-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
QUOTE: Originally posted by eolafan One would think politicians would have MUCH better and more important things to worry about other than bike trails!
Remember: In South Carolina, North is southeast of Due West... HIOAg /Bill
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan That would be like indemnification with onus on the local government as Amtrak has struggled with it. Local government doesn't want this. A few pedestrian bridges here and there is o.k but keep from the tracks.
QUOTE: Originally posted by lonewoof Do I understand this correctly -- there used to be a TWO LANE HIGHWAY alongside the tracks on this bridge? Seems that would be considerably more hazardous for the railroad AND the highway, than a park and a few cyclists...
Have fun with your trains
QUOTE: Originally posted by martin.knoepfel I do not understand why thea don't use the space left to double-track KCS. Bikers and hikers can cross the river on a ferry.
QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd QUOTE: Originally posted by martin.knoepfel I do not understand why thea don't use the space left to double-track KCS. Bikers and hikers can cross the river on a ferry. I think the point of the trail would be to enjoy being over the river, not just get to the other side. I wonder if the bridge could be reinforced enough to allow two trains at once. There are a zillion places where roads run parallel to tracks on solid ground. Why would it be more dangerous on a bridge?
QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill JOdom: Not so. Derailments are LESS likely on bridges, because you don't have subgrade issues that take track out of alignment. A track-caused derailment on a bridge is virtually always going to be the result of a broken rail, which don't respect location. The rigidity of the bridge structure is a benefit to the track structure. Ballasted-deck bridges are preferred for short spans because track alignment is much easier to maintain. The transition between track resting on soil and track resting on a rigid and unyielding bridge results in a continual problem with soft spots immediately adjacent to the bridge abutments. Lateral alignment on curves is an issue, too. Long-span bridges are almost entirely open-deck instead of ballasted deck because the weight of the ballast bed and the pan that holds the ballast becomes an issue.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.