Riding on the Shore Line last Saturday the supports for the catenary caught my eye. Early on they seem like sculptural objects. Four angle irons slowly flare upward to form a narrow tower. They are connected by flat straps in a criss cross pattern. At the cross arm a short spire sits on top with the angle irons coming together and fastened to flat straps in the same criss cross pattern. They look like they are intended to be an aesthetic part of track side scenery as well as to perform a utilitarian function.
Coming out of the tunnels the towers are covered with rust. Then, at Bridgeport, there is a change. The towers are painted light gray. Why they should be unpainted before Bridgeport and painted after is a puzzle. But they are painted up to New Haven.
After New Haven the supports are simple I beams that stick up in the air like the poles that they are. They look to be galvanized and rust has not yet begun. This seems to be a less expensive and less interesting way to support the catenary than the earlier supports. Also, beginning at New Haven the weights and pulleys to hold the wires in tension are quite visible. The weights and pulleys are 20 poles apart.
Seeing the Hell Gate Bridge is always a treat. Fortunately it was down as we approached so the train ran across it with no interruption.
While there are many draw bridges along the Shore Line, Hell Gate is not one of them. It's a high fixed bridge.
http://www.nyc-architecture.com/BRI/BRI005-HellGate.htm
John WRWhy they should be unpainted before Bridgeport and painted after is a puzzle. But they are painted up to New Haven.
Most likely MNRR hasn't gotten around to painting them yet.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I think we can put catanary structures into three catagories along this line at the moment: 1) what is left of the original NY,NH, & H installation; 2) what MNRR/ConDot are doing in replacing the original, and 3) The High Speed Shore Line Acela era. All in various stages of fix, paint, replacing.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
oltmanndMost likely MNRR hasn't gotten around to painting them yet.
That occurred to me too, Don, as the best explanation of why the towers are unpainted. And the truth is that I simply don't know why.
However, if you look at the concrete foundations the unpainted ones have a lot of rust staining as you would expect. The painted ones have very little rust staining despite the fact that they have been there for many years. And there is no sign of any current painting going on. Not only are there no painters in sight; also I didn't see any place where it looks like supplies might be stored, especially vehicles equipped with cherry pickers that would reach the top of the towers. So while there could be a painting project in progress I did not see any sign of one.
Henry,
Of course I rode by on a train so I might have missed some important details. Yet I was deliberately observing them to see what I could see.
It looked to me like all of the original towers are in place although some are painted and some are not. However, it is possible that those north of Bridgeport are new and still galvanized so that what looks like pint is really the zinc coating. What impressed me the most is the graceful design of the towers; I can easily imagine one in a sculpture park.
I understand that Amtrak owns the tracks between New Haven and Providence so I assume Amtrak has installed the I beam posts along that section of track. This trip ended at Kingston, Rhode Island which is south of Providence so I don't know how the supports are constructed where the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority owns the tracks.
John WR Henry, Of course I rode by on a train so I might have missed some important details. Yet I was deliberately observing them to see what I could see. It looked to me like all of the original towers are in place although some are painted and some are not. However, it is possible that those north of Bridgeport are new and still galvanized so that what looks like pint is really the zinc coating. What impressed me the most is the graceful design of the towers; I can easily imagine one in a sculpture park. I understand that Amtrak owns the tracks between New Haven and Providence so I assume Amtrak has installed the I beam posts along that section of track. This trip ended at Kingston, Rhode Island which is south of Providence so I don't know how the supports are constructed where the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority owns the tracks.
The MBTA end of the NEC was electrified as part of the same project that covered the New Haven to Providence section and uses the same design for Catenary. Amtrak (i.e the Federal Gov't) covered the cost of the project and I doubt MBTA would have had much input as none of their "heavy rail" commuter lines use electric motive power (unlike their subway/light rail lines,OC).
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
Cos Cob 1988
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=356241&nseq=1
This would be south of Bridgeport.
Is this what you saw?
On the other side of NH - 1985, pre-electrification, but post-concrete ties. 100 mph service, but it took an F40PH a looooong time to get there.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=9268&nseq=2
Don,
The color in your picture matches what I saw. It could be that the towers are painted or they could be galvanized with the galvanizing not worn off. My recollection is that the painted or galvanized towers began after Bridgeport but if the ones you show are in Cos Cob I no doubt missed them.
