Trains.com

Third Rail AND Overhead

28351 views
82 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2008
  • 1,112 posts
Posted by aegrotatio on Monday, August 31, 2009 11:52 AM

Awesome!

What is more efficient and cost effective to used a third rail or overhead?

 

How about over-running or under-running third rail?  Are there specific advantages or disadvantages of either kind?

 

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Monday, August 31, 2009 6:42 PM

I would opt for 'under-running' third rail.  It has these advantages:  1).  It is easier to shield from inadvertant contact, if you remember to lift your leg over it.  2).  It is easier to insulate, yet gain access, if needed.  3.)  It doesn't foul as many "clearance plates", as the overall profile is lower.  Yes, some freight cars are restricted from running in third rail territory.  4.)  It is more protected from the weather (snow, sleet) than the over-running, upon which ice could/does build up.  5.)  It looks better, but that is a NYC opinion.

NYC had some flangers in the Electric Division territory.  They had blowers that removed snow build-up from under the third rail, in addition to the normal flanger duties.  Cool to watch!

As far as the original question goes, third rail maintenance doesn't require the use of a "wire train".  Short segments can be isolated for work, without on-track equipment.  Of course, overhead AC is cheaper to distribute than third rail DC.

Bill Hays -- Shelby, MT 

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Monday, August 31, 2009 7:02 PM

I would like to hear more about the Wassaic service.  What kind of locomotives are used from Brewster North/Southeast, westward?  I assume they run into/out of GCT also.  Are any FL-9s still running?  What ever happened to the two FL-9s that were painted in the NYC "Lightning Stripe" scheme?  They were way cool, methinks!!!

Anyhoo, I'd love to see restoration of the Harlem Division passenger service to Chatham, NY and on to Albany!  The 8% New York State sales tax should easily be able to support the rebuild!  What else do they have to spend it on?  A Danbury-Brewster-Poughkeepsie shuttle would be neat.  Connecticut could donate some of their sales tax revenue to this venture.  A couple of RDCs would work, espically with bar service.  Onward to Campbell Hall, and beyond.  Even eastward to Waterbury and Hartford!  Knock the "Yuppies" off the Poughkeepsie Bridge, keep the Hudson clean (no water bottles, diapers, and Labrador 'Land Mines' being kicked into the river) and connect with the M-NR 'Port Jervis' line, etc....

Bill Hays -- in 'no-sales-tax' Montana! 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 8,156 posts
Posted by henry6 on Monday, August 31, 2009 7:31 PM

The line north (NYC RR west) of Wassaic is gone, a walking trail in some places, dissapeared in others.  Very doubtful it will ever become a railroad again.

There's a guy here called Dutchrailnut who lives in Brewster and is an engineer for MNRR and I hope he can jump in here and answer your questions better.  FL9's are gone, Genisis are in and I believe they are duel mode...GCT trains from Wassaic are up to 10 cars I think, the local turn is, I think, two.

You've got some neat ideas which just are not real enough for MNRR.  And the lightning striped units are at the Danbury Museum.

RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • 42 posts
Posted by HERBYD on Monday, August 31, 2009 7:33 PM

   why all the fuss. why not put a diesel locomotive on the end of  a set of m-7 cars.  penn station to babylon. drop off  half the cars then continue east on diesel. only needed for rush hour thru trains.

herbyd

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Monday, August 31, 2009 8:31 PM
BNSFwatcher

I would opt for 'under-running' third rail.  It has these advantages:  1).  It is easier to shield from inadvertant contact, if you remember to lift your leg over it.  2).  It is easier to insulate, yet gain access, if needed.  3.)  It doesn't foul as many "clearance plates", as the overall profile is lower.  Yes, some freight cars are restricted from running in third rail territory.  4.)  It is more protected from the weather (snow, sleet) than the over-running, upon which ice could/does build up.  5.)  It looks better, but that is a NYC opinion.

NYC had some flangers in the Electric Division territory.  They had blowers that removed snow build-up from under the third rail, in addition to the normal flanger duties.  Cool to watch!

As far as the original question goes, third rail maintenance doesn't require the use of a "wire train".  Short segments can be isolated for work, without on-track equipment.  Of course, overhead AC is cheaper to distribute than third rail DC.

Bill Hays -- Shelby, MT 

The disadvantage of underrunning is that you need sprung shoes to keep contact. Gravity will work with overrunning.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 115 posts
Posted by Cricketer on Tuesday, September 1, 2009 1:15 PM

Couople of further point on 3rd rail vs overhead. The first is speed - the fastest regular 3rd rail service I know of is 100mph, it's double that for overhead, with a maximum over 350mph is speed.

