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

Re: Gaps in the third rail

Expand Messages
  • riispark99
    I m not sure your theory holds since the North Shore was overhead and held speed records for interurbans. ... if ... high ... reliable ... quickly ... shoes,
    Message 1 of 9 , Sep 9, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      I'm not sure your theory holds since the North Shore was overhead
      and held speed records for interurbans.

      --- In thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com, "thegreatthirdrail"
      <thegreatthirdrail@...> wrote:
      >
      > My understanding, and someone more knowledgeable please correct me
      if
      > applicable,, was that third rail "technology" was more suited for
      high
      > speed service in the early 1900's than overhead wire.
      >
      > IE, the use of a gravity fed shoe running on a rail was more
      reliable
      > at high speeds than a pole on the wire. Assuming this to be a true
      > statement, clearly the overhead wire system caught up pretty
      quickly
      > in terms of suitability for high speed use.
      >
      > As regard gaps in the third rail, besides the obvious reasons of
      > switches and grade crossings, I beleive some other reasons for the
      > gaps, as well as switching the third rail from the inside to the
      > outside running rails might include evening out the wear on the
      shoes,
      > as well as block protection.
      >
      > John
      >
    • thegreatthirdrail
      ... While that is most certainly a true statement, consider that those records were not set in 1900 when the decision to build the CA&E was made. Those records
      Message 2 of 9 , Sep 10, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com, "riispark99" <kend@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > I'm not sure your theory holds since the North Shore was overhead
        > and held speed records for interurbans.
        >

        While that is most certainly a true statement, consider that those
        records were not set in 1900 when the decision to build the CA&E was
        made. Those records were set on a railroad which was mostly built
        after the Aurora & Elgin, and those older, original parts had
        seriously upgraded from the original designs by then.

        The CA&E was designed for what were for the times, high speed
        operation (45-60 mph)The CA&E was something of an innovator for the
        times in terms of operational speeds. My belief is that the
        technology of reliable high speed overhead operation did not evolve
        until some 20 years or so after the CA&E has built with 3rd rail.

        John
      • Fred Crissey
        I think that the reason the North Shore was overhead was that it started that way from Waukegon to Evanston and they just were used to. The line north to
        Message 3 of 9 , Sep 10, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          I think that the reason the North Shore was overhead was that it started that way from Waukegon to Evanston and they just were used to.  The line north to Milwaukee which was built several years after the CA&E was better engineered due to the fact they only served three cities/villages north, Zion, Kenosha and Racine and the line was built to the west in then unpopulated areas and could be straight and almost gradeless.  I have a feeling although I cannot prove it that the CA&E intended to go to the Loop when it was built using the el east of Laramie Ave and the third rail was the appropriate power distribution system.  Also the CA&E had more curves due to passing through more populated areas and obstructions such as the cemetaires just west of Des Plaines Ave.  The CA&E did have plans to flatten out some of the curves in Villa Park and Maywood but it never got done.  CA&E trains ran fast but because of the el traffic going to Westchester branch and only two tracks west of Marshfield Ave they were necessarily slow.  There are all kinds of stories about CA&E trains sneaking up on els and applying power and the brakes at the sametime causing the el to go slower and then turning off the power and brakes causing the el to jump forward.  If the CA&E had built the proposed cut off from Westchester to Aurora which would have roughly paralleled Butterfield Road, I think it would have given the NS a run for their money as there was nothing out there except farms until the late 1950's.  West of Bellwood it was pretty fast but there were lots of stops.  The "Cannonball" which was a nonstop train from Wells Street to Wheaton was the hot train on the line.  Until 1953 the CA&E base service (non rush hour) were three trains an hour in each direction between Wheaton and Wells Street; an all stop local, a principle stop express and a limited train that made it's last eastbound stop at Lombard Main Street until Des Plaines Ave.  This train left Wheaton at :50 and Lombard on the hour (:00).  When the CA&E was built it was one of the fastest lines in the US.  Speeds up to 70 mph were no unusual.
          Fred Crissey 

          riispark99 <kend@...> wrote:
          I'm not sure your theory holds since the North Shore was overhead
          and held speed records for interurbans.

          --- In thegreatthirdrail@ yahoogroups. com, "thegreatthirdrail"
          <thegreatthirdrail@ ...> wrote:
          >
          > My understanding, and someone more knowledgeable please correct me
          if
          > applicable,, was that third rail "technology" was more suited for
          high
          > speed service in the early 1900's than overhead wire.
          >
          > IE, the use of a gravity fed shoe running on a rail was more
          reliable
          > at high speeds than a pole on the wire. Assuming this to be a true
          > statement, clearly the overhead wire system caught up pretty
          quickly
          > in terms of suitability for high speed use.
          >
          > As regard gaps in the third rail, besides the obvious reasons of
          > switches and grade crossings, I beleive some other reasons for the
          > gaps, as well as switching the third rail from the inside to the
          > outside running rails might include evening out the wear on the
          shoes,
          > as well as block protection.
          >
          > John
          >


        • cgchisholm@aol.com
          Anyone interested in the Interurbans should get a copy of Hilton & Dues ELECTRIC INTERURBAN RAILWAYS IN AMERICA. Look at Chapter 2 THE TECHNOLOGY OF THE
          Message 4 of 9 , Sep 10, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Anyone interested in the Interurbans should get a copy of Hilton & Dues'
            ELECTRIC INTERURBAN RAILWAYS IN AMERICA.
            Look at  Chapter 2 THE TECHNOLOGY OF THE INTERURBANS
            On p.45 there is a discussion of Third Rail vs Overhead.

