Bad train pictures

[vsmith]

Stub switch



The position of the rails is held in place by the switch stand, good enough for early light engines but got more problematic as locos got bigger. A heavy loco couls cause the approach rails to spread and derail the engine.

[vsmith]

Stub switch



The position of the rails is held in place by the switch stand, good enough for early light engines but got more problematic as locos got bigger. A heavy loco couls cause the approach rails to spread and derail the engine.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Stub switches were often used with three-way switches. Another disadvantage comes during hot weather when the rail would expand and the stubs would stick.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Stub switches were often used with three-way switches. Another disadvantage comes during hot weather when the rail would expand and the stubs would stick.

[dehusman]

A stub switch is a switch without points. Look at a regular (with points) switch. Now remove the points. You will have two continuous outer rails and two stub ended inner rails. Cut the outer two rails outer rails even with the inner rails. Now four rails stub end. Connect the two outer rails (in gauge) to a throwbar. By sliding the two outer rails of the switch you line them up with either pair of stub ended routes leading to the frog. The advantage is its simpler to build (you don't have to make points) but the abrupt joint tends to get damaged and its harder to keep the rails in guage.

Dave H.

[dehusman]

A stub switch is a switch without points. Look at a regular (with points) switch. Now remove the points. You will have two continuous outer rails and two stub ended inner rails. Cut the outer two rails outer rails even with the inner rails. Now four rails stub end. Connect the two outer rails (in gauge) to a throwbar. By sliding the two outer rails of the switch you line them up with either pair of stub ended routes leading to the frog. The advantage is its simpler to build (you don't have to make points) but the abrupt joint tends to get damaged and its harder to keep the rails in guage.

Dave H.

[bnsfkline]

My e-mail that I use here on the forums supports photos.

[bnsfkline]

My e-mail that I use here on the forums supports photos.

[edblysard]

Jim,
Email me at
[e-mail]
with a email address that supports photos, and I will send you a shot of a stub switch.
One look at it will explain all....
Ed

[edblysard]

Jim,
Email me at
[e-mail]
with a email address that supports photos, and I will send you a shot of a stub switch.
One look at it will explain all....
Ed

[bnsfkline]

What is a stub switch? I keep hearing about it and cant find any photos

[bnsfkline]

What is a stub switch? I keep hearing about it and cant find any photos

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

There are two varieties of GMD1's, which as a whole appear to be stretched road-switcher versions of the SW1200. The B-B version (CN 1900-1917) were equipped with steam generators and were probably used for branchline passenger service. The A1A-A1A version (CN 1000-1077 and NAR 301-305) were used on light-rail branch lines.

The GMD1 is a Canada-only model. The closest US version is the RS1325, of which only two were built (C&IM 30-31). Both are GM-EMD designs.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

There are two varieties of GMD1's, which as a whole appear to be stretched road-switcher versions of the SW1200. The B-B version (CN 1900-1917) were equipped with steam generators and were probably used for branchline passenger service. The A1A-A1A version (CN 1000-1077 and NAR 301-305) were used on light-rail branch lines.

The GMD1 is a Canada-only model. The closest US version is the RS1325, of which only two were built (C&IM 30-31). Both are GM-EMD designs.

[Mikeygaw]

i was looking at a site with a CN roster... they have units called GMD1's... who made them (i'm guessing EMD) and what are they used for?

[Mikeygaw]

i was looking at a site with a CN roster... they have units called GMD1's... who made them (i'm guessing EMD) and what are they used for?

[Anonymous]

I just wanted to remind people that this thread is a great place to ask questions. If you have a question--dumb or not--this thread is an excellent place to post questions.

Recently a question was asked about headlights, so in keeping with that idea, how about horns? When a horn fails to sound for any reason what must the engineer do? How far will the engine be allowed to travel as the lead engine if the horn will not sound? Will the engineer switch lead engines to have an engine with an operable horn?

This may be a rare occurance but I do know it has happened. When the Cotton Belt 819 was restored to running condition, on a trip to St. Louis, the horn failed. [:0] I think it actaully fell off but am not 100% sure about that part. I know what happened on that trip and what happened there but how about mainline trains?

[Anonymous]

I just wanted to remind people that this thread is a great place to ask questions. If you have a question--dumb or not--this thread is an excellent place to post questions.

Recently a question was asked about headlights, so in keeping with that idea, how about horns? When a horn fails to sound for any reason what must the engineer do? How far will the engine be allowed to travel as the lead engine if the horn will not sound? Will the engineer switch lead engines to have an engine with an operable horn?

