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

L-Carrier

Expand Messages
  • Blake Bowers
    Just a few notes, AT&T is requiring their work force to Treat the L-Carrier Route like it was our Fiber Route . IE, continue to perform cable locates, and to
    Message 1 of 23 , Sep 22, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Just a few notes,

      AT&T is requiring their work force to
      "Treat the L-Carrier Route like it was our Fiber Route".

      IE, continue to perform cable locates, and to protect
      the L-Carrier route like it was active fiber.

      The thought from the work force is that it is due to the
      lead content in the cable, and to possibly protect
      their easement.

      Kind of interesting however, when they have sold so many of the stations
      along the route, and now are
      actively destroying huts and manholes before
      sale.
    • Paul Zawada
      I can verify the coaxial cable marked as fiber story as I know someone who lives adjacent to an L5 easement and saw that AT&T had done this. About a year ago
      Message 2 of 23 , Sep 22, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        I can verify the coaxial cable marked as fiber story as I know someone
        who lives adjacent to an L5 easement and saw that AT&T had done this.
        About a year ago their neighbor called OUPS (Ohio's one-call
        underground utility number) and low and behold AT&T showed up and
        marked the L5 easement as a fiber route. I wonder if they put tone
        on the cable and located actual location of the cable or if they just
        eyeballed it with maps and RoW markers.

        Interestingly, a lot of the right-of-way markers on that route remain
        but most of the old "do not dig anywhere in this area" signs were
        removed a number of years ago. So there is no phone number posted on
        the route but the one-call number does notify AT&T. The remaining
        marker posts still have the RoW location tags on them, clearly stating
        where the RoW is. Something tells me that those tags were left in
        place intentionally.

        IANAL, but I agree that they might be trying to protect the easement.
        If AT&T or a successor wanted to lay a new cable on an existing
        easement and a landowner tried arguing that they had abandoned the
        easement, continuing to participate in the local one-call program
        would be one way the company would try to establish that the easement
        was not abandoned. I'm sure other legal maneuvers (like perhaps the
        continued presence of RoW markers) could be used to further bolster
        the argument the cable was not abandoned despite not being connected
        to anything.

        I guess the lead sheath theory holds water as well. I know at least
        L4 cable was polyethylene over a lead sheath, so the intent of
        continuing to locate the cable would be to keep someone from nicking
        the polyethylene jacket and allowing the lead to leach into the soil.
        Was the L5 cable of similar construction or did they do away with the
        lead sheath?

        As an aside, I do recall in about the 1991-1992 time frame that AT&T
        had posted "right-of-way for sale" signs along the L-carrier route
        that ran from Chicago to Danville, IL. The for sale signs lasted for
        a year at the most before they completely disappeared with most other
        traces of the route, though at least a few repeater huts remain. So
        in some cases they appear to have abandoned routes that were no longer
        needed. (I never saw any evidence that they dug up the cable, so it
        may still be in the ground, but unlike a lot of other routes, the
        markers are completely gone.)

        I have a copy of an AT&T L-carrier easement filed away somewhere; I
        will try to dig it up to see if it says anything about the duration of
        the easement or abandonment. The terms won't apply to all AT&T coax
        routes, but it might give some insights.

        --zawada

        On 9/22/05, Blake Bowers <bbowers@...> wrote:
        > Just a few notes,
        >
        > AT&T is requiring their work force to
        > "Treat the L-Carrier Route like it was our Fiber Route".
        >
        > IE, continue to perform cable locates, and to protect
        > the L-Carrier route like it was active fiber.
        >
        > The thought from the work force is that it is due to the
        > lead content in the cable, and to possibly protect
        > their easement.
        >
        > Kind of interesting however, when they have sold so many of the stations
        > along the route, and now are
        > actively destroying huts and manholes before
        > sale.
      • David Lesher
        ... ATT had a big mess over easements in Indiana. They d put fiber in along a rail line. The railroad shut down & was removed. Then it turned out the RoW
        Message 3 of 23 , Sep 23, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered:
          >
          > IANAL, but I agree that they might be trying to protect the easement.
          > If AT&T or a successor wanted to lay a new cable on an existing
          > easement and a landowner tried arguing that they had abandoned the
          > easement, continuing to participate in the local one-call program
          > would be one way the company would try to establish that the easement
          > was not abandoned. I'm sure other legal maneuvers (like perhaps the
          > continued presence of RoW markers) could be used to further bolster
          > the argument the cable was not abandoned despite not being connected
          > to anything.