The second is about voltage loss - low voltage 3rd rail will lose voltage over short distances, so needs substations every ten or so miles. 3rd rail, with much higher voltages needs many fewer substations. Less fixed plant leads to less cost, though against that the cost of actualy laying 3rd rail is usually much less than stringing up catenerary, as clearances need much less work for 3rd rail.

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Tuesday, September 1, 2009 6:31 PM

I don't ever remember seeing springs on NYC or NYNH&H under-running third rail shoes.  Maybe I never looked!  I think the shoes ran with the horizontal geometry of the trucks.  If anything, they might need a spring, or some flexibility, to allow them to 'dip' where third rail was a bit low.  Spring-loading them upward would cause them to rise when there were gaps in the third rail, or it changed sides.  At he next side-change, an upwardly-sprung shoe would foul the new pick-up rail and be lost!  The New Haven's shoes were held down, pneumatically, in third rail territory.  I doubt if they were spring-loaded to go up.  A momentary air-failure would have caused them to foul the next third rail and be clipped off.  I'm really guessing here and hope for enlightenment.  I don't know nutthin' about over-running third rail.  Yar, there are 'transition' rails, on a gentle slope, on both systems to handle minor variations in the shoe height when changing sides or bridging gaps.  Any Engineers, civil/mechanical/electrical, that is, from 466 Lexington Avenue still out there?

Bill Hays --  wdh@mcn.net

  • Member since
    September 2008
  • 1,112 posts
Posted by aegrotatio on Saturday, September 5, 2009 11:14 PM

 The pile of clipped shoes must have been an interesting sight.

 

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Saturday, September 5, 2009 11:45 PM

BNSFwatcher
At he next side-change, an upwardly-sprung shoe would foul the new pick-up rail and be lost!  The New Haven's shoes were held down, pneumatically, in third rail territory.  I doubt if they were spring-loaded to go up

Actually I have never looked at the thrd rail shoe either over running or under running.  However I have looked at the rails and at all ends of a section or 3rd rail they have a ramp rail. ie on an overrunning rail the rail slowly goes down about 4 inches until the shoe cannot contact the third rail. Opposite on an under running rail.  That seems to indicate a spring or pneumatic (?) actuation to maintain contact.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, September 6, 2009 4:30 AM

Chicago may still be using gravity shoes, but other than that, as far as I know, all other current North American third-rail uses have some some kind of spring shoe system.   The spring may be a pneumatic spring (like the spring system of many modern railcars of all types uses "air-bags") and be part of the deploy-recess, control system, but it is still a spring.

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Sunday, September 6, 2009 5:36 PM

I don't recall ever seeing a "pile" of shoes.  Back in 'the olde days', scrap was going for one-cent-per-pound.  I suppose local scavengers got to them quickly in Mount Vernon.  Why didn't I think of that?

Hays -- wdh@mcn.net

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Sunday, September 6, 2009 5:41 PM

Does anyone know who manufactures third-rail shoes?  I'd be interested in perusing their web-site(s).  I have no idea what they were/are made of.  Could there be copper in them?

Hays -- wdh@mcn.net

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, September 8, 2009 2:53 AM

Ohio Brass was a major manufacturer.   They also made streetcar and trolleybus wire frogs, "ears" to attach catenary to span-wire, and lots of other rail related items.  I think also rope trolley catchers and retrievers.   (Catchers will keep the rope from running out should the pole dewire, while retrievers actually pull the pole down to the roof.   The former were in general use on moderate speed streetcars while the latter were used on high speed interurubans like the North Shore and Indiana Railroad.)   A brass/copper and steel alloy is standard for shoes.

I guess when I have time I'll explore the web and see if OB is still in business.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, September 8, 2009 11:14 AM

daveklepper
I guess when I have time I'll explore the web and see if OB is still in business.

Yep, Dave, Ohio Brass is still in business, though not independently.

http://www.hubbellpowersystems.com/powertest/ohio_brass/ohiobrass.html

Johnny

Johnny

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Tuesday, September 8, 2009 10:19 PM

I checked the Hubbell/Ohio Brass website.  No joy.  I could find no reference to third-rail shoes.  Maybe it is a minor part of their business.  BTW, Mr. Hubbell invented the thingie you screw into a light fixture and it allows you to plug in a male line cord.  It is called a "Hubbell", in the trade, to this day.  Wish I had known that the shoes were a copper/brass alloy!  My scrap dealer screwed me!

