[PRCo] Re: Interurban Accidents

[Ken & Tracie]

No, it's the extension of the "Beer Line" that ran to North Milwaukee 
Junction, then continued northwest to North Lake and I believe there is 
another branch that also runs north.

To be truthful, before hitting the "send" button, I did consider Rule #1 
would apply.

But now there are gates and people drive around them. Even if you seldom see 
a train, why drive around dropped gates with bells ringing and red lights 
flashing all over the place?

To bring this back on topic, who was the one who pointed that it took a real 
brain trust to paint a PCC in Army camouflage and run it through the woods 
south of Pittsburgh? That was one of the best observations I've ever read on 
this list! I still laugh about it.

K.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fred Schneider" <fwschneider at comcast.net>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2005 6:47 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Interurban Accidents


> Is this the old mainline?
>
> I suspect there is a inverse relationship to the number of train
> sightings and the number of accidents.   So, Rule #1:   If we seldom
> see a train, why bother to look.
>
> Then rule #2 takes effect.  That reads, in contest between 400,000
> lb. train and 4,000 lb. SUV, guess which wins?
>
> I ask all of you to make note .... next time you pull up to a
> railroad crossing in traffic, is there a dufus in front of you
> sitting on the tracks?   What are you going to do when he (she) backs
> up in a hurry?
>
>
> On Sep 25, 2005, at 9:28 PM, Ken & Tracie wrote:
>
>> There is a former Milwaukee Road grade crossing at Villard Avenue
>> in what
>> used to be the town of North Milwauke
>>
>> The last time I visited Milwaukee, the short line that bought this
>> trackage
>> had installed gates, more prominent flashers and yet motor vehicle
>> versus
>> train accidents have been steadily increasing.
>>
>> Makes sense to me...
>>
>> K.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>