that some pretty sharp dispatching is required for a double track main line.  As has been pointed out by others in this thread, perfect dispatching that keeps everything on time is difficult to achieve for a variety of reasons.

Unless Amtrak wants to move its trains to the UP New Line, it is going to have to co-exist with a suburban operation on a congested main line.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 7:06 AM

CMStPnP
 
n012944
If you are talking about me, my expertise is in the now.

 

Is that why your posting an article from 1944 in an attempt to support your arguing position?   Regardless of your background your grasping at straws here and I don't think you have the faintest clue about the track route being discussed based on what you posted so far.    I know your trying hard to convince me but you haven't.

 

Nor would you be convinced by anybody, so what's your point?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 1:00 AM

n012944
If you are talking about me, my expertise is in the now.

Is that why your posting an article from 1944 in an attempt to support your arguing position?   Regardless of your background your grasping at straws here and I don't think you have the faintest clue about the track route being discussed based on what you posted so far.    I know your trying hard to convince me but you haven't.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 12:48 AM

schlimm
If someone refuses to see how a train operating at 100mph over most of a route nonstop would have a shorter running time than one which has a 79mph top limit and makes 3 stops, then he is operating in alternate fact universe.

On average for most runs 5 stops, two are not on the timetable and are unscheduled.   You either get 5 stops Southbound or you get very slow running in METRA territory (45 mph at times).     You don't see that from reading a timetable and pontificating.......you actually have to ride the train.     It was ironic that even when the best track was METRA track and the track North suffered from deferred maintenence the running was always slower on the better maintained METRA track.  Milwaukee road ran the same stretch of track better even in bankruptcy.

Had you googled.   You would see CP offering the same timetable at 79 mph vs 90 mph, only change in time is one min maybe two min.     Now why do you suppose that is?   Even with the station stops a 10 mph improvement over 85 miles should equate to more than 1-2 min time gained......they are not making more stops.   Would be curious what the schedule improvement would be if the terminus was the start of METRA territory.

Also what is the one stop Empire Builder carded at?    85 miles in 97 min. one direction.........108 min the other.    I think that proves that it has more to do with time of day and traffic than station stops how long it takes a train to transit the corridor and what the schedule is.   Amazing that the guy with no railroad experience is the first to point that out.

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,515 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Monday, March 13, 2017 9:50 PM

I found Bucky

 

Image may contain: one or more people, people standing and outdoor

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Monday, March 13, 2017 8:20 PM

n012944
BTW I am still waiting for you to prove your claim.  Using todays traffic and todays plant.  I think Schlimn was right, I better not hold my breath for anything but insults, facts are foriegn to you.  When I see many of the errors that you have posted in this thread alone, makes me not expect anything useful out of you.

Judging by some of his postings, it may be that he has a serious problem with reading comprehension.  Or else his need to be "right" - all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding - causes the numerous distortions we have all seen.

If someone refuses to see how a train operating at 100mph over most of a route nonstop would have a shorter running time than one which has a 79mph top limit and makes 3 stops, then he is operating in alternate fact universe.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: The 17th hole at TPC
  • 2,283 posts
Posted by n012944 on Monday, March 13, 2017 8:07 PM

CMStPnP
  Best argument of all: "Let me keep my train handling expertise from the mid-1940's and you need to prove to me with meets and diagrams you can do better.....lets see the facts"........ 

Who made that argument?  Or are you making stuff up again?  If you are talking about me, my expertise is in the now.  I may not watch as many YouTube videos as you, but I deal with this 5 days a week.

It seems as though you are the kind of person who takes a few commercial flights, plays Microsoft Flight Simulator a couple of times, and thinks you are the next Sully.  You seem to be the kind of person who goes out and buys a fox body Mustang, takes a Richard Petty Driving Experience, and thinks he is Mario Andretti. You think you are an expert because you went on a choo choo ride and watched a YouTube video.  I can't argue with that, when someone doesn't care about the facts.  

