|
|
| Covered/uncovered third rail (778727) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
| (778728) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 1 01:27:25 2009, in response to Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by gbs on Fri May 1 01:22:31 2009. I'm assuimg that you're familiar with the current "subway style" third rail shoes ... the earlier el cars, as well as CTA use the "elevated style" third rail shoes which are "gravity-based" ... what you're familiar with came later ... the "El type" third rails were closer to the running rails and lower than the current type third rail. The El shoes looked like this:
|
|
|
| (778877) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by gbs on Fri May 1 12:21:33 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 1 01:27:25 2009. Thanks! That photo clearly shows the answers to my questions. I've never seen a shoe like that before.But if the El third rail was both lower and closer, how did the uncovered Canarsie third rail accommodate both the El cars and the subway cars? Simply having no cover doesn't put the rail in the right position for both. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (778886) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by jamaicaexpress on Fri May 1 12:47:26 2009, in response to Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by gbs on Fri May 1 01:22:31 2009. When I was a kid (admittedly, a very l-o-o-o-o-ng time ago), both wood (el) and steel (subway) cars ran on the Eatern Division. Prior to the advent of the NYCTA, all of the third rail in the Eastern Division was uncovered. I always thought that the third rail covers (just like the outside catwalks) were added by the TA as a safety measure. |
|
|
| (778895) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 1 13:42:43 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by gbs on Fri May 1 12:21:33 2009. You're welcome ... as to the BMT arrangements (and it wasn't just the Canarsie like that) I'm not entirely sure ... I can *guess* that the BMT came up with a compromise design which allowed both types of shoes to make a good contact, but when you have sled shoes such as depicted, then you can't put up a cover over the third rail itself. Hopefully someone else will paste up the answer to that one for you as this has been discussed before from time to time ... the answer is that BMT, unlike the IRT, saw the issue and came up with a clever solution with their pickup shoe and third rail design whereas the IRT just added a second third rail for the subway type shoes on the els where subway line trains ran ... |
|
|
| (778905) | |
Outside catwalks |
|
|
Posted by gbs on Fri May 1 13:57:00 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by jamaicaexpress on Fri May 1 12:47:26 2009. Speaking of outside catwalks, I was surprised to see the recent photos of the Chicago El where there are no outside catwalks, just like the Atlantic Avenue elevated LIRR.It's always a little jarring to be under the elevated Atlantic Avenue section and have an LIRR train above you sticking out over the structure. It looks like the engineer sits over the street, not over the structure. Even though catwalks wouldn't prevent the train from falling, their absence makes everything look scarier. |
|
|
| (778907) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by gbs on Fri May 1 14:03:41 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 1 13:42:43 2009. Thanks again. Your knowledge was, as always, very helpful.What about the Flushing line prior to 1949? Didn't the BMT run old El cars there while the IRT ran subway cars on the same tracks? Do any old photos show third rail arrangements other than what's there today? |
|
|
| (778911) | |
Re: Outside catwalks |
|
|
Posted by Lou from Brooklyn on Fri May 1 14:13:40 2009, in response to Outside catwalks, posted by gbs on Fri May 1 13:57:00 2009. This time next year Atlantic Ave LIRR elevated will have cat walks on both sides. They are installing them now. |
|
|
| (778913) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 1 14:21:26 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by gbs on Fri May 1 14:03:41 2009. Those pictures ARE out there ... went looking and came up empty handed so far ... saw one from 1945 at QBP and the IRT side had subway third rail in the picture and it looked like the BMT side did also. But I *know* the drop sled rail was out there, just gotta look back earlier. |
|
|
| (778914) | |
Re: Outside catwalks |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 1 14:23:29 2009, in response to Re: Outside catwalks, posted by Lou from Brooklyn on Fri May 1 14:13:40 2009. About flipping time ... one of the fun parts of structure walks is the omnipresent where do I go if both tracks have railroad at the same time? :) |