Bill Hays 

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Tuesday, September 8, 2009 10:40 PM

Another "off-the-wall" question:  who made pantographs?  Also, what is the defining difference between 'trolley wire', simple overhead, and "catenary".  I should check Wikipedia, but I'm really lazy...  The original New Haven catenary was very heavy-duty stuff:  Three triangular messengers with an under-slung contact (copper) wire.  I notice that they have recently repainted the lattice-work catenary towers.  Not a job I would undertake! 

I think the New Haven used to, occasionally, lubricate the contact wires (with graphite?) and had a team in Grand Central Terminal that would inspect/replace the pantograph running shoes during layovers.  There were "pocket tracks" in Grand Central Terminal where the "Jets" (EP-5s) would lay-over, under the Waldorf-Astoria, including FDR's platform, just northeast of Tower "C".  The "Pan Crews" would be there every day.  They would patrol the platforms where the MUs were idle.  NYC didn't have third-rail shoe inspectors in GCT.  All that was done at Harmon or North White Plains.  Dunno where NH checked their shoes, but it must have been out of third-rail territory.

Bill Hays

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, September 9, 2009 2:25 AM

Glad to hear that Ohio Brass is still in business.   YOu might write them and ask for a listing or catalogue of their railway related products, both in regular production and custom ordered.

Probably, today, most pantographs come from the the Faverly Company in France.   But GE and Westinghouse built their own pantographs in the past.

All trolley wire is caternary.   Catenary is simply a shape that forms between to points supporting a string or a wire with any flexibility.   However, some railfans reserve the word for an overhead wire system that has both a messenger, the upper wire forming the catenary shape, and the contact wire, which is supposed to be held approximately level.  And as you pointed out, their were installations with two messangers, forming triangular "catenary" and double messengers, where the main messanger supports and intermediate messenger that supports the trolley wire, as on much of the original PRR installation.

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Thursday, October 8, 2009 8:22 PM

UPDATE:  Does anyone know the disposition/ultimate fate of the electric motors that New York Central used in the Detroit River Tunnel?  When was it de-electrified?  Just curious...way out of my territory.

Hays

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, October 9, 2009 6:33 AM

BNSFwatcher

UPDATE:  Does anyone know the disposition/ultimate fate of the electric motors that New York Central used in the Detroit River Tunnel?  When was it de-electrified?  Just curious...way out of my territory.

Hays

The Detroit River Tunnel was de-electrified around 1954.  The steeple-cab motors were scrapped.  The R-2 class boxcabs that were transferred from New York were either scrapped or sold to the South Shore Line.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Friday, October 9, 2009 8:56 AM

Thanks for the info.  I remember seeing the all-black "R" motors on the Hudson Division and the West Side line.  I saw an "R" in passenger service on the Harlem Division.  It was towing a steam-generator car.  Could have been the winter of 1953, after we moved from New Haven territory.  CRS, fur sure!

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Sunday, January 3, 2010 4:51 PM

Last week, I saw, on the web (dunno where.  CRS!  I'll look again) pictures of motors in Detroit.  They were lettered for Detroit River Tunnel Company and  Michigan Central Rail Road and New York Central Lines, all on each loco!  I think the pictures were c.a. 1906 (?).  Apparently NYC under-running third-rail standard.  Interestingly, they had the little pantographs on top, too, for cross-over work.  Anyone know the history of the D. R. T. C. electrification?   

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Sunday, January 3, 2010 5:05 PM

I recently (again, CRS) a picture of an "R" motor that was quite different from any others I had seen.  It looked like a Swiss "Alligator"!, i.e. an elongated steeple-cab.  It was pulling a passenger train!  What where there?  R-1, R-2, and R-3s?  Anything published about them?  P. S.:  that steam-generator car, on the Harlem, was 3d rail powered.

Hays

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, January 4, 2010 7:04 AM

BNSFwatcher

I recently (again, CRS) a picture of an "R" motor that was quite different from any others I had seen.  It looked like a Swiss "Alligator"!, i.e. an elongated steeple-cab.  It was pulling a passenger train!  What where there?  R-1, R-2, and R-3s?  Anything published about them?  P. S.:  that steam-generator car, on the Harlem, was 3d rail powered.

Hays

If it looked like a "Crocodile", it was probably a PRR L-5.  They were third-rail locomotives that were intended to replace the DD-1's.  Some of the DD-1's were transferred to LIRR when the L-5's were built, but the L-5's were not a total success due to their longer rigid wheelbase.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • 1,307 posts
Posted by Falcon48 on Wednesday, January 6, 2010 1:28 AM

daveklepper

The "T" Blue Line is the only one left.   Chicago at one time  not only had Skokie Swift, but Evanston and Lake Street as well.   The BMT el trains ran on the surface until 1912 Brighton (now Q and B), 1914  Sea Beach (now N), 1917 West End (now D), and 1918 Culver(now F, very different route north of Ditmas Avenue), where they used trolley poles.  And the present "J"  did similarly run on the surface on Jamaica Avenue in 1904. (or was it 1901?)    Also Canarsie (now L) when it ran all the way to the Shore.