The towers pictured appear to me to stand straight up in the air. I did see some like that. All of the towers were not identical. In some places there were a lot of wires, more so than in most places and then there were towers to handle the extra load. The cross braces are like the cross braces in all of the towers.
The towers that impressed me were shaped like a long narrow square vase. At the top they had a small but definite spire. A few had a wire running along the top but most did not. On the left side of your picture the towers in the distance may have been vase shaped but I cannot see them clearly.
John
Actually, I know perfectly well that MBTA runs diesel trains but it slipped my mind. I've ridden on MBTA trains all along the Boston and Providence line.
John WR Actually, I know perfectly well that MBTA runs diesel trains but it slipped my mind. I've ridden on MBTA trains all along the Boston and Providence line.
Over the years I've seen the question posed; "Why doesn't the MBTA electrify (or buy Dual Mode locomotives for) it's NEC line. The consensus has been one of access to large amounts of capital (from the Feds, most likely)..
And practically, there is very little electric track in and around Boston...none, in fact, off the Corridor. So why spend money when there are no diesel restrictions?
I wouldn't have thought there is that much of a price difference between electric and diesel locomotives. Is there?
henry6 And practically, there is very little electric track in and around Boston...none, in fact, off the Corridor. So why spend money when there are no diesel restrictions?
Weren't you singing the praises of EMU vs loco hauled trains in that other thread. I would think they would at least consider electric when it comes time to buy new equipment.
Actually, Henry, I don't think the New Haven had enough money to even consider electrifying tracks around Boston. The railroad went bankrupt in 1935 and never recovered. I'm not sure but I don't think they even got out of bankruptcy during World War II.
Compared to the New Haven the Eire was a complete success.
Actually, MIke, the New Haven brought a great many EMU's back in the days when they could afford to. This was the first railroad in the country to use AC for electric traction. All of the New York commuter service was electric. However, it all petered out in New Haven when they just ran out of money.
John WR Actually, MIke, the New Haven brought a great many EMU's back in the days when they could afford to. This was the first railroad in the country to use AC for electric traction. All of the New York commuter service was electric. However, it all petered out in New Haven when they just ran out of money.
Good thing the States of Conn. & NY bought new EMUs for the NY-NH service. Now that the Boston end is electrified, maybe the States of Mass. & RI would consider the costs/benefits of doing the same on their end.
MidlandMikeNow that the Boston end is electrified, maybe the States of Mass. & RI would consider the costs/benefits of doing the same on their end.
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen, Mike. Recently Rhode Island extended the MBTA line to Wakefield in the southern part of the state. An actual extra track was build--I don't know who paid for it--to run the diesels on.
Since the line now runs to Wickford Junction I wonder why they didn't take it down to Kingston. Kingston is an Amtrak stop. It would make a helpful connection. It would be possible to board an MBTA train at Warwick (Hills Grove) or Wickford Junction and change at Kingston to go to any Amtrak point south.
I also wonder why they didn't provide for a station in East Greenwich.
I hope I'm not boring you. I grew up in RI so I am familiar with a lot of obscure (and maybe boring) information.
For comparison, note that MARC has both diesel and straight electric operations and has opted for push-pull operations with either electrics or diesels on all of its lines, no MU cars. For MBTA, going with MU cars or dual-powers for the Boston-Providence line would be an unnecessary added expense, especially since that would be the only electric line.
John WR I wouldn't have thought there is that much of a price difference between electric and diesel locomotives. Is there?
There shouldn't be, but there is. It's more a function of who's paying the bill than the complexity of the equipment.
A freight DE is about $2.5M
A passenger DE is $3-7M (but should be about the same as the frt locomotive...overall complexity is similar. Frt locos have more wheels, axles, motors, psgr locos have HEP)
Metrolink is buying 20 new EMD DE locos at $6.3M each (with 20 cyl Caterpilars in'em)
Amtrak's latest electric loco order is $6.6M a copy.
My take on the reasons why:
It will be REALLY interesting to see what kind of price FEC can get on passenger equipment - even if it has to be "FRA strong".
.
There was a pretty good advantage of electric over steam for high density lines, but the advent of diesel locomotives reduce the benefit a great deal. Electrification pretty much stopped when steam started to die.