|
|
| (778917) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by VictorM on Fri May 1 14:33:13 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by gbs on Fri May 1 14:03:41 2009. I remember the original R-12 cars had angled 3rd rail shoes (bent up at the tip) so that the shoe would make a flat contact with either type of 3rd rail. I think the IRT elevated third rail was further out but lower than the subway type 3rd rail. Here's a photo from NYC subway.org showing the angled shoes on a 1939 Flushing World's Fair car: |
|
|
| (778918) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Fri May 1 14:33:36 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by gbs on Fri May 1 12:21:33 2009. Hello Kevin Please DO try better to give factually CORRECT information. "ELevated" style 3rd rail - developed by Frank Sprague in 1897-8 and first implemented on the Chicago CRT EL's , and later IRT and BRT original EL systems between then and 1900-1, was HIGHER ('NOT' LOWER as you incorrecty stated) than the later 1903-4 first IRT Subway route COVERED Subway style and further and lower positioned Third Rail, which was copied from an Interurban Line 3rd rail installation. BRT and IRT "Elevated Style" 3rd Rail shoes - called DROP SLED shoes, were a slightly different sled design than that as used on the CHICAGO systm whose photo you used. But the working characteristics were the same. Subway style PADDLE 3rd rail shoes originally designed for the IRT and BMT were fabricated with two "contact" pad plates on the subway used "paddle" style shoe, with the shoe paddle angled upward near its tip where the "subway position" 3rd rail contact pad was located. The EL style 3rd rail contact pad was located a bit further back (about 4 inches) - and the INSULATED wood beam for these "dual contact pad" subway paddle shoes was positioned HIGHER on the truck sideframes' twin "end-of-beam" mounting brackets to allow the inward contact pad to ride flat on the closer and higher EL style 3rd rail. These dual-contact-pad design 3rd rail subway paddle shoes lasted to at least the early 1960's - and were gradually replaced on the, all, IRT SUBWAY cars built prior to 1956, that had them - after 1963-4 with "subway only" style paddle contact shoes with only an outer tip contact pad and a less angled shoe end "tip" The insulated wooden beams were repositioned lower on the twin mounting brackets so as to also lower the newer design subway paddle shoes closer to the subway style lower position covered 3rd rail. This simplified shoe type changeover gradually became the norm on the BMT by and thru the mid to late 1960's The IRT Manhattan "Elevated Division" lines used a wooden safety backboard along the outer catwalk facing side of their uncovered Elevated style 3rd rail. This "safety" board, attached to the rail itsel by insulated blocks, brackets and bolts, faced the adjacent catwalk to protect track & railway workers and was about 1 inch HIGHER than the 3rd rail head. THIS unique safety device, was found ONLY on the four Manhattan EL's and also on ... (a) the entire Bronx IRT 3rd Avenue EL segment, Harlem River up to Gun Hill Road and the north beyond located to connection ramps ONLY up to the switches connecting them to the IRT White Plains Rd Line above it. However, about mid-late 1957 (and used up thru April 1973 end of service) that by then "Shuttle" line was re-fitted with only subway style covered 3rd rail and operated by steel subway car trains from mid-late Dec. 1956. (b) the IRT 9th Avenue EL Mainline Bronx portion only up to tops of the two ramps switch tracks connecting it to the mainline Woodlawn Jerome IRT EL (c) the IRT 2nd Avenue EL over the Queensboro Bridge to and including ONLY the Queensbound up-ramp and entry-exit tracks for the "EL" trains to and prior to entering Queens Plaza (IRT south portion) Complex Station. From Queens Plaza out to Flushing and Astoria (until Oct. 1949) trackage was all DUAL 3rd rails (d) The 1916 erected IRT Bronx Bergen Cutoff connection route AND the original 1901 erected IRT E. 150th Street first connection route from the Bronx 3rd Avenue EL up to starting just beyond the switch tracks jointly connecting the 3rd Ave EL Mainline Route connections trackages with the mainline trackages of the IRT White Plains Rd. Line at Brook and Westchester Avenues Regarding a,b,c,d, at the point where BOTH IRT wooden EL and IRT steel subway trains shared the same trackage, there was DUAL 3rd rail, EL style located on one side of each track, and subway styled located on the opposite side. Subway cars made contact with BOTH rails when running; EL cars contacted ONLY their 3rd rail