BTW I am still waiting for you to prove your claim.  Using todays traffic and todays plant.  I think Schlimn was right, I better not hold my breath for anything but insults, facts are foriegn to you.  When I see many of the errors that you have posted in this thread alone, makes me not expect anything useful out of you.

An "expensive model collector"

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Monday, March 13, 2017 7:12 PM

n012944
Yep. Here is an interesting Trains article about the upgrades the MILW did to their Chi-Milw main for high speed passenger service.  Included in the article is a speed tape from a typical Hiawatha run.  It indicates a lot of 100 mph running https://milwaukeeroadarchives.com/Chicago,%20Milwaukee%20&%20St.%20Paul/1944%20February%20Trains

Despite the fact 1944 is not 1955 (have my doubts 1944 standards were maintained through 1955), Federal rules concerning operations change over time..... you can read between the Kalmbach hype and see.............Semaphore Signals,   CTC extremely limited,  Trains having to slow and cross over and run against the directional flow of traffic.    Regardless the timetable of 2 nonstop trains making it in 75 min same in 1955.    More importantly look at the average speed back then in what is now METRA territory (thanks for helping me make my point there).     Look what a better job they did back then running METRA territory on their own with more antiquated signals and less refined operating rules.

97 miles of upgraded ballast on a double track 85 mile railroad amounts to what per main?    If memory serves me correctly, back then it was actually a three track main in parts of Illinois, North of CUS.   Speed limit was not consistent and you can read via the article it wasn't either.    All of which I stated earlier.

Now, how fast do you think the trip will be made to METRA territory running at 90 mph South of Milwaukee non-stop?    What do you think the average speed will be non-stop?    How visible do you think the METRA train handling issue will be once WisDOT attempts those experiments and watches the average train speed drop by 50% or more in places  in METRA territory (with no scheduled stops).    At that point WisDOT will have a WTF moment and METRA will have some explaining to do............at any rate once those experiments happen.......and they are planned.   It will be interesting to be a bug on the wall in that first METRA vs WisDOT meeting.   I can hear it now......"but we have planned windows you have to fall into".......lol.   "We at METRA are experienced railroaders so it doesn't matter what you think about our practices from long ago that we use today".......lol.   Best argument of all: "Let me keep my train handling expertise from the mid-1940's and you need to prove to me with meets and diagrams you can do better.....lets see the facts"........Yeah they are going to love those answers <not>.

Oh boy, interesting times will then be upon us in the Illinois / Wisconsin rail subsidy program.

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Monday, March 13, 2017 4:51 PM

Murphy Siding
You must not get out much.

I get out a lot, maybe a little too much.  But with things like the Gotcha, you have to stand back a ways to see it.  Most people are immersed in it, so they have no idea. 

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, March 13, 2017 4:47 PM

Euclid
 
Mookie
 
Euclid
girlish “gotcha”

 

How about calling it boyish gotcha....

 

 

 

I have given some thought to that.  Gotcha may be gender-neutral, but I tend to think it leans one way.  Gotcha is actually the central theme of current society, and it is closely related to sarcasm.  Both spring forth from their natural home, which is television culture.  One thing for sure is you never hear a manly Gotcha. 

 

 

You must not get out much.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,021 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, March 13, 2017 4:11 PM

There was a movie by that name...

It was a paintball enthusiast who somehow got involved in international intrigue...

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Monday, March 13, 2017 4:00 PM

Mookie
 
Euclid
girlish “gotcha”

 

How about calling it boyish gotcha....

 

I have given some thought to that.  Gotcha may be gender-neutral, but I tend to think it leans one way.  Gotcha is actually the central theme of current society, and it is closely related to sarcasm.  Both spring forth from their natural home, which is television culture.  One thing for sure is you never hear a manly Gotcha. 

 

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, March 13, 2017 3:47 PM

Mookie
 
Euclid
girlish “gotcha”

 

How about calling it boyish gotcha....

 

 

That would sound kinda....femme.Whistling

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: US
  • 13,488 posts
Posted by Mookie on Monday, March 13, 2017 3:40 PM

Euclid
girlish “gotcha”

How about calling it boyish gotcha....

She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw

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