          ATT had a big mess over easements in Indiana. They'd put fiber
          in along a rail line. The railroad shut down & was removed. Then
          it turned out the RoW wasn't owned by it; and the easements said
          railroad use only...and when rail operations ceased, the easements
          did as well.



          --
          A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@...
          & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
          Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
          is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
        • Paul Zawada
          ... Yes, this is true and it illustrates how precarious the interest in a piece of land may be if those obtaining the easements don t use care in identifying
          Message 4 of 23 , Sep 23, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            On 9/23/05, David Lesher <wb8foz@...> wrote:
            > Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered:
            > >
            > > IANAL, but I agree that they might be trying to protect the easement.
            > > If AT&T or a successor wanted to lay a new cable on an existing
            > > easement and a landowner tried arguing that they had abandoned the
            > > easement, continuing to participate in the local one-call program
            > > would be one way the company would try to establish that the easement
            > > was not abandoned. I'm sure other legal maneuvers (like perhaps the
            > > continued presence of RoW markers) could be used to further bolster
            > > the argument the cable was not abandoned despite not being connected
            > > to anything.
            >
            > ATT had a big mess over easements in Indiana. They'd put fiber
            > in along a rail line. The railroad shut down & was removed. Then
            > it turned out the RoW wasn't owned by it; and the easements said
            > railroad use only...and when rail operations ceased, the easements
            > did as well.

            Yes, this is true and it illustrates how precarious the interest in a
            piece of land may be if those obtaining the easements don't use care
            in identifying the land owner who has the most airtight claim to a
            piece of land. It seems many of the carriers (including AT&T) got
            careless in obtaining their rights-of-way in the rush to cover the
            country fiber and the railroads were quick to try to cash in on the
            trend as well...

            If you were to go back and look at the the L-carrier routes, I think
            you'd probably find that AT&T Long Lines did a better job of securing
            easements with landowners. Mostly since it seems that they prefered
            more straight-line routes cutting directly across farm fields and such
            rather than trying to utilize existing corridors.

            --zawada
          • paul rosa
            In this regard, there was a group a few years ago that was filing class action lawsuits against all railroads that laid fiber along their railroad
            Message 5 of 23 , Sep 23, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              In this regard, there was a group a few years ago that was filing class
              action lawsuits against all railroads that laid fiber along their
              railroad rights-of-way, arguing that fiber exceeded the "scope" of the
              easements that were originally granted for railroad purposes.
              Settlements were reached about 2 years ago. I discussed these with a
              friend of mine who is a senior executive with T-Cubed, Norfolk
              Southern's fiber subsidiary. The settlement called for payments of
              roughly $6,000 per mile. He described it as a great deal, i.e., just
              pay this pittance and be over with it. Of course, as everybody knows,
              roughly 40% of this went to the lawyers who filed the class action
              suits. Hey, it sure beats working. Ironically, my girlfriend had one
              of these easements on her property. She told me about all the legal
              paperwork she had received and queried me about holding out for a higher
              amount. My advice (which she followed) was to just take the money and
              run. I mean, if you think about it, the individual property owner has
              such small frontage that the payments are measured in hundreds of
              dollars, not thousands. There's no way they can gain economic advantage
              in a pitched battle. The railroads know this, as do the lawyers filing
              the lawsuits. Everybody wins big except the landowners.

