larry@kitty.UUCP (Larry Lippman) (01/18/86)
I enjoy taking a train as a pleasant respite from flying, with the vast
majority of my train trips being in New York State between Buffalo and Albany.
I have noticed that a small percentage of this Conrail track has no open-wire
lines for signalling and communication purposes; from the presence of battery
pits and signalling at grade crossings, it is obvious that there is underground
cable buried along the track.
However, most of the track still contains poles with open-wire lines.
These poles, insulators and lines are in DEPLORABLE condition! Some poles
are actually at a 45 degree angle.
Why is this? Is it because there really is underground cable and the
open-wire lines are no longer used, so no one bothers with maintenance? Or
is Conrail trying to tempt fate with poor facility maintenance? I have noticed
a significant program of track replacement between Buffalo and Albany - which
means Conrail has money to spend. Under these cirumstances, I find it hard to
believe that Conrail would fail to make the comparatively small expenditure to
maintain their open-wire facilities. On the other hand, if there is underground
cable, why doesn't Conrail spend the small amount of money to clean up the
environment and remove the poles?
==> Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York <==
==> UUCP {decvax|dual|rocksanne|rocksvax|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry <==
==> VOICE 716/741-9185 {rice|shell}!baylor!/ <==
==> FAX 716/741-9635 {G1, G2, G3 modes} duke!ethos!/ <==
==> seismo!/ <==
==> "Have you hugged your cat today?" ihnp4!/ <==mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (01/19/86)
In article <722@kitty.UUCP> larry@kitty.UUCP writes: >I have noticed that a small percentage of this Conrail track has no open-wire >lines for signalling and communication purposes; from the presence of battery >pits and signalling at grade crossings, it is obvious that there is >underground cable buried along the track. However, most of the track still >contains poles with open-wire lines. These poles, insulators and lines are >in DEPLORABLE condition! Some poles are actually at a 45 degree angle. Why >is this? Is it because there really is underground cable and the >open-wire lines are no longer used, so no one bothers with maintenance? Or >is Conrail trying to tempt fate with poor facility maintenance? I have >noticed a significant program of track replacement between Buffalo and >Albany - which means Conrail has money to spend. Under these cirumstances, >I find it hard to believe that Conrail would fail to make the comparatively >small expenditure to maintain their open-wire facilities. On the other hand, >if there is underground cable, why doesn't Conrail spend the small amount >of money to clean up the environment and remove the poles? On the Corridor, the wires between Providence and New Haven do in fact carry the signalling-- I can confirm this because I took the train from DC to Boston the weekend after Gloria came through. There were downed lines the entire way, and all the signals and most of the grade crossings were out, causing tremendous delays. These persisted on the way back two days later, although they weren't as extreme (there weren't any boats on the track in Groton by that time (I'm not kidding!)). On the local B&O trackage there seems to be both underground and wires on poles. There appears to be some maintenance on the poles, although they are in some disrepair. Also, one must recall that some of the wiring must be underground to get at the rails. On the mainline out of Washinfgton to the west, the wiring is all underground out to the Georgetown spur (which also happens to be where the Metro goes underground to the North). There is a junction box where the wires come out; this is well-maintained, so I have to assume it works. It is not suprising that track work is given priority over signals. When a signal fails, one (or a small crew) go out to fix it. It slows traffic, but, unless the train crews violate the rules, the chances of an accident are small. Failure of the roadbed or of a rail is in contrast an expensive proposition, with derailments, blockage of traffic, injuries, and adverse publicity. Signals are usually heavily redundant anyway, and if the pole is about to fall over, who really worries? C. Wingate
David.Black@A.CS.CMU.EDU (01/21/86)
Somebody mentioned trackwork between Buffalo and Albany on Conrail and inferred that Conrail had money. Conrail does have money (approx. $1 Billion in the bank at the moment), but the trackwork was paid for in a large part by the state of New York. This was in part to run faster passenger trains, but (last I heard) Conrail had refused to raise the speed limit for passenger trains even though they're running their freights faster. I believe New York also paid for much of the trackwork on the ex-Erie main across southern New York. --Dave