Ever seen track this bad?

[GP-9_Man11786]

The LIRR out to Montauk had a 15 mph restriction for quite some time.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by mudchicken

Jim White: Keep your day job. You'll never make it as a railroader.

49CFR213.109(b)(3) and 49CFR213.109(c) says that's just fine for 10 MPH track.

You clearly do NOT understand how the angle bar and bolts work (as in the logic behind the design of the system distributing the load)...

The local roadmaster is probably doing the best he can with what budget he has and still manages to keep things rolling.

[(-D][(-D][(-D]

I wouldn't want to be a railroader, but I kinda like your day job (impressing forum members by insulting others). I bet you think the ties are in mint condition too, and that tie plate is at the proper angle for 10 mph traffic too, eh ChickyMud?? You need to lay off the creosote and pull your head up out of the "Book of Uncommon Sense".

Books with codes are no different than law books, and as the adage goes, "The law's an ***"! [;)][;)][;)]

[nssr9169]

As long as no body goes***over teakettle i say it's fine........A railroad in wisconsin THE TRACK IS SO BAD YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW THERE IS BALLAST UNTILL YOU MOW THE WEEDS[:p][:D]. with youall should try very fun[;)]

[tormadel]

[Anonymous]

I would like to second farmer 03 regarding the ex RI from Bureau to Peoria IL. Ex-RI trackage looked much worse than this and some ex-ICG looked worse than this as well. And they were not even in the worst parts of town![:(][;)]

[slotracer]

Worst mainline or branchline track I have ever seen was the old LEhigh Valley Niagara Falls Branch through teh Amherst/Tonawand region. Lumpy and wavy old joint bar track with broken ties and you could pull spikes out with your fingers. I beleive the trains actually ran on teh ground and the tracks were simply there for cosmetic value.

[edblysard]

Funny, but Mr White missed the point of what a joint bar does..
Look again...the joint is tight, and the bolts are tight also.
The ends of the rail are not shelling or peeling, so the joint is not getting hammered and the joint is in gauge and supported by at least one end on a tie...although it is not a requirement that it sit on a tie at all.
The point of the joint bar is to keep the ends of the rail aligned, and to keep one end from riding higher or lower than the other...which this one is doing.

Oh, and if this paticular mudchicken told me I could run a SD70M down that track at 10 mph, I would, with out any hesitation.

Ed

[zardoz]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Jim_White

QUOTE: Originally posted by mudchicken

Jim White: Keep your day job. You'll never make it as a railroader.

49CFR213.109(b)(3) and 49CFR213.109(c) says that's just fine for 10 MPH track.

You clearly do NOT understand how the angle bar and bolts work (as in the logic behind the design of the system distributing the load)...

The local roadmaster is probably doing the best he can with what budget he has and still manages to keep things rolling.

[(-D][(-D][(-D]

I wouldn't want to be a railroader, but I kinda like your day job (impressing forum members by insulting others). I bet you think the ties are in mint condition too, and that tie plate is at the proper angle for 10 mph traffic too, eh ChickyMud?? You need to lay off the creosote and pull your head up out of the "Book of Uncommon Sense".

Books with codes are no different than law books, and as the adage goes, "The law's an ***"! [;)][;)][;)]

I think Mr. Mudchicken did a nice job of explaining things from his viewpoint of actually working on the track and having more knowledge about track maintenance than just about the entire forum membership combined. He never once implied that the track was in good condition; he merely explained to the other posters his impression of what he saw in the photos.

It seems to me that his reply was meant as light-hearted, and that no disrespect was intended.

I might suggest that if your 'skin' is so thin that you cannot take even the slightest razzing, then perhaps it would be best for you if you refrained from interaction with other people.

Your name-calling and insults towards him are completely unwarranted.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Funny, but Mr White missed the point of what a joint bar does..
Look again...the joint is tight, and the bolts are tight also.
The ends of the rail are not shelling or peeling, so the joint is not getting hammered and the joint is in gauge and supported by at least one end on a tie...although it is not a requirement that it sit on a tie at all.
The point of the joint bar is to keep the ends of the rail aligned, and to keep one end from riding higher or lower than the other...which this one is doing.

Oh, and if this paticular mudchicken told me I could run a SD70M down that track at 10 mph, I would, with out any hesitation.

Ed

Judging by the picture of this situation we see before us, are you and Mudchicken saying that the joint bar here (again, in this particular situation) will be able to consistently handle the tremendous loads with no signs of wearing?

[coborn35]

QUOTE: Originally posted by nssr9169

As long as no body goes***over teakettle i say it's fine........A railroad in wisconsin THE TRACK IS SO BAD YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW THERE IS BALLAST UNTILL YOU MOW THE WEEDS[:p][:D]. with youall should try very fun[;)]

LOL I know!