              Paul Rosa
              Harpers Ferry, West Virginia

              David Lesher wrote:

              >Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered:
              >
              >
              >>IANAL, but I agree that they might be trying to protect the easement.
              >> If AT&T or a successor wanted to lay a new cable on an existing
              >>easement and a landowner tried arguing that they had abandoned the
              >>easement, continuing to participate in the local one-call program
              >>would be one way the company would try to establish that the easement
              >>was not abandoned. I'm sure other legal maneuvers (like perhaps the
              >>continued presence of RoW markers) could be used to further bolster
              >>the argument the cable was not abandoned despite not being connected
              >>to anything.
              >>
              >>
              >
              >ATT had a big mess over easements in Indiana. They'd put fiber
              >in along a rail line. The railroad shut down & was removed. Then
              >it turned out the RoW wasn't owned by it; and the easements said
              >railroad use only...and when rail operations ceased, the easements
              >did as well.
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • s92187
              ... zawada ... One of the L carrier huts on that route is right across the road from the Grant Park, IL microwave station. It was still there the last time I
              Message 6 of 23 , Sep 23, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, Paul Zawada <EngineerZ@g...> wrote:
                > . . .
                > > As an aside, I do recall in about the 1991-1992 time frame that AT&T
                > had posted "right-of-way for sale" signs along the L-carrier route
                > that ran from Chicago to Danville, IL. The for sale signs lasted for
                > a year at the most before they completely disappeared with most other
                > traces of the route, though at least a few repeater huts remain. > --
                zawada
                >
                >

                One of the L carrier huts on that route is right across the road from
                the Grant Park, IL microwave station. It was still there the last time
                I was at the Grant Park site, back in early Spring.

                Terry Michaels
              • David Lesher
                ... Ahem: http://www.photonics.com/spectra/business/XQ/ASP/businessid.368/QX/read.htm I Googled on ATT Indiana settlement easement to find it. -- A host is a
                Message 7 of 23 , Sep 23, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered:
                  >
                  > In this regard, there was a group a few years ago that was filing class
                  > action lawsuits against all railroads that laid fiber along their
                  > railroad rights-of-way, arguing that fiber exceeded the "scope" of the
                  > easements that were originally granted for railroad purposes.
                  > Settlements were reached about 2 years ago. I discussed these with a
                  > friend of mine who is a senior executive with T-Cubed, Norfolk
                  > Southern's fiber subsidiary. The settlement called for payments of
                  > roughly $6,000 per mile. He described it as a great deal, i.e., just
                  > pay this pittance and be over with it.


                  Ahem:

                  http://www.photonics.com/spectra/business/XQ/ASP/businessid.368/QX/read.htm


                  I Googled on

                  ATT Indiana settlement easement

                  to find it.



                  --
                  A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@...
                  & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
                  Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
                  is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
                • Albert LaFrance
                  ... From: paul rosa To: Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 3:10 PM Subject: Re: [coldwarcomms] L-Carrier,
                  Message 8 of 23 , Sep 23, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "paul rosa" <prosa@...>
                    To: <coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 3:10 PM
                    Subject: Re: [coldwarcomms] L-Carrier, really easements


                    > In this regard, there was a group a few years ago that was filing class
                    > action lawsuits against all railroads that laid fiber along their
                    > railroad rights-of-way, arguing that fiber exceeded the "scope" of the
                    > easements that were originally granted for railroad purposes.
                    > Settlements were reached about 2 years ago. I discussed these with a
                    > friend of mine who is a senior executive with T-Cubed, Norfolk
                    > Southern's fiber subsidiary. The settlement called for payments of
                    > roughly $6,000 per mile. He described it as a great deal, i.e., just
                    > pay this pittance and be over with it. Of course, as everybody knows,
                    > roughly 40% of this went to the lawyers who filed the class action
                    > suits. Hey, it sure beats working. Ironically, my girlfriend had one
                    > of these easements on her property. She told me about all the legal
                    > paperwork she had received and queried me about holding out for a higher
                    > amount. My advice (which she followed) was to just take the money and
                    > run. I mean, if you think about it, the individual property owner has
                    > such small frontage that the payments are measured in hundreds of
                    > dollars, not thousands. There's no way they can gain economic advantage
                    > in a pitched battle. The railroads know this, as do the lawyers filing
                    > the lawsuits. Everybody wins big except the landowners.
                    >
                    > Paul Rosa
                    > Harpers Ferry, West Virginia

                    Here's AT&T's official web site for settlement of the resulting class-action
                    lawsuit:
                    http://att.fsiwebs.net/rrcorridors/ .

                    Note that the Maryland section (
                    http://att.fsiwebs.net/rrcorridors/Maryland/maryland.htm ) names a couple of
                    active underground stations, and even identifies one cable route as the
                    "Camp David Branch" - quite surprising for a company which has expressed
                    concern about such information being publicized.

