Trains.com

Western Maryland

631 views
13 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2004
  • From: Terre Haute IN
  • 199 posts
Western Maryland
Posted by robscaboose on Saturday, August 27, 2005 9:44 AM
[:)][?] I was watching the "History Channel" this AM & saw a couple of tv ads for vacationing in the Sate of Maryland. During the ad they showed a number of clips (each 2-3 seconds long) of exciting things to do in the great State of Maryland. One of them was I believe was Western Maryland's # 734 BLASTING around a curve, smoke belching out of her stack.

Seems ironic for the Western Maryland to be in a national commerical for the State of Maryland, when Allegany County, Maryland wants to have a hike/bike trail instead of the railroad.

Rob
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Saturday, August 27, 2005 10:28 AM
....Isn't it "also want" instead of "no railroad"....just that to do both is a ROW conflict....
I sure hope they find a way to do both...Both have many followers and users.

Quentin

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, August 27, 2005 11:50 AM
Someone is gonna have to save the WM. It was there furst.

Them durn hikers wanna walk all them miles thru the hills and woods they can probably find a way to bypass the [censored] tunnel!
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Saturday, August 27, 2005 12:37 PM
...It is a very short tunnel and certainly an interlocking system could be devised to make certain only one concern is using the tunnel at a time, etc..."Durn hikers"..walking and biking routes are being constructed all over the country and will continue to be expanded including the one on the former WM ROW......Again, I hope the solution can be found to provide for both.

Quentin

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 1,190 posts
Posted by mvlandsw on Saturday, August 27, 2005 2:12 PM
Since the tunnel is short It should not be too hard nor expensive to bore a separate small sized tunnel for the bike trail.
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Saturday, August 27, 2005 2:55 PM
Yes, a separate tunnel would be fine...but now you're talking money...It really is too bad we can't spend that kind of money on such projects....Even back in the 30's major money was spent all over the country to build and provide recreation projects....{And Jobs}....

Quentin

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 223 posts
Posted by poppyl on Saturday, August 27, 2005 7:17 PM
You guys are correct that the tunnel is an issue but there are several options now under active review (none involve a separate tunnel for the hikers/bikers). The bigger issue for the Western Maryland Scenic Railroad is a hefty MOW bill that must be dealt with over the next few years. Another somewhat smaller distraction is that CSX wants them out of the space that they lease in WVa for winter storage and maintenance. It sounds like they have an answer for that issue.

FYI -- the Consolidation that the WMSR is using did not begin life as a WM loco but was restored to very closely resemble a WM H-8.
  • Member since
    March 2002
  • From: Collegeville. PA
  • 210 posts
Posted by Mark300 on Sunday, August 28, 2005 12:32 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by mvlandsw

Since the tunnel is short It should not be too hard nor expensive to bore a separate small sized tunnel for the bike trail.

I believe that's the 'Bru***unnel' above Helmstetter's curve and that's actually like 900 feet long & might have been double tracked back in the days of steam. That condition might be a 'little daunting' for folks caught inside with a real live 2-8-0 Consol and a good sized consist climbing the 1.75% grade or braking on the way down.

I agree, it's not that hard to reroute a bike trail around the hill, but there might not be any interest from adjacent property owners in leasing or providing a land easement on their ground to do the run-around.

My [2c]

Happy Railroading.

Mark
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Sunday, August 28, 2005 1:51 PM
....I think it should not be considered to have hikers and bikers...and...a live train occupying the tunnel at the same time...even though it may be wide enough to provide space to do that....The noise would be horrific for one thing and some folks may panic....

Quentin

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Sunday, August 28, 2005 1:57 PM
..........Yes, a web search shows the tunnel was bored for 2 tracks.

Quentin

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, August 30, 2005 1:10 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Modelcar

....I think it should not be considered to have hikers and bikers...and...a live train occupying the tunnel at the same time...even though it may be wide enough to provide space to do that....The noise would be horrific for one thing and some folks may panic....



I was near the UP 3985 when it came by one day. The noise is very loud without a tunnel. Inside a tunnel it might could really seriously damage someone's hearing. [:0]
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Tuesday, August 30, 2005 8:04 AM
...Point blank in reality....Live train..{steam or diesel}, and walkers or bikers, can not be planned to occupy the tunnel space at the same time....!

Quentin

  • Member since
    July 2005
  • From: Northeast Missouri
  • 869 posts
Posted by SchemerBob on Tuesday, August 30, 2005 8:09 AM
Why do they need a doufus trail anyways? If people want to see that part of the country can't they just ride the train? And isn't that the reason they're there in the first place?

Why waste a bunch of money boring another tunnel or making a stupid trail when the people can just ride the train and see all that. You make another tunnel or even build the trail you're destroying part of the scenery. I've seen video of that line on 2 different programs and it looks very nice. Why destroy some of that so people can walk along side the track?

This is just the beginning though. If they don't charge anyone to go on this trail then more people, including railfans, will choose to walk the trail instead of riding the trains, to get photographs and stuff like that. That's when the WM will start to go downhill.
Long live the BNSF .... AND its paint scheme. SchemerBob
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania
  • 13,456 posts
Posted by Modelcar on Tuesday, August 30, 2005 8:20 AM
...As you may or may not know trail systems are being built across the country now and have been during the past decade. I believe this route is part of a national trail that will span across America from coast to coast....Trails are improtant to a lot of our citizens just as other forms of recreation are....We have a long paved trail passing through our community and it's become a real asset....It's being used by many and some builders are even creating housing areas next to it since it has caught on and now popular.

Quentin

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