[CMSTPP]

I've seen track where there are no ties. The line is sitting on gravel. Infact this line is located in Spooner Wisconsin. Pretty Sweet railroad. WGNS Wisconsin Great Northern railway.

James

[Anonymous]

thanks david.

that is some great track to model !

[edblysard]

Yes, that is exactaly what I am implying...it in fact is doing a fine job of just that.
Are the ends of the rail damaged in any way you can see?
Is one end worn more than the other, or chipped/damaged?
Are they out of alignment?
Is one rail riding higher than the other, or is the joint bar holding the rail together?
As long as the bolts are kept snug, it works.
I work in a yard, built in 1924...quite a few joint bars never sit on a tie...and some of our rail, in use today, is from the original tracks...1924.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Jim_White

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Funny, but Mr White missed the point of what a joint bar does..
Look again...the joint is tight, and the bolts are tight also.
The ends of the rail are not shelling or peeling, so the joint is not getting hammered and the joint is in gauge and supported by at least one end on a tie...although it is not a requirement that it sit on a tie at all.
The point of the joint bar is to keep the ends of the rail aligned, and to keep one end from riding higher or lower than the other...which this one is doing.

Oh, and if this paticular mudchicken told me I could run a SD70M down that track at 10 mph, I would, with out any hesitation.

Ed

Judging by the picture of this situation we see before us, are you and Mudchicken saying that the joint bar here (again, in this particular situation) will be able to consistently handle the tremendous loads with no signs of wearing?

[Anonymous]

WHOOT!!! Ok, I'll take your word for it. My primary objective never was to be contentious with anyone here who is an expert in railroading. Why I brought this up in the first place was because I know there is always room for new ideas and improvements in any job. I'm sure this concept I had was already looked at (perhaps many many years ago) and through engineering & testing, what was discovered was a "... it doesn't matter ... it's all the same ..." to the idea.

I offer my apologies to Mudchicken for my outburst. I believe someone else here said I misinterpreted MC's reply. Yes, it is possible. I'm at times trigger happy and fire back when I feel fired upon. I'm simply a man with many faults.

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Yes, that is exactaly what I am implying...it in fact is doing a fine job of just that.
Are the ends of the rail damaged in any way you can see?
Is one end worn more than the other, or chipped/damaged?
Are they out of alignment?
Is one rail riding higher than the other, or is the joint bar holding the rail together?
As long as the bolts are kept snug, it works.
I work in a yard, built in 1924...quite a few joint bars never sit on a tie...and some of our rail, in use today, is from the original tracks...1924.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Jim_White

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Funny, but Mr White missed the point of what a joint bar does..
Look again...the joint is tight, and the bolts are tight also.
The ends of the rail are not shelling or peeling, so the joint is not getting hammered and the joint is in gauge and supported by at least one end on a tie...although it is not a requirement that it sit on a tie at all.
The point of the joint bar is to keep the ends of the rail aligned, and to keep one end from riding higher or lower than the other...which this one is doing.

Oh, and if this paticular mudchicken told me I could run a SD70M down that track at 10 mph, I would, with out any hesitation.

Ed

Judging by the picture of this situation we see before us, are you and Mudchicken saying that the joint bar here (again, in this particular situation) will be able to consistently handle the tremendous loads with no signs of wearing?

[paulstecyna21]

i have near the lehigh river in allentown on kimmet street i got to get a picture of them in order to show you all.

[edblysard]

Jim,
I can’t accept an apology for the mudchicken, he is a "grownup" and can do that for himself...and I don’t think you need to apologize to me.

But my point was that the support for the track inst just the joint bars...its main purpose, besides joining the track pieces together, is to hold alignment and gauge.

Some where on this forum was a posting with a video of a CSX running over a really bad soft spot...so bad the rail was rocking/ pumping up and down by at least 6", ...far enough to have pulled the spikes out of the ties.
Everybody was freaked out by it...but as long as the joint bar does what it is meant to do....
In a perfect world with perfect railroads, then yes, it is a good idea to place joints on ties, and to stagger the joint on the opposing rail far enough apart to prevent harmonic rocking....but most railroads aint perfect...and most of the track designers and engineers know that, so they over design this stuff with that in mind.

If you get a chance, go look at a compromise joint bar, designed to joint two different size rail together...it will make a lot of sense after you look at it for a while.
[8D]Ed

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by monkeyman2


Worst tracks I've ever seen....

Please tell me that those aren't still in use.

[tree68]

QUOTE: Originally posted by RR Redneck

QUOTE: Originally posted by monkeyman2


Worst tracks I've ever seen....

Please tell me that those aren't still in use.

Looks like they may well still be in guage. The big hump is because of the unloader...

[edblysard]

Why not?
Those are industrial tracks, inside a plant...max speed about walking speed for the unloader...not as bad as a lot of others I work all the time.
Ed

QUOTE: Originally posted by RR Redneck

QUOTE: Originally posted by monkeyman2


Worst tracks I've ever seen....