                    The site provides a map and aerial imagery to help in locating the exact
                    route:
                    http://att.fsiwebs.net/rrcorridors/Maryland/Frederick.htm
                    http://att.fsiwebs.net/rrcorridors/Maryland/MD_129.htm
                    http://att.fsiwebs.net/rrcorridors/Maryland/MD_135.htm

                    Albert
                  • mschwieb
                    They did the same thing for the Toledo - Dayton route a few years back when Wood County was paving Devil s hole road (north of Bowling Green). A power feed for
                    Message 9 of 23 , Oct 3, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      They did the same thing for the Toledo - Dayton route a few years
                      back when Wood County was paving Devil's hole road (north of Bowling
                      Green). A power feed for this route is/was (the building is
                      abandoned in place) just off of the road in question.

                      Michael Schwiebert

                      --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "Blake Bowers" <bbowers@m...>
                      wrote:
                      > Just a few notes,
                      >
                      > AT&T is requiring their work force to
                      > "Treat the L-Carrier Route like it was our Fiber Route".
                      >
                      > IE, continue to perform cable locates, and to protect
                      > the L-Carrier route like it was active fiber.
                      >
                      > The thought from the work force is that it is due to the
                      > lead content in the cable, and to possibly protect
                      > their easement.
                      >
                      > Kind of interesting however, when they have sold so many of the
                      stations
                      > along the route, and now are
                      > actively destroying huts and manholes before
                      > sale.
                    • Blake Bowers
                      A power feed? Abandoned in place? Those are 8k square foot buildings! Where was it? ... From: mschwieb To:
                      Message 10 of 23 , Oct 3, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        A power feed? Abandoned in place? Those are 8k
                        square foot buildings!

                        Where was it?


                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: "mschwieb" <Michael.Schwiebert@...>
                        To: <coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com>
                        Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 12:01 PM
                        Subject: [coldwarcomms] Re: L-Carrier


                        > They did the same thing for the Toledo - Dayton route a few years
                        > back when Wood County was paving Devil's hole road (north of Bowling
                        > Green). A power feed for this route is/was (the building is
                        > abandoned in place) just off of the road in question.
                        >
                        > Michael Schwiebert
                        >
                        > --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "Blake Bowers" <bbowers@m...>
                        > wrote:
                        >> Just a few notes,
                        >>
                        >> AT&T is requiring their work force to
                        >> "Treat the L-Carrier Route like it was our Fiber Route".
                        >>
                        >> IE, continue to perform cable locates, and to protect
                        >> the L-Carrier route like it was active fiber.
                        >>
                        >> The thought from the work force is that it is due to the
                        >> lead content in the cable, and to possibly protect
                        >> their easement.
                        >>
                        >> Kind of interesting however, when they have sold so many of the
                        > stations
                        >> along the route, and now are
                        >> actively destroying huts and manholes before
                        >> sale.
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                      • mschwieb
                        Perhaps I ve got my terms mixed up, but the structure in question is a (approx) 15 x20 building just south of Devil s hole road approximately 3/4 mile east
                        Message 11 of 23 , Oct 3, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Perhaps I've got my terms mixed up, but the structure in question
                          is a (approx) 15'x20' building just south of Devil's hole road
                          approximately 3/4 mile east of I-75 (between Perrysburg & Bowling
                          Green OH). It had 3 phase power into it, which leads me to believe
                          that it was more than just a "normal" repeater hut. If I recall
                          correctly, there are intermediate facilities between the main
                          stations (approximately 50 mi away) where power is fed into the
                          system. For example, on the Bluffton OH - Plano IL route, there is
                          a structure that is just east of Wapakoneta OH (which would be about
                          50 mi west of Bluffton) that has 3 phase power in, and underground
                          fuel storage for a Gen-set. Also in this case the marker
                          numbers "reset" (start at "1" again) at this facility as well. The
                          physical size for the Wapakoneta building is approx 20'x20'.

