Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? (145924) | |
Home > SubChat |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 1 of 2 |
(145929) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by SLRT on Mon Sep 26 16:41:22 2005, in response to Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 26 16:38:34 2005. And we'd have an excuse to reopen the Sedgwick Avenue tunnel. I'm all for it. |
|
(145947) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Sep 26 16:58:20 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by SLRT on Mon Sep 26 16:41:22 2005. And we'd have an excuse to reopen the Sedgwick Avenue tunnel.I don't think so, unless there was no room left in GCT for the Putnam Line trains. And I think there's room. And if there was no room, they'd just not reopen the Putnam Line. |
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It
|
(145950) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Sep 26 17:05:40 2005, in response to Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 26 16:38:34 2005. The Put would only be viable as light rail line, to many crossings for todays heavy rail. and its less than 10 miles at farthest point from either Harlem or Hudson line. |
|
(145952) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Dan on Mon Sep 26 17:10:50 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Sep 26 16:58:20 2005. What condition is the line in now? |
|
(145954) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Sep 26 17:16:05 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Dan on Mon Sep 26 17:10:50 2005. The Putnam Line? There are some pieces of active track I believe somewhere way up north near the Harlem Line, but I'm not really clear on that. Dutch knows all about it. At the south end, there is track for a few hundred feet north of where the line joins the Hudson Line r-o-w next to the new Target store (I keep forgetting the name of that junction). In between, it is a rail-trail or just abandoned r-o-w. I'm not sure if any structures have been built on the r-o-w. |
|
(145957) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Sep 26 17:26:09 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Dan on Mon Sep 26 17:10:50 2005. 75% paved over as bicycle trail |
|
(145960) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Mon Sep 26 17:33:29 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Sep 26 17:16:05 2005. The ROW of "The Put" can also be visible inside Van Cortlandt Park, on the Broadway side. There are remains of Van Cortlandt station, along with at least 2 trestles that can accomodate 2 tracks. Down by Van Cortlandt Park south, where the entrance to the Saw Mill River Parkway and the Major Deegan is located, the ROW goes underneath VCP South and runs alongside the Deegan. You can walk along this path which is between the parking lot behind the Deegan and Van Cortlandt Lake.There are more traces of the Putnam branch you can discover yourself. They are at least 2 more locations in the Bronx, south of the Target store that I know offhand. |
|
(145962) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 26 17:40:27 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Sep 26 17:05:40 2005. "Too many crossings" for light rail, too. Where would your southern terminus be? I say bring on the Shoreliners and Gennie Twos, myself. |
|
(145963) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Sep 26 17:46:38 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Sep 26 16:58:20 2005. If you divert some Hudson Line to a West Sider terminal under the West Side Railyards that could free up space for Putnum line service. |
|
(145964) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Sep 26 17:49:13 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Sep 26 17:46:38 2005. Does anyone want to go to the West Side Railyards? |
|
(145969) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Mon Sep 26 18:07:59 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 26 17:40:27 2005. "Too many crossings" for light rail, too.Ever seen line T4 in Valencia? |
|
(145970) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Sep 26 18:08:05 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 26 17:40:27 2005. Connect at Univerity heights and Brewster.By putting stops at the intersections a lot of grief can be avoided. for Heave rail there is not enough demand. for Light rail like Riverline diesel trolleys can be used with shorth headway in rush and 1/2 hour service in off peak. It would accomodate far more stops and flexibility to traveler. |
|
(145972) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Mon Sep 26 18:08:25 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Sep 26 17:49:13 2005. Well, maybe in 2016. ;D |
|
(145999) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 18:49:45 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Mon Sep 26 17:33:29 2005. Do you have a map of this line? |
|
(146014) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Sep 26 19:09:13 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Sep 26 17:46:38 2005. There's plenty of room in GCT to handle the Putnam line. |
|
(146015) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Sep 26 19:10:20 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Sep 26 17:05:40 2005. What about grade-separating the line? (most of it — a few crossings could be kept if needed.) Would that be feasible, or are there too many crossings? |
|
(146016) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 19:10:53 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Sep 26 19:09:13 2005. I would agree. Unlike Penn, GCT still has spare capacity. The question is whether this line is viable or not as a commuter line. It's not clear. |