Please tell me that those aren't still in use.

[Anonymous]

[tormadel]

QUOTE: Originally posted by tree68

QUOTE: Originally posted by RR Redneck

QUOTE: Originally posted by monkeyman2


Worst tracks I've ever seen....

Please tell me that those aren't still in use.

Looks like they may well still be in guage. The big hump is because of the unloader...

It doesn't look good I'll grant you that.

[Anonymous]

kinda looks like our main from syracuse to massena and that is 40 mph

[CaptainChuck]

Looks better than the GRS District 1 Mainline.
No joke

[mudchicken]

In Colorado & most other places, that track should be mandated out of service and not because of the track. (Ed, I would fear for a switchman's safety, especially in the dark)

(how bad has the camera scrunched up the image?)

Agri-dummies![V][V][V]

[edblysard]

Beside the absence of walkways, the missing barricade/barrier to keep you from falling into the pit...and the close clearance of the Archimedes screw pit building…?

We lost a guy 9 years ago, got knocked off a wood chip car into the screw pit at Pasadena paper because of close clearance, he was dead before the engineer could plug the train.

Ed

[monkeyman2]

QUOTE: Originally posted by tormadel

QUOTE: Originally posted by tree68

QUOTE: Originally posted by RR Redneck

QUOTE: Originally posted by monkeyman2


Worst tracks I've ever seen....

Please tell me that those aren't still in use.

Looks like they may well still be in guage. The big hump is because of the unloader...

It doesn't look good I'll grant you that.

Its the end of a branch line, It's not really used any more, Atleast as far as I know...
that pic's from last year, Next time im in the area I'll get more pics and see if its in use... or improved.

[mudchicken]

The side clearance alone is illegal as sin. What state are we talking?

(....and you had a BNSF switchman and two UP switchmen killed by similar close clearance violations last year. The idots at the grain facility are probably totally unaware of what hazzard they have created)

(Betcha the under track unloading pit doesn't meet minimum standard as well and the rail now has to do double duty as a bridge beam spanning 3+ feet)

Ed - Don't need him to apologize. Mr. White just stepped in it again, all by himself, quite nicely. (Ranks right up there with the clown in California complaining about all those DERAIL signs at La Mirada marking where trains derailed [:D][:D][:D] like so many tombstones.[(-D][(-D][(-D])

[monkeyman2]

QUOTE: Originally posted by mudchicken

The side clearance alone is illegal as sin. What state are we talking?

(....and you had a BNSF switchman and two UP switchmen killed by similar close clearance violations last year. The idots at the grain facility are probably totally unaware of what hazzard they have created)

(Betcha the under track unloading pit doesn't meet minimum standard as well and the rail now has to do double duty as a bridge beam spanning 3+ feet)

Ed - Don't need him to apologize. Mr. White just stepped in it again, all by himself, quite nicely. (Ranks right up there with the clown in California complaining about all those DERAIL signs at La Mirada marking where trains derailed [:D][:D][:D] like so many tombstones.[(-D][(-D][(-D])

Its in Maryland, and its probably been there sense the 50's. and as far as I know the whole little branch lines abonden except for the 1st little bit which they store cars on some times.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Ed - Don't need him to apologize. Mr. White just stepped in it again, all by himself, quite nicely. (Ranks right up there with the clown in California complaining about all those DERAIL signs at La Mirada marking where trains derailed like so many tombstones.)

WHAT?! What am I guilty of now? [}:)]

[Anonymous]

Boys---boys---boys!! Settle down. You're becoming too good entertainment.

A word to the wise. If you try to argue technical details with people who have forgotten more than you ever learned about the subject in the first place, you're probably not going to win any brownie points, or the argument either. That's called an "argument from ignorance" in philosophical logic, and it will get you a 5 or 6 on the Wunderlich test.

For all you speculators, the photos first posted appear to be of one of the better segments what was the MP Bergstrom AFB spur in south Austin TX. It's now a UP industrial spur and in a GOOD year it sees maybe a switch move or two a week. It's class 1. It has broken ties, cut ties, rotten ties, displaced and/or missing tie plates, killed spikes, etc., but it has 5 good ties per rail joint and in fact will hold up the short, light moves that use it at speeds that amount more to a jog or walk than anything else. Yes, they do occasionally derail a car, which at that speed is more of a nuisance than anything else. It's not the UP (ex-MP) main line that crosses Oltorf St, which is Class 4 and sees 30-50 trains a day, including ATK. But pay attention to Ed and MC. They know what they're talking about. Look at the rail joint and track in those photos. The rail is not broken, shelled or beaten down. The bolts appear to be tight. The track is holding gauge reasonably well. It works for its current very limited purpose. If business warrants it that track will get upgraded. It's really that simple.