Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [coldwarcomms] Re: crossing but....

Expand Messages
  • David
    ... I d think expanding an existing manned station vice building a separate one would be cheaper for a number of reasons; one is manpower once going, but also
    Message 1 of 23 , Feb 28, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      On 2/28/11 11:47 PM, cpe122 wrote:

      > Well sort of. In part I think the point was if you were building a new
      > route and had to site a main station sufficiently near another L (i.e.
      > Bluffton) why not site it on the existing L so as to be able to take
      > advantage of the routing flexibility the junction would offer.



      I'd think expanding an existing manned station vice building a separate one
      would be cheaper for a number of reasons; one is manpower once going, but
      also fixed costs.

      And no reason a station could not be power feed station for the new line,
      leaving the option of later upgrades.
    • cpe122
      ... I ve studied some of the L s fairly closely; including the specific mileage between L-4 main/power feed stations. Long Lines was pretty particular about
      Message 2 of 23 , Mar 1, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, David <wb8foz@...> wrote:
        >
        > On 2/28/11 11:47 PM, cpe122 wrote:
        >
        > > Well sort of. In part I think the point was if you were building a new
        > > route and had to site a main station sufficiently near another L (i.e.
        > > Bluffton) why not site it on the existing L so as to be able to take
        > > advantage of the routing flexibility the junction would offer.
        >
        > I'd think expanding an existing manned station vice building a separate one
        > would be cheaper for a number of reasons; one is manpower once going, but
        > also fixed costs.
        >
        > And no reason a station could not be power feed station for the new line,
        > leaving the option of later upgrades.

        I've studied some of the L's fairly closely; including the specific mileage between L-4 main/power feed stations. Long Lines was pretty particular about optimizing the length of the equalization and power sections. This normally translates into the fewest buildings and/or repeaters. Optimizing (normally maximizing) the distance of each cable section on long routes has the effect of minimizes the flexibility and odds of it being convenient to "match up" with existing cables. This is ONE of the reasons we see SOME of the branch "tie" cables between routes-some times things "line up" for a L station to be a junction (whether L-to-L, or L-to-R), and some times they don't (of course there are other reasons for these branch cables too, i.e. specific traffic route requirements and target avoidance).

        There are other, perhaps minor, "disincentives" for creating junctions at crossings during new construction. Two items that come to mind are the differences in power systems and multiplex between the different versions of L carrier. To create a junction would mean dealing with both power systems and some amount of multiplex equipment to break the carrier down to the requisite Jumbogroup and/or Mastergroups to go between different versions of L carrier. I would note sometimes L's were upgraded, i.e. L-3 to (a 12 tube) L-4 to avoid these issues even when the extra capacity wasn't apparently used.

        /cpe
      • Paul Zawada
        ... Here s a link to the location of the Winamac underground. It s actually closer to the small town of Pulaski:
        Message 3 of 23 , Mar 1, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:47 PM, cpe122 <long-lines@...> wrote:

          >
          > Here is a crude map that shows Bluffton, Plano, Wapakoneta and a supposed
          > power feed station at Winamac (not on any map I have seen, but there has to
          > be one as it's too far from Bluffton to Plano w/o one);


          Here's a link to the location of the Winamac underground. It's actually
          closer to the small town of Pulaski:

          http://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?params=40_58_51_N_86_39_19_W

          The location of the station is less than a mile outside of the blue circle
          on your map. I'd say that's pretty much right on the mark!

          It was for sale a couple of years ago.. It may still be available:

          http://www.missilebases.com/pulaskiindiana

          --zawada


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • David
          ... I had not considered that aspect; and it would add a large burden to any such design. They were very sure of their design, and so pushed each leg to the
          Message 4 of 23 , Mar 1, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            On 3/1/11 7:30 PM, cpe122 wrote:

            > Long Lines was pretty particular about optimizing the length of the
            > equalization and power sections. This normally translates into the
            > fewest buildings and/or repeaters. Optimizing (normally maximizing) the
            > distance of each cable section on long routes has the effect of
            > minimizes the flexibility and odds of it being convenient to "match up"
            > with existing cables.


            I had not considered that aspect; and it would add a large burden to any
            such design.

            They were very sure of their design, and so pushed each leg to the limit.

            I seem to recall that bit them on one ?Socal? leg that arced over regularly
            due to the high voltage needed.
          • arkyjoe123
            One of the L-3 cables out of Jacksonville, FL ran at high enough voltage that it was pressurized with Sulfur Hexaflouride gas to prevent arc over. There were
            Message 5 of 23 , Mar 1, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              One of the L-3 cables out of Jacksonville, FL ran at high enough voltage that it was pressurized with Sulfur Hexaflouride gas to prevent arc over. There were red tags on the cable in every manhole it went through.

              73, JOE

              --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, David <wb8foz@...> wrote:
              >

              >
              > I seem to recall that bit them on one ?Socal? leg that arced over regularly
              > due to the high voltage needed.
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.