John WRCompared to the New Haven the Eire was a complete success.
MidlandMike henry6 And practically, there is very little electric track in and around Boston...none, in fact, off the Corridor. So why spend money when there are no diesel restrictions? Weren't you singing the praises of EMU vs loco hauled trains in that other thread. I would think they would at least consider electric when it comes time to buy new equipment.
But why buy EMU's when there isn't track to use it.? Too little track around Boston for MBTA to make big investment in EMU's or even electric locomotives. Unless they were to invest heavily in stringing wires, etc. and that is more than a Brahman can afford.
MARC using push pulls is pretty much ok, especially on the Corridor where there is little gradient and on all lines, long (5+miles average) distances between stations.
NH worked east out of NY with wire going to Danbury, New Canaan, and New Haven before running out of cash. Plus electrification was started under steam rule; when diesels came along, philosophy changed away from electricity.
A footnote: the Erie's Stillwell cars were designed with the idea of maybe electrifying the commuter zone.
It is true that most MBTA lines are not electrified. However, its Providence line is. I count 16 daily inbound trains on that line although not all go the whole distance. It seems to me that to consider electric locomotives for this line deserves some consideration.
Link to the time table: http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/rail/lines/?route=PROVSTOU
12/20. I revised this to eliminate Stoughton trains as Stoughton is a branch line and not electrified. J.
With already existing cat on one of their busiest lines, I think MBTA has a duty to do a cost/benefit study on electrifying their Providence line service (if they haven't done a study already) to make an informed decision. Inertia is not an excuse.
MidlandMike With already existing cat on one of their busiest lines, I think MBTA has a duty to do a cost/benefit study on electrifying their Providence line service (if they haven't done a study already) to make an informed decision. Inertia is not an excuse.
But if the segment under wire is less than 5% of MBTA traffic or number of trains or line mileage...then it would behoove them to use a universal push pull and probably diesel, too. If the wire was over 30 or more percent, then it might be a consideration. I don't know what the numbers are, but from what I remember and know of the services MBTA has, it would seem putting money into any electric traction, would be wasteful; they are better off expanding the diesel and push pull fleet. Cost of putting new wires up at this time is horrendous. So, they are ok as they are now.
John WR MidlandMikeNow that the Boston end is electrified, maybe the States of Mass. & RI would consider the costs/benefits of doing the same on their end. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen, Mike. Recently Rhode Island extended the MBTA line to Wakefield in the southern part of the state. An actual extra track was build--I don't know who paid for it--to run the diesels on. Since the line now runs to Wakefield I wonder why they didn't take it down to Kingston. Kingston is an Amtrak stop. It would make a helpful connection. It would be possible to board an MBTA train at Warwick (Hills Grove) or Wakefield and change at Kingston to go to any Amtrak point south. I also wonder why they didn't provide for a station in East Greenwich. I hope I'm not boring you. I grew up in RI so I am familiar with a lot of obscure (and maybe boring) information. John
Since the line now runs to Wakefield I wonder why they didn't take it down to Kingston. Kingston is an Amtrak stop. It would make a helpful connection. It would be possible to board an MBTA train at Warwick (Hills Grove) or Wakefield and change at Kingston to go to any Amtrak point south.
John, you're certainly not boring me as I've lived in RI since 1976 (we arrived the day after my 10th birthday)
The third track freight line to Quonset was paid for mostly with Federal funds,it is hosting an ever increasing amount of freight tonnage with service provided by Providence & Worcester. The big thing in recent years is mullti level auto carriers to and from the Port of Quonset....
John WR Actually, Henry, I don't think the New Haven had enough money to even consider electrifying tracks around Boston. The railroad went bankrupt in 1935 and never recovered. I'm not sure but I don't think they even got out of bankruptcy during World War II. Compared to the New Haven the Eire was a complete success.
IIRC, the New Haven had plans to extend the electrification from New Haven to Boston and did do engineering studies but the scheme died during the Great Depression..
There is a big blockade to operate MBTA electric servive to Providence. I believe that some of those trains still run on the Fairmont - Southhampton route ? I knw if there is any problem on the main from Readville to BOS south station they will detour on that route. This alternate is not electrified.
Thanks for your information, Don. You make some good points. Very good points.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.