|
(146018) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 19:13:04 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Sep 26 19:10:20 2005. If you spend the money to tunnel and build underground stations, you can eliminate most if not all the potential crossings. But that would mean spending money as if you're building a subway.You could do that for a given stretch, the have it emerge. Or yyyou could use a near-surface tunnel box, like the Washington Metrorail Blue Line extension to Largo Town Center. |
|
(146020) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:18:01 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 18:49:45 2005. There's some good stuff on Joe Brennan's site as well as forgotten NY ...http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/abandoned/sedgwick.html I could swear either "Forgotten NY" or someone else did a walking tour of the tracks from the Bronx into Westchester, but can't find it ... These are also useful: http://www.xydexx.com/modernruins/putnam.htm And the whole bike trail can be read here: http://www.westchestergov.com/parks/brochures/Trailways/NorthCountymain.htm |
|
(146023) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Sep 26 19:27:27 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 19:10:53 2005. What about the capacity of MO junction? |
|
(146024) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Sep 26 19:27:51 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 19:13:04 2005. I was thinking about either having the line in a trench, or on an embankment. |
|
(146025) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 19:29:53 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:18:01 2005. The New York and Boston - isn't that the railroad whose line became the Dyre Av branch of the IRT? |
|
(146026) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 19:30:42 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Sep 26 19:27:51 2005. That could work. |
|
(146027) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:38:35 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 19:29:53 2005. Nope ... you're thinking of the NYWB, the "New York, Westchester and Back." :) |
|
(146029) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:40:20 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 19:30:42 2005. I'll see if I can find that "walking tour" of the ROW ... it has pictures of the right of way from Kingsbridge up past the Westchester line and through Van Cortlandt Park ... once you see the photos and what happened to the ROW, you'll see that it'd be a LOT easier to just bulldoze the Major Deecup and run tracks down that. :) |
|
(146031) | |
FOUND THE PIX! (Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed?) |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:43:17 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 19:29:53 2005. Here:http://www.forgotten-ny.com/SUBWAYS/Putnam%20Branch%20page/putnam.html |
|
(146032) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 26 19:47:48 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Sep 26 18:08:05 2005. Light rail won't get more jobs for your union brothers, though.How can you judge whether or not there's not enough demand for commuter rail? |
|
(146033) | |
Re: FOUND THE PIX! (Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed?) |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:51:17 2005, in response to FOUND THE PIX! (Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed?), posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:43:17 2005. And some more:http://www.bjwrr.com/ontrack/put.htm http://www.tsny.com/otto/nycrr/nyc_putnam.html AND the map! http://www.tsny.com/otto/nycrr/images/map-nyc_putnam.jpg |
|
(146036) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Sep 26 19:58:44 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 26 19:47:48 2005. off peak trains on harlem and hudson barely have sufficient passengers, 7 car rush hour trains run with only two or three cars open.for nay sayers on crossings go bike the right of way from hawthorn to brewster and count the amount of driveways and roads cutting accros the bikepath. |
|
(146038) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 19:59:38 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:40:20 2005. Understood.This is subchat...home to harmless speculation. |
|
(146042) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 26 20:16:15 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:40:20 2005. Nah . . . Major Disaster Expwy got grades too severe in places . . . |
|
(146044) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 20:16:57 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 26 19:59:38 2005. Nothing I'd love to see more than more railroads and people USING them. :) |
|
(146046) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 20:27:25 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 26 20:16:15 2005. Nothing that a chitload of C4 couldn't cure. :) |
|
(146055) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by wzlirr on Mon Sep 26 20:52:06 2005, in response to Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 26 16:38:34 2005. The Put has been severed in several places in Westchester County -- most notably when the Hawthorne Traffic Circle was made into a big interchange, and at several other places in Yonkers it was a mere 1-track ROW, which couldn't be used for anything more than a single-track LRT line. Near the Pleaantville Station, which is now a business, the line disappears due to new overpasses for route NY-117 over the Taconic. |