 

Interurbans:   Key System or Sacramento Northern, both third rail and overhead were on the Bay Bridge.   Someone else tell me who used what.

Lehigh Valley Transit, third rail over the Philly and Western, Norristown - 69th Street, trolley elsewhere.  (Liberty Bell Route)

Sacramento Northern.   Trolley Wire in Chico, third rail from there to Sacramento, then trolley wire to the East Bay.

Lackawanna and Wyoming Valley, Laural Line, trolley wire in Wiilksbarre and the South Scranton branch, third rail for the rest of the main line.

The Great Third Rail, Chicago Aurora and Elgin, mostly third rail, but wire ont he Batavia b ranch and, if memory is correct, in both Elgine and Aurora.

 

The North Shore

I believe that the Key Sytem and SN both used 3rd rail on the Bay Bridge.  SP's Interurban Electric Railway used catenary on the same tracks.

The CA&E in its final years had trolley wire in Elgin, Batavia and Aurora.  At one time, it also had trolley wire in West Chicago, Geneva and St. Charles (on its St. Charles line abandoned in the 1930's) and on its Mount Carmel Cemetary line.    

 

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Saturday, January 9, 2010 3:41 PM

No, it wasn't a PRR (BARF!) L-1.  The 'noses' weren't very long, maybe 5'-0", or less.  The picture was taken at Harmon, NY and said it was an R-motor.  I'll have to search for that picture.  Speaking of the PRR, I have a picture of a 0+C+0 dinky juice jack that I took in Kearney (sp?), NJ, back in the mid '50s, along with a PRR "Bobber" (4-wheel caboose).  Tiny thingies.  It may have been used as a shop switcher set.  The pantograph, on the motor, was bigger than the loco!  I'll dig them out, too, and come up with a number, or two.  Yar!   Had a 'deranged' friend in high school that liked the PRR.  We went out that way a couple of times.  I, at least, enjoyed the ride on the H&M.

Hays   -23.5 F. on Thursday, + 42 F. today!

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, January 10, 2010 2:39 AM

The standard 11000V 25Hz AC Pennsy Switcher was an 0-C-0 (or 0-6-0 in Whyte steam loco listing) and there must have been hundreds of them: at Penn Station, NY, Sunnyside,yard, Phili, Baltimore, and Harrisburg.  The LIRR also had eight or ten at Bay Ridge to switch the New Haven trains.  The only 11000V AC LIRR power.   The LIRR local freigth between Fresh Pond and Bay Ridge was steam, though..

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, January 10, 2010 2:43 AM

The standard Pennsy switcher was an 0-C-0m or 0-6-0 in Whyte steam parlance.  Hundred or so of them, at Penn NYm Queens Sunnyside Yard, Phili, Baltimore, Harrisburg, Patomac Yard, Enola, Waveryly and Greenivlle, NJ..  LIRR had about eight or ten to switch the New Haven Freights at the Bay Ridge car floatm although the LIRR Fresh Pond - Bay Ridge local freight was steam

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Tuesday, January 12, 2010 3:06 PM

I found my 616 prints, but they are in bad shape (mildew)!  The caboose, PRR 478413, was shot at West Kearney or Harrison, NJ.  Very fitting, for that little railroad.  The 0+C+0 switcher, number undiscernable, was shot at Sunnyside Yard, both c.a. 1955, maybe the same day.  If anyone wants the 616 negatives (gratis), let me know and I'll dig them out.  Purifying my collection, donch'a know?  "Out, out!, red stuff!".

Hays  wdh@mcn.net 

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Wednesday, January 13, 2010 6:59 PM

I have been re-re-re-perusing Louis V. Grogan's wonderful "The Coming of the New York and Harlem Railroad".  Therein, I found two pictures:  one identified as an "R" motor (tri-power:  electric, battery, and Diesel), one as a "R-2".  They don't look anything alike.  Curiouser, and curiouser!

On page 64 is a picture of a "Q" motor, #150 (nee 1250),  taken in Mount Vernon yard in 1947.  The little loco was a straight-electric, at 1665 hp!, on it's B-B frame.  Grogan says it was retired in 1955.  I lived in Mount Vernon, and was a habituate of the yard, from 1953 to 1965.  I never saw the likes.  Any info will be appreciated.

Hays 

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