type. However, regarding a,b,c,d above - it must be noted that the EL STYLE 3rd rail DID NOT have its back side safety protector wood plank, because, being 1 inch approx. higher than the EL Style 3rd rail contact head, the wood safety backboard would make contact with and foul the dual-contact-pad steel subway car "subway 3rd rail style" paddle shoes. The BRT and later BMT (as well as Chicago CRT and later CTA) opted to NOT ever utilize the IRT style-design wooden back safety board, and its trackage with both wood EL cars and Steel subway cars in joint-service operated trains, used ONLY the "Elevated" Style 3rd rail, FULLY unprotected, located along ONLY ONE side of each track. This arrangement lasted on Jamaica EL Portions and some yards, and the Myrtle EL's until thru to late 1960's until the end of wooden EL cars (Myrtle El, 1969) By the very early 1970's all traces of BMT uncovered EL Style and positioned 3rd rail were completely gone. By early 1960's all EL style & position 3rd rail was gone on the IRT system Regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (778920) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by VictorM on Fri May 1 14:43:37 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by VictorM on Fri May 1 14:33:13 2009. From Joe Frank's explanation I see I had the El type and subway type 3rd rail descriptions reversed |
|
|
| (778922) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by Jeff Rosen on Fri May 1 14:44:58 2009, in response to Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by gbs on Fri May 1 01:22:31 2009. OK, to all who responded here. Why couldn't they just have one type of shoe on all cars. I doesn't seem like it would be hard to change the shoe style on a train. |
|
|
| (778923) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 1 14:51:25 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Fri May 1 14:33:36 2009. Joe, I never claimed any expertise on this if you had read what I'd said ... I was merely trying to provide an idea of what it was about until such time as folks who KNEW the details came along. Perhaps you might want to spend a little more time here for these kind of questions. :) |
|
|
| (778925) | |
Re: Outside catwalks |
|
|
Posted by 67th Avenue on Fri May 1 15:00:28 2009, in response to Re: Outside catwalks, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 1 14:23:29 2009. Don't most el structures have catwalks and how about inside tunnels - do trackworkers have a place to walk along the wall? |
|
|
| (778926) | |
Re: Outside catwalks |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 1 15:02:19 2009, in response to Re: Outside catwalks, posted by 67th Avenue on Fri May 1 15:00:28 2009. Yes they do ... which is why Atlantic Avenue always surprised me ... |
|
|
| (778928) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoPCCLCars on Fri May 1 15:03:20 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Fri May 1 14:33:36 2009. Well, Joe, just a minor correction of the corrections (smile)"ELevated" style 3rd rail - developed by Frank Sprague in 1897-8 and first implemented on the Chicago CRT EL's , and later IRT and BRT original EL systems between then and 1900-1, was HIGHER ('NOT' LOWER as you incorrecty stated) than the later 1903-4 first IRT Subway route COVERED Subway style and further and lower positioned Third Rail, which was copied from an Interurban Line 3rd rail installation. The gravity third rail was first implemented in United Kingdom in 1893. In the U.S. the first usage of the British gravity system was on the Intramural Railway at the Columbian Exposition Worlds Fair in 1893. The West Side Metropolitan Elevated saw the successful operation at the Fair and switched plans from a steam road to an electric road using the gravity third rail shoe and electric motor cars pulling trailers. Frank Sprague successfully demonstrated electric MU control on the South Side "L" and that system was adopted by all Chicago "L"s. Despite our open and exposed third rail, Chicago did use paddle shoes: on about 300 of the PCC cars and on the 2200 series cars still in service. David Harrison |
|
|
| (778930) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri May 1 15:09:32 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by VictorM on Fri May 1 14:43:37 2009. Partially correct. Elevated 3rd rail was closer and HIGHER than subway 3rd rail. As for the differences between the IRT and BMT, there was a thread about this a couple of months ago and there were photos posted of the Westchester Av el structure N/O 149 St that showed only elevated type 3rd rail indicating that there were certain areas on the IRT where only elevated 3rd rail was used by both subway and el cars. Nobody seemed to ba able to answer why certain areas on the IRT used both when in other areas, the el type served both purposes. |