This may be a rare occurance but I do know it has happened. When the Cotton Belt 819 was restored to running condition, on a trip to St. Louis, the horn failed. [:0] I think it actaully fell off but am not 100% sure about that part. I know what happened on that trip and what happened there but how about mainline trains?

[dehusman]

That the counter weight. A smashboard is a "sign" that that fouls the track. The Baring Cross bridge is not equipped with smashboards.

Dave H.

[dehusman]

That the counter weight. A smashboard is a "sign" that that fouls the track. The Baring Cross bridge is not equipped with smashboards.

Dave H.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes

Now that the "Story" [;)] is over we can get back to talking about trains. [:)]

Sunday afternoon I noticed the Bearing Cross Railroad Bridge going up. It links Little Rock to North Little Rock and is double tracked.

I took several pics of the liftspan in the up position. I noticed that when the bridge was up there seemed to be something blocking the tracks. I believe it was a weight that lowers as the bridge goes up but I am not sure about that. However it did appear that it would block the tracks and prevent a train from falling into the river. I have heard the term -- smashboard. Is this a smashboard in the true sense of the word or just accidentally a smashboard? [?]

Now come on people, Nora deserves better treatement than this. I found her thread on page 16. [:(] Now get with the topic and ask and answer some question. [;)]


Now back to questions and answers, and other related info. [^]


I just posted a second photo of the Bearing Cross Railroad Bridge in the raised position. I will post two links here, one in the down position and one in the up position. Now we can compare them and notice the counterweights blocking the trains path in the "raised" position.


http://naphotos.nerail.org/showpic/?2004100322100032262.jpg

http://naphotos.nerail.org/showpic/?200412051232393623.jpg

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes

Now that the "Story" [;)] is over we can get back to talking about trains. [:)]

Sunday afternoon I noticed the Bearing Cross Railroad Bridge going up. It links Little Rock to North Little Rock and is double tracked.

I took several pics of the liftspan in the up position. I noticed that when the bridge was up there seemed to be something blocking the tracks. I believe it was a weight that lowers as the bridge goes up but I am not sure about that. However it did appear that it would block the tracks and prevent a train from falling into the river. I have heard the term -- smashboard. Is this a smashboard in the true sense of the word or just accidentally a smashboard? [?]

Now come on people, Nora deserves better treatement than this. I found her thread on page 16. [:(] Now get with the topic and ask and answer some question. [;)]


Now back to questions and answers, and other related info. [^]


I just posted a second photo of the Bearing Cross Railroad Bridge in the raised position. I will post two links here, one in the down position and one in the up position. Now we can compare them and notice the counterweights blocking the trains path in the "raised" position.


http://naphotos.nerail.org/showpic/?2004100322100032262.jpg

http://naphotos.nerail.org/showpic/?200412051232393623.jpg

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Further comment on LTL and package freight: Since I live near Clearing Yard and several major truck terminals, I've observed that the LTL and package carriers in the area (mainly UPS, Yellow and FedEx) generally operate 28-foot trailers as double bottoms.

REA operated primarily for package freight, what is usually shipped by UPS today. Railroads operated their own LCL service, often in expedited freight trains. I'm not sure where the dividing line falls between LCL/LTL and package service.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Further comment on LTL and package freight: Since I live near Clearing Yard and several major truck terminals, I've observed that the LTL and package carriers in the area (mainly UPS, Yellow and FedEx) generally operate 28-foot trailers as double bottoms.

REA operated primarily for package freight, what is usually shipped by UPS today. Railroads operated their own LCL service, often in expedited freight trains. I'm not sure where the dividing line falls between LCL/LTL and package service.

[WDGF]

Thank you Peter and Mark for filling me in. Sometimes it's hard for a relative outsider to follow a thread without a good understanding of what the terminology means. Often I can cipher it out of the context of the thread, but this was one where I just wasn't able to.

[WDGF]

Thank you Peter and Mark for filling me in. Sometimes it's hard for a relative outsider to follow a thread without a good understanding of what the terminology means. Often I can cipher it out of the context of the thread, but this was one where I just wasn't able to.

[Overmod]

Brak, there's quite an answer to your question. I think people with 'distinctive competence' in signaling and dispatching will address it in some detail, but here's a start.

