Bad train pictures

[Anonymous]

Has everyone run out of questions? [?]

Or just forgot about this thread? [?]

OK, who has the next question? [?]

[Anonymous]

Has everyone run out of questions? [?]

Or just forgot about this thread? [?]

OK, who has the next question? [?]

[Mikeygaw]

hey, answer Mikey's question first!

[Mikeygaw]

hey, answer Mikey's question first!

[Anonymous]

Could they be Mile markers?

I know we have mile arkers on our tracksa that go from 1.....2.....3......4......5... but at 12.2 Is the yard and theres a sign, where the track..swithces theres a post with mile 12.2 on it, and on the other side is a completely different number...

make sense...

probobly not.

[Anonymous]

Could they be Mile markers?

I know we have mile arkers on our tracksa that go from 1.....2.....3......4......5... but at 12.2 Is the yard and theres a sign, where the track..swithces theres a post with mile 12.2 on it, and on the other side is a completely different number...

make sense...

probobly not.

[rrnut282]

Was this sign on an electrified line?

[rrnut282]

Was this sign on an electrified line?

[Anonymous]

7 amps 62 volts...

No way.. you couldn't run a pump on that, let alone a train.

[Anonymous]

7 amps 62 volts...

No way.. you couldn't run a pump on that, let alone a train.

[rrnut282]

Not if it was 62KV

[rrnut282]

Not if it was 62KV

[Anonymous]

But 62, 000 V, it would be really dangerous to put that much through rails, usually thats reserved for sum,bways or above power lines.

Matter of fact, to put 62KV through Rails, the electrcity would Arc into the ground, So that would fail. Any eletricity that is over 601 Volts, must be a certain Height off the ground otherwise it will arc... and ground itself out..

[Anonymous]

But 62, 000 V, it would be really dangerous to put that much through rails, usually thats reserved for sum,bways or above power lines.

Matter of fact, to put 62KV through Rails, the electrcity would Arc into the ground, So that would fail. Any eletricity that is over 601 Volts, must be a certain Height off the ground otherwise it will arc... and ground itself out..

[cherokee woman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes

Has everyone run out of questions? [?]

Or just forgot about this thread? [?]

OK, who has the next question? [?]

Jim, you want a stupid question? I've got one:

What does "articulated" mean in conjunction with trains? (Simple everyday English will suffice for answers, please)?

[cherokee woman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes

Has everyone run out of questions? [?]

Or just forgot about this thread? [?]

OK, who has the next question? [?]

Jim, you want a stupid question? I've got one:

What does "articulated" mean in conjunction with trains? (Simple everyday English will suffice for answers, please)?

[Mookie]

I know this one, but since I am leaving - I will leave it lay for someone else to pick up!

Big Boys - my favorite - were articulated!!!!!! Very ingenius invention!

Mookie

[Mookie]

I know this one, but since I am leaving - I will leave it lay for someone else to pick up!

Big Boys - my favorite - were articulated!!!!!! Very ingenius invention!

Mookie

[Mikeygaw]

ok, i've gathered up some of the info from when I asked that question a little while back (it's scattered throughout pages 34-36)

Articulated steamers front engine is not rigidly fixed to the locomotive, its rear end is hinged approximately between the rear engine's cylinders, so it can swing under the boiler in order to enable the locomotive to negotiate curves etc.

Some examples are like Mookie said the Big Boys, Challangers, Mallets, 2-6-6-2, USRA 2-8-8-2, among others

Non-articulated engines don't have those hinges. An example is the T1 4-4-4-4's

[Mikeygaw]

ok, i've gathered up some of the info from when I asked that question a little while back (it's scattered throughout pages 34-36)

Articulated steamers front engine is not rigidly fixed to the locomotive, its rear end is hinged approximately between the rear engine's cylinders, so it can swing under the boiler in order to enable the locomotive to negotiate curves etc.

Some examples are like Mookie said the Big Boys, Challangers, Mallets, 2-6-6-2, USRA 2-8-8-2, among others

Non-articulated engines don't have those hinges. An example is the T1 4-4-4-4's

[Mikeygaw]

ok, now back to my question... the line is overhead electricfied... and how about the rails? there are two sections of rails set on the side, and two markers

[Mikeygaw]

ok, now back to my question... the line is overhead electricfied... and how about the rails? there are two sections of rails set on the side, and two markers

[JoeKoh]

mikey they could be marking the section of rail they want to replace?
just a guess
stay safe
joe

[JoeKoh]

mikey they could be marking the section of rail they want to replace?
just a guess
stay safe
joe

[Anonymous]

Very True...

[Anonymous]

Very True...

[Mikeygaw]

ok, new question to resurect the thread... i've seen engines refered to as rebuilt from one engine to another engine (for example CSX #2422 and 2423 are listed as SD-40-2's rebuilt from SD-45-2's (http://www.online-isp.com/~rcraig/CSX.HTML))

Well, how do the rebuilt locomotives compare to locomotives that were originally built to the specifications of the new type? Are they better? worse? about the same?

How much of the locomotive has to be rebuilt to change the name? Is the locomotive completely rebuilt, or just enough that the engine more closely resembles the engine type of it's new name than the type it was originally built as?

Are flaws in the type the locomotive is being turned into included into the rebuilt engine, or are they corrected?

And finally, if the locomotive's original type has a benefit over the locomotive's new type, are the benefits left in, or are they brought down to the level of the new type?

[Mikeygaw]

ok, new question to resurect the thread... i've seen engines refered to as rebuilt from one engine to another engine (for example CSX #2422 and 2423 are listed as SD-40-2's rebuilt from SD-45-2's (http://www.online-isp.com/~rcraig/CSX.HTML))

Well, how do the rebuilt locomotives compare to locomotives that were originally built to the specifications of the new type? Are they better? worse? about the same?

How much of the locomotive has to be rebuilt to change the name? Is the locomotive completely rebuilt, or just enough that the engine more closely resembles the engine type of it's new name than the type it was originally built as?

Are flaws in the type the locomotive is being turned into included into the rebuilt engine, or are they corrected?

And finally, if the locomotive's original type has a benefit over the locomotive's new type, are the benefits left in, or are they brought down to the level of the new type?

[dehusman]

The rebuilds have more to do with the insides than the outsides. An SD45 that is now listed as an SD40-2 means that the diesel engine has been completely replaced (a V16 instead of a V20) and the electrical system has been upgraded to dash 2 specs. The exterior might not look any different at all.

The Railroads really don't care what it looks like on the outside, they only care about how it operates. Generally you don't rebuild unless it improves the operate, the power or the reliability. Not to say that some rebuilds are less than satisfactory.

Dave H.

[dehusman]

The rebuilds have more to do with the insides than the outsides. An SD45 that is now listed as an SD40-2 means that the diesel engine has been completely replaced (a V16 instead of a V20) and the electrical system has been upgraded to dash 2 specs. The exterior might not look any different at all.

The Railroads really don't care what it looks like on the outside, they only care about how it operates. Generally you don't rebuild unless it improves the operate, the power or the reliability. Not to say that some rebuilds are less than satisfactory.

Dave H.