|
|
| (778934) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri May 1 15:19:13 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by Jeff Rosen on Fri May 1 14:44:58 2009. The problem was that the elevated "gravity" shoe came earlier and the paddle type shoe which allowed for a covered 3rd rail came later. There were portions of both BMT and IRT els where the paddle type shoes wouldn't clear, most notibly the Myrtle Av El between Bway and Bridge St. The TA solved the problem of 2 types of shoes on Myrtle by providing special ramps at the entrances to those stations that lifted the shoes above the portions of the girder work where they wouldn't ordinarily clear. |
|
|
| (778935) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri May 1 15:19:39 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by Jeff Rosen on Fri May 1 14:44:58 2009. The problem was that the elevated "gravity" shoe came earlier and the paddle type shoe which allowed for a covered 3rd rail came later. There were portions of both BMT and IRT els where the paddle type shoes wouldn't clear, most notibly the Myrtle Av El between Bway and Bridge St. The TA solved the problem of 2 types of shoes on Myrtle by providing special ramps at the entrances to those stations that lifted the shoes above the portions of the girder work where they wouldn't ordinarily clear. |
|
|
| (778937) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Fri May 1 15:22:29 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by gbs on Fri May 1 14:03:41 2009. Hello Gps The Flushing and Astoria IRT owned EL's used DUAL 3rd rail on all tracks. On one side of each track was a Subway covered style lower 3rd Rail, the Elevated uncovewred style higher 3rd Rail was on the other. The BMT Wooden EL Gate car trains used as "BMT EL Shuttles" to and from Flushing and Astoria terminals, were fitted with SUBWAY PADDLE 3rd rail shoes when they were placed on those routes about 1920 by the BMT. The BMT 1938-39 created former Gate car MUDC conversion Q-Type modernized trainsets also were fitted with Subway type 3rd rail paddle shoes to operate. The IRT 2nd Avenue EL wooden Gate car and MUDC Converted Trains still retained their original EL STYLE Drop Sled contact shoes which could ONLY be used on the higher and closer positioned, uncovered "EL" style 3rd rail. The IRT Steinway class, and BMT Standard (*) steel subway cars had subway style paddle shoes While the 2nd Avenue El trains operating to Flushing and Astoria made contact with ONLY the EL style 3rd rail, the BMT Shuttle Wood EL Gate cars and Q Types, BMT Standards and IRT Steinways, contacted the "joint" 3rd rails located on BOTH sides of the tracks they ran on. BMT and IRT wooden EL cars, and IRT steel Steinway cars were approx. NINE feet wide; BMT Standards were TEN feet wide. (*) BMT Standards used only isolated dedicated trackage for them to use as turnbacks to and from upper and lower levels of BMT Standard ONLY dedicated station platform sides to and from Manhattan on the BMT "north half" portion station platforms of the Queens Plaza Junction Complex. Even though 2nd Avenue IRT EL service from Manhattan (via Queensboro Bridge) ended in June 1942, EL style 3rd rail still remained surviving intact thru Dec. 1949 only, on the Astoria EL (when it became modified in mid-late Oct.1949 for BMT steel subway trains operations only) and was then removed --- and thru 1955-6 on the post Oct. 1949 IRT trains operation ONLY operations Flushing Line - so as for use by various IRT Work trains still using long out of revenue service IRT Elevated Motor cars still having Drop Sled EL style shoes. With the close the the Manhattan 3rd Avenue EL by 5-12-1955, and mid Dec. 1956 end of revenue service on Bronx only 3rd Ave. EL remnant - and anywhere for ALL few remaining IRT wooden EL cars, and the then wholesale immediate scrapping of ALL remaining same, the EL style 3rd rail was removed from the Flushing line gradually, and work train "work motors" then comprised solely surplus pre-war steel IRT subway motor cars (ie: Low-V's). The Astoria Line after Jan. 1950 could and did use surplus 10' wide steel subway car (or BMT Electric locos) work motors for work trains on that back then and as now, BMT Division only line. Regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (778939) | |
