[PRCo] Re: Cleveland Subway Tours

[Phillip Clark Campbell]

> ----- Original Message ----

> From: Schneider Fred <fwschneider at comcast.net>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Monday, May 25, 2009 12:09:02 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Cleveland Subway Tours
> 
> Yup.   The reason why a lot of European tram speeds are so much  
> higher through facing point switches is elementary.  They commonly  
> use double point switches in streets whereas we used cheaper single  
> point special work.
> 
> fws
> 
>
>
Mr.Schneider;


I fully understand Mr.Brannon's concern about operating at higher
speeds through facing point turnouts when originally instructed that
5-mph was top speed.  When I lived in San Francisco the Lrv operators
were hesitant to do the 27-mph through points in the subway weren't they
after operating PCCs at low speed to insure that surface points were set.
Indeed I am told the operators of PCCs were to make a full stop at
all facing point turnouts before proceeding.  Different rules for different
operating companies.

I do disagree with your observations above.  A very high percentage of
friends and others who have visited Europe indicate that the trams are
very sluggish / slow 'in the streets.'  Additionally, what advantage does
a double point turnout have over a single point/mate?  In both cases
only one point is being used to direct the truck; the other point in a double
point turnout is not touched by a wheel is it?  So what is the advantage?
A point is still a point and can be picked or split can't it.

In many but not all cases, construction of points has been greatly modified
in Europe hasn't it.  Trolleys with which you and I are familiar 'generally' faced
points into 35-50--foot radius turns;  one doesn't speed into such a turn.
In Europe, turnouts today have been modified to a much larger radius
into the points followed by the nominal radius of the turn.  This makes
for much longer and thinner 'double' points doesn't it with more wear,
maintenance, and much more frequent replacement because of the wear.

I believe Portland uses double points in streets.  Turning into the downtown
terminal requires slow speed through double points doesn't it because of
the sharp radius.

RRs have typically used higher speeds into facing points as well but their
wheel // flange coutour is larger and different from the thin flanges of
trolleys isn't it.  Modern Lrvs tend to have RR contour flanges which
makes them more amenable to operating at higher speeds into 'points.'
I would 'assume' that the wheels on Mr.Brannon's cars are closer
to RR profile than to trolley / streetcar profile wouldn't you.


Mr.Brannon;

As I recall you also volunteer as engineer on a restored RR.  Apparently
your last tour on this line was cancelled as weather caused a mud
slide across the tracks.  Please keep us informed of this operation;  it
sounds interesting.  How does this compare with your current electric
train operation and former streetcar service on Pat?



Phil




> 
> >> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Schneider Fred wrote:
> >> 
> >> I see no problem with facing point switches at 70 mph as long as they
> >> are interlocked with signals and cannot be thrown with a car
> >> approaching when it is closer than the service brake stopping
> >> distance.   But as you implied, it is one of those things you have to
> >> get used to when you go from streetcars and non-interlocked switches
> >
> > On May 25, 2009, at 12:11 PM, Derrick Brashear wrote:
> >
> > and, hell, single point turnouts in some cases
> >
> >> to a railroad or rapid transit environment where you are protected
> >> from a switch being thrown right in front of you or left in the wrong
> >> position.