                          Michael Schwiebert

                          --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "Blake Bowers" <bbowers@m...>
                          wrote:
                          > A power feed? Abandoned in place? Those are 8k
                          > square foot buildings!
                          >
                          > Where was it?
                          >
                          >
                          > ----- Original Message -----
                          > From: "mschwieb" <Michael.Schwiebert@g...>
                          > To: <coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com>
                          > Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 12:01 PM
                          > Subject: [coldwarcomms] Re: L-Carrier
                          >
                          >
                          > > They did the same thing for the Toledo - Dayton route a few
                          years
                          > > back when Wood County was paving Devil's hole road (north of
                          Bowling
                          > > Green). A power feed for this route is/was (the building is
                          > > abandoned in place) just off of the road in question.
                          > >
                          > > Michael Schwiebert
                          > >
                          > > --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "Blake Bowers"
                          <bbowers@m...>
                          > > wrote:
                          > >> Just a few notes,
                          > >>
                          > >> AT&T is requiring their work force to
                          > >> "Treat the L-Carrier Route like it was our Fiber Route".
                          > >>
                          > >> IE, continue to perform cable locates, and to protect
                          > >> the L-Carrier route like it was active fiber.
                          > >>
                          > >> The thought from the work force is that it is due to the
                          > >> lead content in the cable, and to possibly protect
                          > >> their easement.
                          > >>
                          > >> Kind of interesting however, when they have sold so many of the
                          > > stations
                          > >> along the route, and now are
                          > >> actively destroying huts and manholes before
                          > >> sale.
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                        • cpe122
                          I do not find a continuing response to this 2005 thread. I have not found the first structure Michael referred to (removed?), and the second (near Wapakoneta)
                          Message 12 of 23 , Feb 19, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I do not find a continuing response to this 2005 thread.

                            I have not found the first structure Michael referred to (removed?), and the second (near Wapakoneta) almost sounds like a station on the N-S route I've been looking for (but at 29 miles SSW of Bluffton it far too south to be on the Plano-Bluffton L-4).

                            /cpe

                            --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "mschwieb" <Michael.Schwiebert@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Perhaps I've got my terms mixed up, but the structure in question
                            > is a (approx) 15'x20' building just south of Devil's hole road
                            > approximately 3/4 mile east of I-75 (between Perrysburg & Bowling
                            > Green OH). It had 3 phase power into it, which leads me to believe
                            > that it was more than just a "normal" repeater hut. If I recall
                            > correctly, there are intermediate facilities between the main
                            > stations (approximately 50 mi away) where power is fed into the
                            > system. For example, on the Bluffton OH - Plano IL route, there is
                            > a structure that is just east of Wapakoneta OH (which would be about
                            > 50 mi west of Bluffton) that has 3 phase power in, and underground
                            > fuel storage for a Gen-set. Also in this case the marker
                            > numbers "reset" (start at "1" again) at this facility as well. The
                            > physical size for the Wapakoneta building is approx 20'x20'.
                            >
                            > Michael Schwiebert
                            >
                            > --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "Blake Bowers" <bbowers@m...>
                            > wrote:
                            > > A power feed? Abandoned in place? Those are 8k
                            > > square foot buildings!
                            > >
                            > > Where was it?
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > ----- Original Message -----
                            > > From: "mschwieb" <Michael.Schwiebert@g...>
                            > > To: <coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com>
                            > > Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 12:01 PM
                            > > Subject: [coldwarcomms] Re: L-Carrier
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > > They did the same thing for the Toledo - Dayton route a few
                            > years
                            > > > back when Wood County was paving Devil's hole road (north of
                            > Bowling
                            > > > Green). A power feed for this route is/was (the building is
                            > > > abandoned in place) just off of the road in question.
                            > > >
                            > > > Michael Schwiebert
                            > > >
                            > > > --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "Blake Bowers"
                            > <bbowers@m...>
                            > > > wrote:
                            > > >> Just a few notes,
                            > > >>
                            > > >> AT&T is requiring their work force to
                            > > >> "Treat the L-Carrier Route like it was our Fiber Route".
                            > > >>
                            > > >> IE, continue to perform cable locates, and to protect
                            > > >> the L-Carrier route like it was active fiber.
                            > > >>
                            > > >> The thought from the work force is that it is due to the
                            > > >> lead content in the cable, and to possibly protect
                            > > >> their easement.
                            > > >>
                            > > >> Kind of interesting however, when they have sold so many of the
                            > > > stations
                            > > >> along the route, and now are
                            > > >> actively destroying huts and manholes before
                            > > >> sale.
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            >
                          • michael_schwiebert
                            ... The Structure on Devil s Hole Road in Wood County OH can be seen on the following Google Maps link.
                            Message 13 of 23 , Feb 20, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "cpe122" <long-lines@...> wrote:

                              The Structure on Devil's Hole Road in Wood County OH can be seen on the following Google Maps link.

