[PRCo] Re: Crossovers

[tsquare at toad.net]

Re: The crossover between McFarland and Biltmore --

All true -- but since there existed nearby another way to allow service cars
to clear, wouldn't it have been better (and I use this word cautiously) to
have used one crossing and one turnout instead of three turnouts at this
location?  This would have eliminated the possibility of an outbound 38
"splitting the switch".  (Occurrence thereof at this location was a
possibility that PRCo apparently ignored.)

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
[mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org]On Behalf Of Jim
Holland
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 5:01 AM
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Crossovers



> Fred W. Schneider III wrote:

> Is it not possible that many of the crossovers were installed to permit
> service cars to either turn back or to get out of the way of regular
> cars?

	FRED::	Think you might be missing the point of our discoveries.  Seems
that the vast majority of X-Overs (of which there weren't many) were for
regularly scheduled terminals for double-ended equipment.
	This particular one which Tom inquires about is on W.-Liberty just
inbound of the 42-wye.  The 42-wye connected to the 38-line in
2-different places:::::::
	1)--McFarland Road for the 42/38--owl
	2)--leg of the wye.

	In the latter case, an inbound 42-car could turn onto the outbound
38-line and be heading the wrong direction on the outbound track.  The
X-Over is needed to get the car back on the right track.

>> tsquare at toad.net wrote:

>> Adding comment to yours:

>> I could never figure out the utility of the crossover on the 38 line
>> between McFarland and Biltmore.  Yes, it permitted an outbound 42 to
>> utilize 38 inbound in an emergency -- but an outbound 38 couldn't
>> utilize it to go inbound on 42 (that operation would have had to be
>> via the specialwork at McFarland and West Liberty (about 300' further
>> south) -- and then with two backup moves!  So what was the intended
>> purpose of the crossover?  Was there at one time cut-back service
>> on the 38 line at this location?

>> Tom