"Traditional" railroading doesn't depend on the signals to give a train authority over a certain section of track. When signals are used, they are spaced at least as far apart as the 'longest' train will take to stop, and there will be at least one caution indication before a 'red' signal, which is supposed to keep surprises from happening. Crews also know where the signals are located along the wayside, and will use due care when approaching one in a 'blind' location.

As you point out, it's easier if there is a 'signal light on the dash' -- and this was available to railroads at an astonishingly early date. It's what is sometimes called 'cab signals'. A short digression: It was somewhat complex to install a cab-signal system on steam locomotives before 1920, as it required finicky electromechanical components and either a big battery or an electrical generator of some capacity to work. After 1920, when the Government returned United States railroads to private control, it also mandated installation of automatic train control (which has nothing per se to do with cab signals, but can share much of the control and actuation circuitry). By 1947, ATC was required for trains running 80 mph and over -- which will explain the otherwise arbitrary-sounding 79 mph speed limit for non-ATC-equipped track or trains. If you invest in the significant overhead of an ATC system, which nominally does little more than hit the brakes if you miss a signal, I consider it a meaningful advantage to install cab-signal repeaters for the wayside signaling... or even eliminate the wayside lights and their maintenance completely (as some railroads have done).

A good example of modern rules is the Northeast Operating Rule Advisory Committee (NORAC) rulebook -- signal indications here tie operating cab signals to operations over 79 mph, for example. (Very high speed, especially on twisting rights-of-way such as sections of that over which the Acela operates north of New Haven, requires cab signals for safe high-speed operation even in the presence of operating train-control systems, in large part for technical reasons relating to rail braking.)

There has been a relatively recent 'push' to obtain the safety benefits of ATC even on slower trains, using modern communications and electronics technology. It would not "do" to confuse this cutting-edge research with 125-year-old 'automatic train control', so you'll often see the more modern euphemism "positive train control" (or its former and now somewhat (rightly) discredited idiot brother PTS (positive train stop). Some of these systems can allow for flexible headway, based on the type of train and its actual stopping characteristics; others incorporate useful functions into the signal system (such as warning about track-gang activity or other maintenance activity on the controlled routes). An interesting example is the North American Joint Positive Train Control (NAJPTC) project.

Watch this thread for better information from people who know more.

[Overmod]

Brak, there's quite an answer to your question. I think people with 'distinctive competence' in signaling and dispatching will address it in some detail, but here's a start.

"Traditional" railroading doesn't depend on the signals to give a train authority over a certain section of track. When signals are used, they are spaced at least as far apart as the 'longest' train will take to stop, and there will be at least one caution indication before a 'red' signal, which is supposed to keep surprises from happening. Crews also know where the signals are located along the wayside, and will use due care when approaching one in a 'blind' location.

As you point out, it's easier if there is a 'signal light on the dash' -- and this was available to railroads at an astonishingly early date. It's what is sometimes called 'cab signals'. A short digression: It was somewhat complex to install a cab-signal system on steam locomotives before 1920, as it required finicky electromechanical components and either a big battery or an electrical generator of some capacity to work. After 1920, when the Government returned United States railroads to private control, it also mandated installation of automatic train control (which has nothing per se to do with cab signals, but can share much of the control and actuation circuitry). By 1947, ATC was required for trains running 80 mph and over -- which will explain the otherwise arbitrary-sounding 79 mph speed limit for non-ATC-equipped track or trains. If you invest in the significant overhead of an ATC system, which nominally does little more than hit the brakes if you miss a signal, I consider it a meaningful advantage to install cab-signal repeaters for the wayside signaling... or even eliminate the wayside lights and their maintenance completely (as some railroads have done).

A good example of modern rules is the Northeast Operating Rule Advisory Committee (NORAC) rulebook -- signal indications here tie operating cab signals to operations over 79 mph, for example. (Very high speed, especially on twisting rights-of-way such as sections of that over which the Acela operates north of New Haven, requires cab signals for safe high-speed operation even in the presence of operating train-control systems, in large part for technical reasons relating to rail braking.)

There has been a relatively recent 'push' to obtain the safety benefits of ATC even on slower trains, using modern communications and electronics technology. It would not "do" to confuse this cutting-edge research with 125-year-old 'automatic train control', so you'll often see the more modern euphemism "positive train control" (or its former and now somewhat (rightly) discredited idiot brother PTS (positive train stop). Some of these systems can allow for flexible headway, based on the type of train and its actual stopping characteristics; others incorporate useful functions into the signal system (such as warning about track-gang activity or other maintenance activity on the controlled routes). An interesting example is the North American Joint Positive Train Control (NAJPTC) project.