                              http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&gl=us&ie=UTF8&ll=41.443191,-83.614279&spn=0.00645,0.02105&t=h&z=16

                              If you look about half way between the label "Devil's Hole Road" and "Township Highway 61" beneath (south side) of the road that is the structure in question. It had 3 phase power in and is a metal building.

                              As for the Wapakoneta structure the link (below) shows it's location.
                              http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Wapakoneta,+OH&aq=0&sll=41.443191,-83.614279&sspn=0.00645,0.02105&gl=us&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Wapakoneta,+Auglaize,+Ohio&ll=40.55289,-84.152656&spn=0.006538,0.02105&t=h&z=16

                              just below the label "Wapakoneta Fisher Road"

                              I figured that it's on the Bluffton-Plano route for the following reasons: 1. The signage has the pole-top "tents" for aerial viewing purposes that the N-S route out of Toledo does not have. 2. The route warning signage has "AT&T Transcontinental Cable" etc. on them, instead of the Ohio Bell Signage that the N-S route has (at least to Findlay). From what I understand the line west out of Bluffton arc'd out in a southwesterly line (If I recall correctly it crossed I-69 in Indiana well south of Fort Wayne - which may have been the purpose of doing this, contrasted if the route went straight out of Bluffton - which is north of US 30, it would not have crossed I-69 where it does).

                              I haven't spent a lot of time trying to trace the N-S rotue south of Findlay, but it enters Findlay on a due N-S line east of I-75. I've been able to follow it to a point just a little south of where the new Owens Community College Campus is (near the Norfolk Southern track) but I've lost the path after that.

                              Michael Schwiebert
                              Perrysburg OH


                              >
                              > I do not find a continuing response to this 2005 thread.
                              >
                              > I have not found the first structure Michael referred to (removed?), and the second (near Wapakoneta) almost sounds like a station on the N-S route I've been looking for (but at 29 miles SSW of Bluffton it far too south to be on the Plano-Bluffton L-4).
                              >
                              > /cpe
                              >
                              > --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "mschwieb" <Michael.Schwiebert@> wrote:
                              > >
                              > > Perhaps I've got my terms mixed up, but the structure in question
                              > > is a (approx) 15'x20' building just south of Devil's hole road
                              > > approximately 3/4 mile east of I-75 (between Perrysburg & Bowling
                              > > Green OH). It had 3 phase power into it, which leads me to believe
                              > > that it was more than just a "normal" repeater hut. If I recall
                              > > correctly, there are intermediate facilities between the main
                              > > stations (approximately 50 mi away) where power is fed into the
                              > > system. For example, on the Bluffton OH - Plano IL route, there is
                              > > a structure that is just east of Wapakoneta OH (which would be about
                              > > 50 mi west of Bluffton) that has 3 phase power in, and underground
                              > > fuel storage for a Gen-set. Also in this case the marker
                              > > numbers "reset" (start at "1" again) at this facility as well. The
                              > > physical size for the Wapakoneta building is approx 20'x20'.
                              > >
                              > > Michael Schwiebert
                              > >
                              > > --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "Blake Bowers" <bbowers@m...>
                              > > wrote:
                              > > > A power feed? Abandoned in place? Those are 8k
                              > > > square foot buildings!
                              > > >
                              > > > Where was it?
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > > ----- Original Message -----
                              > > > From: "mschwieb" <Michael.Schwiebert@g...>
                              > > > To: <coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com>
                              > > > Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 12:01 PM
                              > > > Subject: [coldwarcomms] Re: L-Carrier
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > > > They did the same thing for the Toledo - Dayton route a few
                              > > years
                              > > > > back when Wood County was paving Devil's hole road (north of
                              > > Bowling
                              > > > > Green). A power feed for this route is/was (the building is
                              > > > > abandoned in place) just off of the road in question.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Michael Schwiebert
                              > > > >
                              > > > > --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "Blake Bowers"
                              > > <bbowers@m...>
                              > > > > wrote:
                              > > > >> Just a few notes,
                              > > > >>
                              > > > >> AT&T is requiring their work force to
                              > > > >> "Treat the L-Carrier Route like it was our Fiber Route".
                              > > > >>
                              > > > >> IE, continue to perform cable locates, and to protect
                              > > > >> the L-Carrier route like it was active fiber.
                              > > > >>
                              > > > >> The thought from the work force is that it is due to the
                              > > > >> lead content in the cable, and to possibly protect
                              > > > >> their easement.
                              > > > >>
                              > > > >> Kind of interesting however, when they have sold so many of the
                              > > > > stations
                              > > > >> along the route, and now are
                              > > > >> actively destroying huts and manholes before
                              > > > >> sale.
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > >
                              >
                            • Paul Zawada
                              I m pretty sure cpe is right... The maps I have show the L4 coax heading due west out of Bluffton. The Wapakoneta facility is way too far south for it to be
                              Message 15 of 23 , Feb 23, 2011
                              • 0 Attachment
                                I'm pretty sure cpe is right... The maps I have show the L4 coax heading
                                due west out of Bluffton. The Wapakoneta facility is way too far south for
                                it to be on the E-W L4 out of Bluffton. The cable would have had to
                                practically head due south from Bluffton in order to hit that location.