            THE ELECTRIC INTERURBAN RAILWAYS IN AMERICA
            George W. Hilton and John F.. Due
            STANFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
            Stanford, California
                   1960
            There are later printings of this book.

            Chuck Chisholm
          • Larry M
            With the exception on the Skokie line from Howard to East Prairie/Crawford the NS was overhead. The Skokie line had a complex overhead system that went to
            Message 5 of 9 , Sep 10, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              With the exception on the Skokie line from Howard to
              East Prairie/Crawford the NS was overhead. The Skokie
              line had a complex overhead system that went to North
              Chicago Jct. originally but was extended to Waukegan
              around 1948. The Winnetka project also had a similar
              complex system.

              The line from Waukegan to Harrison St. in Milwaukee
              was built to railroad standards with the section
              between Racine and, I believe, College south of
              Milwaukee was straight with few grades and was around
              14 miles. The entire stretch from Waukegan to the
              south side of Milwaukee was built for high speed as
              the Skokie line would be years later. The line was
              burdened with the street running in Milwaukee right up
              until the last day of service in 1963. When I-94 was
              being considered in Milwaukee there were some plans to
              move the line into the median of the interstate. That
              never happened due to, at the time, lack of funds and
              the then desire to abandon the railroad.

              The original NSL from Waukegan to Linden Ave. in
              Wilmette was more traditional with some street running
              (including the section in Wilmette on Greenleaf) and
              went thru the suburbs. It precluded the high speed
              operation that Insull wanted for the Chicago to
              Milwaukee trains and ended up being more of a commuter
              line in its latter years. Service was far more
              frequent than on the Skokie line even up until the end
              of the Shore Line in July, 1955.

              There were only a handful of interurbans that chose to
              use third rail. One, I believe, was the Laurel Line
              in Pennsylvania as well as the still running
              Norristown line near Philadelphia that even used the
              former Electroliners and some of the early CTA 6000
              series L cars.

              Larry

              --- Fred Crissey <fhc1290@...> wrote:

              > I think that the reason the North Shore was overhead
              > was that it started that way from Waukegon to
              > Evanston and they just were used to. The line north
              > to Milwaukee which was built several years after the
              > CA&E was better engineered due to the fact they only
              > served three cities/villages north, Zion, Kenosha
              > and Racine and the line was built to the west in
              > then unpopulated areas and could be straight and
              > almost gradeless. I have a feeling although I
              > cannot prove it that the CA&E intended to go to the
              > Loop when it was built using the el east of Laramie
              > Ave and the third rail was the appropriate power
              > distribution system. Also the CA&E had more curves
              > due to passing through more populated areas and
              > obstructions such as the cemetaires just west of Des
              > Plaines Ave. The CA&E did have plans to flatten out
              > some of the curves in Villa Park and Maywood but it
              > never got done. CA&E trains ran fast but because of
              > the el traffic going to Westchester branch and only
              > two tracks west of
              > Marshfield Ave they were necessarily slow. There
              > are all kinds of stories about CA&E trains sneaking
              > up on els and applying power and the brakes at the
              > sametime causing the el to go slower and then
              > turning off the power and brakes causing the el to
              > jump forward. If the CA&E had built the proposed
              > cut off from Westchester to Aurora which would have
              > roughly paralleled Butterfield Road, I think it
              > would have given the NS a run for their money as
              > there was nothing out there except farms until the
              > late 1950's. West of Bellwood it was pretty fast
              > but there were lots of stops. The "Cannonball"
              > which was a nonstop train from Wells Street to
              > Wheaton was the hot train on the line. Until 1953
              > the CA&E base service (non rush hour) were three
              > trains an hour in each direction between Wheaton and
              > Wells Street; an all stop local, a principle stop
              > express and a limited train that made it's last
              > eastbound stop at Lombard Main Street until Des
              > Plaines Ave. This train left Wheaton at
              > :50 and Lombard on the hour (:00). When the CA&E
              > was built it was one of the fastest lines in the US.
              > Speeds up to 70 mph were no unusual.
              > Fred Crissey
              >
              > riispark99 <kend@...> wrote:
              > I'm not sure your theory holds since the
              > North Shore was overhead
              > and held speed records for interurbans.
              >
              > --- In thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com,
              > "thegreatthirdrail"
              > <thegreatthirdrail@...> wrote:
              > >
              > > My understanding, and someone more knowledgeable
              > please correct me
              > if
              > > applicable,, was that third rail "technology" was
              > more suited for
              > high
              > > speed service in the early 1900's than overhead
              > wire.
              > >
              > > IE, the use of a gravity fed shoe running on a
              > rail was more
              > reliable
              > > at high speeds than a pole on the wire. Assuming
              > this to be a true
              > > statement, clearly the overhead wire system caught
              > up pretty
              > quickly
              > > in terms of suitability for high speed use.
              > >
              > > As regard gaps in the third rail, besides the
              > obvious reasons of
              > > switches and grade crossings, I beleive some other
              > reasons for the
              > > gaps, as well as switching the third rail from the
              > inside to the
              > > outside running rails might include evening out
              > the wear on the
              > shoes,
              > > as well as block protection.
              > >
              > > John
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >


              __________________________________________________
              Do You Yahoo!?
              Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
              http://mail.yahoo.com
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.