|
(146082) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by WillD on Mon Sep 26 22:01:51 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 20:27:25 2005. Why go for that watered down silly putty when there's good old ANFO?http://www.ees11.lanl.gov/EES11/MPEGs/June95.mpg |
|
(146093) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 22:14:17 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by WillD on Mon Sep 26 22:01:51 2005. Heh. Why stop there? Ever read of those "peaceful uses of nuclear devices in construction?" OK, so it rattles the house a bit. It's all over in a few milliseconds. Avert your eyes during the flash. :) |
|
(146100) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Mon Sep 26 22:21:09 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 20:16:57 2005. Me too. :) |
|
(146105) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by WillD on Mon Sep 26 22:37:46 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 22:14:17 2005. Your Highway here?Just imagine the Deegan pierced by a crater 1280 feet wide and 320 feet deep. Of course then do you really want the Bronx to look something like the photo below after detonation? More on the plowshares nuclear testing program: http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/Storax.html |
|
(146115) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 23:27:22 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by WillD on Mon Sep 26 22:37:46 2005. Heh. Actually, the bottom picture does remind me of my old home borough. :)And ya GOTTA ask yourself, "what were they thinking?" However, they'd have the SAS done in a couple of days and there'd be no rats. Heh. |
|
(146116) | |
Re: FOUND THE PIX! (Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed?) |
|
Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Mon Sep 26 23:29:30 2005, in response to Re: FOUND THE PIX! (Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed?), posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:51:17 2005. Are there any remains of the Yonkers branch to be seen?wayne |
|
(146128) | |
Re: FOUND THE PIX! (Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed?) |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Sep 27 00:45:12 2005, in response to Re: FOUND THE PIX! (Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed?), posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Mon Sep 26 23:29:30 2005. Don't know for sure, but my understanding is that there's absolutely no remains of any rails or ties, at best its overgrown with weeds. I know that Yonkers has been battling the trail conversion and might still be. |
|
(146147) | |
Re: Putnam Divi..................... NYWB TOUR photos |
|
Posted by South Ferry on Tue Sep 27 03:06:15 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:18:01 2005. I could swear either "Forgotten NY" or someone else did a walking tour of the tracks from the Bronx into Westchester, but can't find it ...If you're talking NYWB.... |
|
(146148) | |
Re: Putnam Divi..................... NYWB TOUR photos |
|
Posted by South Ferry on Tue Sep 27 03:06:25 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:18:01 2005. I could swear either "Forgotten NY" or someone else did a walking tour of the tracks from the Bronx into Westchester, but can't find it ...If you're talking NYWB.... it was Howard Finkel. |
|
(146149) | |
Re: Putnam Divi..................... NYWB TOUR photos |
|
Posted by South Ferry on Tue Sep 27 03:06:47 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Divi..................... NYWB TOUR photos, posted by South Ferry on Tue Sep 27 03:06:15 2005. the other post has a linkie dinkie. |
|
(146152) | |
Re: Putnam Divi..................... NYWB TOUR photos |
|
Posted by Booge on Tue Sep 27 03:23:07 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Divi..................... NYWB TOUR photos, posted by South Ferry on Tue Sep 27 03:06:25 2005. would have loved to go on that one! |
|
(146154) | |
Re: Putnam Divi..................... NYWB TOUR photos |
|
Posted by South Ferry on Tue Sep 27 03:47:31 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Divi..................... NYWB TOUR photos, posted by Booge on Tue Sep 27 03:23:07 2005. Ditto there, from the writeup sounds like it was a self-initiated tour. |
|
(146158) | |
Re: Putnam Divi..................... NYWB TOUR photos |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Sep 27 03:52:27 2005, in response to Re: Putnam Divi..................... NYWB TOUR photos, posted by South Ferry on Tue Sep 27 03:06:15 2005. Nope ... talking those tracks by Bailey Avenue that used to go all the way north. The New York Westchester and Back is on the East side by Dyre Ave. :) |
|
(146180) | |
Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill? |
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Sep 27 07:27:13 2005, in response to Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed? relief for Taconic and Saw Mill?, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 26 16:38:34 2005. The Putnam died due to it's single track ROW and it's lack of a connection to Grand Central. If you could overcome those 2 handicapps, why not? |
|
(146184) | |
Re: FOUND THE PIX! (Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed?) |
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Sep 27 07:37:32 2005, in response to FOUND THE PIX! (Re: Putnam Division as Commuter Rail—viable? needed?), posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 26 19:43:17 2005. Anyone have photos of this line while it was still carrying passangers? |
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 1 of 2 |