                                I always assumed that facility was originally a power feed for the N-S coax
                                between Toledo and Dayton. The E-W L4 route would have utilized all
                                underground facilities. The Wapakoneta structure is too small and too close
                                to the road to be an entrance to such a facility. Also, US-30 heads
                                northwest from I-75 into Fort Wayne and hits I-69 at the northwest side of
                                town, so it's not a good measure of how far south the cable route is when it
                                crosses I-69.

                                I understand the original N-S cable was put in rather early (L1 maybe?) as a
                                side leg to the original transcontinental microwave route. It was put in to
                                carry television to Dayton, Cincinnati, and Columbus. From Dayton, the
                                route continued on microwave utilizing the same concrete structures used on
                                the northern E-W route. See Albert's pages:
                                http://long-lines.net/places-routes/Springboro/index.html
                                http://long-lines.net/places-routes/Ohio-mw.html

                                The earlier L1 cable would have probably required smaller amount of
                                equipment in an above-ground power feed station, which would line up with
                                the Wapakoneta facility.

                                --zawada

                                On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 7:30 PM, michael_schwiebert <
                                michael.schwiebert@...> wrote:

                                >
                                > I figured that it's on the Bluffton-Plano route for the following reasons:
                                > 1. The signage has the pole-top "tents" for aerial viewing purposes that
                                > the N-S route out of Toledo does not have. 2. The route warning signage has
                                > "AT&T Transcontinental Cable" etc. on them, instead of the Ohio Bell Signage
                                > that the N-S route has (at least to Findlay). From what I understand the
                                > line west out of Bluffton arc'd out in a southwesterly line (If I recall
                                > correctly it crossed I-69 in Indiana well south of Fort Wayne - which may
                                > have been the purpose of doing this, contrasted if the route went straight
                                > out of Bluffton - which is north of US 30, it would not have crossed I-69
                                > where it does).
                                >
                                > I haven't spent a lot of time trying to trace the N-S rotue south of
                                > Findlay, but it enters Findlay on a due N-S line east of I-75. I've been
                                > able to follow it to a point just a little south of where the new Owens
                                > Community College Campus is (near the Norfolk Southern track) but I've lost
                                > the path after that.
                                >
                                > Michael Schwiebert
                                > Perrysburg OH
                                >
                                >
                                > >
                                > > I do not find a continuing response to this 2005 thread.
                                > >
                                > > I have not found the first structure Michael referred to (removed?), and
                                > the second (near Wapakoneta) almost sounds like a station on the N-S route
                                > I've been looking for (but at 29 miles SSW of Bluffton it far too south to
                                > be on the Plano-Bluffton L-4).
                                > >
                                > > /cpe
                                >
                                >


                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • David
                                ... We have seen multiple cases where the NS cross the EW L-coax near to but not entering a station. Have we ever found a policy reason behind this? You d a
                                Message 16 of 23 , Feb 23, 2011
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  On 2/23/11 11:20 PM, Paul Zawada wrote:

                                  > I'm pretty sure cpe is right... The maps I have show the L4 coax heading
                                  > due west out of Bluffton. The Wapakoneta facility is way too far south for
                                  > it to be on the E-W L4 out of Bluffton. The cable would have had to
                                  > practically head due south from Bluffton in order to hit that location.