Watch this thread for better information from people who know more.

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

I was issued a Motorola JT1000 eight years ago, still have it.
Works great, until it gets wet...then you cant hear a thing out of it.
Its been dropped from a moving train, fell in a ditch, slid, kicked and bounced along the walkway of a locomotive, dropped in a open top hopper...still working.

Carry it in a hip holster, although it is rarely out of my hand.

I tried a ear piece, with a throat mike...my engineer could hear me, but it was hard to hear and understand him and other transmissions.

In Dans world, cutting out the tremendous sound on a flight deck is the goal, they have a entire language composed of hand signals, as do we.

When they do have to speak to each other, they use a verbal shorthand, and we do too!

But I have to be able to hear a wheel sliding, or a flat spot, along with the transmissions from other crews, even if they are not directed towards my crew.

Sometimes, the smallest sound will clue you in to something going wrong, trust me, at night, cars can sneak up on you in a second, and the only tip off you get is a squeak of the bearing, or a wheel flange binds and squeals.

You have to be able to hear all of thet.

It might just be the way my hearing is wired, but the ear piece got in the way of me hearing things I have to hear, after a while, you can tell if a coupling made just by the sound.

Add in the fact that railroad are not going to replace something that is currently working, (it aint broke, dont fix it).

By the way, the life span of my radio is out of the ordinary...most guys need one every other year, but I take a little better care of it than most, when it rains, I have a big stash of the plastic bags they slip over your newspaper to keep it dry, they work just fine on radios too!

If I could find a wireless ear piece, maybe, but any wire hanging is a hazzard, I was issued a hand held mike with the radio, used it right up to the point I got hung up on a cut lever, and had to run, then ride a car I kicked, all the way to the joint, trying to un hook the mike.
Haven't used it since, dont even know where it is...

Ed

many of the deck guys also use radios ..... "mickey mouse's" because they're integral to the ear pieces. They take ALOT of abuse, and are made to be wet, hot, cold, etc. And they have short cords with disconnects, since in the high snag enivornment, better to lose radio comms, than to go off the deck edge with the cat shot. Bad ju ju. But, they are not listening for things, either so...each will find what works best for them...

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

I was issued a Motorola JT1000 eight years ago, still have it.
Works great, until it gets wet...then you cant hear a thing out of it.
Its been dropped from a moving train, fell in a ditch, slid, kicked and bounced along the walkway of a locomotive, dropped in a open top hopper...still working.

Carry it in a hip holster, although it is rarely out of my hand.

I tried a ear piece, with a throat mike...my engineer could hear me, but it was hard to hear and understand him and other transmissions.

In Dans world, cutting out the tremendous sound on a flight deck is the goal, they have a entire language composed of hand signals, as do we.

When they do have to speak to each other, they use a verbal shorthand, and we do too!

But I have to be able to hear a wheel sliding, or a flat spot, along with the transmissions from other crews, even if they are not directed towards my crew.

Sometimes, the smallest sound will clue you in to something going wrong, trust me, at night, cars can sneak up on you in a second, and the only tip off you get is a squeak of the bearing, or a wheel flange binds and squeals.

You have to be able to hear all of thet.

It might just be the way my hearing is wired, but the ear piece got in the way of me hearing things I have to hear, after a while, you can tell if a coupling made just by the sound.

Add in the fact that railroad are not going to replace something that is currently working, (it aint broke, dont fix it).

By the way, the life span of my radio is out of the ordinary...most guys need one every other year, but I take a little better care of it than most, when it rains, I have a big stash of the plastic bags they slip over your newspaper to keep it dry, they work just fine on radios too!

If I could find a wireless ear piece, maybe, but any wire hanging is a hazzard, I was issued a hand held mike with the radio, used it right up to the point I got hung up on a cut lever, and had to run, then ride a car I kicked, all the way to the joint, trying to un hook the mike.
Haven't used it since, dont even know where it is...

Ed

many of the deck guys also use radios ..... "mickey mouse's" because they're integral to the ear pieces. They take ALOT of abuse, and are made to be wet, hot, cold, etc. And they have short cords with disconnects, since in the high snag enivornment, better to lose radio comms, than to go off the deck edge with the cat shot. Bad ju ju. But, they are not listening for things, either so...each will find what works best for them...