                                  We have seen multiple cases where the NS cross the EW L-coax near to but
                                  not entering a station.

                                  Have we ever found a policy reason behind this? You'd a thunk
                                  versatility/alternate routing was high on the list when things were planned.

                                  Sure, one cable was there before the other but....
                                • OZOB99
                                  ... Those factors might be convenient, but cost rules(unless uncle sam paying); if the crossing cable was terminated, each side would require a complete L
                                  Message 17 of 23 , Feb 24, 2011
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, David <wb8foz@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > On 2/23/11 11:20 PM, Paul Zawada wrote:
                                    >
                                    > > I'm pretty sure cpe is right... The maps I have show the L4 coax heading
                                    > > due west out of Bluffton. The Wapakoneta facility is way too far south for
                                    > > it to be on the E-W L4 out of Bluffton. The cable would have had to
                                    > > practically head due south from Bluffton in order to hit that location.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > We have seen multiple cases where the NS cross the EW L-coax near to but
                                    > not entering a station.
                                    >
                                    > Have we ever found a policy reason behind this? You'd a thunk
                                    > versatility/alternate routing was high on the list when things were planned.
                                    >
                                    > Sure, one cable was there before the other but....

                                    Those factors might be convenient, but cost rules(unless uncle sam paying); if the crossing cable was terminated, each side would require a complete L MUX,channel banks,etc(+floor space,thus possible building addition),upgrades to power plant & HVAC,etc.
                                    >
                                  • cpe122
                                    ... 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
                                    Message 18 of 23 , Feb 28, 2011
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "OZOB99" <ozob99@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, David <wb8foz@> wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > On 2/23/11 11:20 PM, Paul Zawada wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > > I'm pretty sure cpe is right... The maps I have show the L4 coax heading
                                      > > > due west out of Bluffton. The Wapakoneta facility is way too far south for
                                      > > > it to be on the E-W L4 out of Bluffton. The cable would have had to
                                      > > > practically head due south from Bluffton in order to hit that location.

                                      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); this may help put things into perspective. Note the rings represent the 54 mile (maximum) equalization range for L-4.

                                      http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/display/1298952874-02756-64.223.229.173.html
                                      (you may have to put this back together)

                                      > > We have seen multiple cases where the NS cross the EW L-coax near to but
                                      > > not entering a station.
                                      > >
                                      > > Have we ever found a policy reason behind this? You'd a thunk
                                      > > versatility/alternate routing was high on the list when things were planned.
                                      > >
                                      > > Sure, one cable was there before the other but....

                                      I located a L-1/L-4 crossing in a corn field east of Lyons in Iowa. It was a bit of a "let down". The crossing itself was not marked (as far as I could tell--I didn't go rooting around in somebody's corn field proper). There were four markers around the sides of the corn field; if you didn't look numbers and some of other detials that were different over the years, you would know it was two L's crossing.

                                      > Those factors might be convenient, but cost rules(unless uncle sam paying); if the crossing cable was terminated, each side would require a complete L MUX,channel banks,etc(+floor space,thus possible building addition),upgrades to power plant & HVAC,etc.

                                      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. It would seem that a junction of disimilar L carrier systems would have do be done in a main station; and Long Lines would have probably wanted to be able to break out circuits thus requiring mux equipment. However this is not always the case with similar L carriers. Springfield Jct. in Mass. was little more than an existing hut with a third cable coming into it.

                                      On the other hand you've got to be careful which crossings are junctions, their number and juxtapostion, after all the big ones are targets--take out junction station--take out TWO (or more) cables.

                                      /cpe
                                    • 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 19 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 20 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 21 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 22 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 23 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.