Re: Outside catwalks |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoPCCLCars on Fri May 1 15:28:51 2009, in response to Outside catwalks, posted by gbs on Fri May 1 13:57:00 2009. Correct....in Chicago you will only find an outside catwalk in areas where personnel might frequently be on the right-of-way. Other areas with outside catwalks are places where the train frequency is high. Our rules state that two trains may NOT pass someone on a walkway at the same time. Preference is given to the inbound train.This view shows the outside catwalk on the left side leading from the Adams station downtown to the tower at Van Buren.  This shot on the north side main shows Clark Tower but the catwalk from Belmont station behind the photographer is on the left. One would expect it on the right, right?? Well historically, Clark Tower used to be way down there , on the left, pass the tracks branching off to the Ravenswood route. So when the junction was reconfigured, they left the catwalk in the same position. (Note to spellcheck...it's not spelled wrong...it's a tree where raven birds like to congregate!)  Some typical Chicago "L" with no outside walkways.    David Harrison |
|
|
| (778941) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Fri May 1 15:36:11 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by ChicagoPCCLCars on Fri May 1 15:03:20 2009. Hello David (H) Thanks !!! And yes, I knew that Frank Sprague researched the earlier 1893 British system - but being the subject matter and question HERE was pertinent to USA only (and more so NY City per se) operation history ... I wanted to keep my (usually lengthy historical) reply even "less" wordy and complicated...heh! Yes, I recall also some CTA car classes used paddle shoes - I believe the info source I long ago read came, infact, from you, either here or your posting long ago at my NYCTMG Forum, which you are long time member of. I often wondered WHY modern CTA still insists upon, and retains, the highly dangerous, lethal, (to track walkers and workers, employees, ESPECIALLY in Chicago's notable frequent snowy and wet, inclement weather periods) fully umnprotected 3rd rails and related drop-sled shoe contact system. Thanks MUCH for the additional ("British data) info also ! Regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (778948) | |
Re: Outside catwalks |
|
|
Posted by daDouce Man on Fri May 1 16:00:51 2009, in response to Re: Outside catwalks, posted by Lou from Brooklyn on Fri May 1 14:13:40 2009. As of last week the cat walks were being installed on the east end of the LIRR tressle. East of Rochester IIRC. Construction is causing congestion along Atlantic Ave. |
|
|
| (778950) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoPCCLCars on Fri May 1 16:04:14 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Fri May 1 15:36:11 2009. I often wondered WHY modern CTA still insists upon, and retains, the highly dangerous, lethal, (to track walkers and workers, employees, ESPECIALLY in Chicago's notable frequent snowy and wet, inclement weather periods) fully umnprotected 3rd rails and related drop-sled shoe contact system. Heh, heh. that's the easiest question to answer. We in Chicago like to say the only people who seem to worry about our exposed third rail are people from everywhere else. It's not worried about here, rest assured. Like those who question our flat junctions on the "L". David Harrison |
|
|
| (778952) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by Brighton Private on Fri May 1 16:07:52 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by ChicagoPCCLCars on Fri May 1 16:04:14 2009. What are the stats on injuries/fatalities from contact with the third rail in Chicago?And what was the experience in New York? |
|
|
| (778959) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoPCCLCars on Fri May 1 16:16:00 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by Brighton Private on Fri May 1 16:07:52 2009. I think only two incidents in the last two years. One was a CTA office employee. What was he doing on the tracks was never explained. The other was someone tossed on the tracks by gangbangers. Don't remember the outcome.David Harrison |
|
|
| (778979) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Fri May 1 17:12:22 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by randyo on Fri May 1 15:09:32 2009. Hello Randy (O) Yes, we both participated in that long ago thread. 3rd rails thread...heh Being the IRT "West Farms Line" Westchester Avenue EL from Brook Ave thru to Bronx Park EAST Terminal Station was planned to be pre-opened and temporarily served first and SOLELY by IRT Manhattan 3rd and 2nd Ave Elevated Trains via the original and then only-existing "E.150th street-Third Avenue" 2 track conection EL branch from the 3rd Ave EL Mainline just north of E. 149th street station - the West Farms line was initially fitted solely with EL style 3rd Rail.....but with NO wooden back safety board on the West Farms Line EL's Elevated style uncovered 3rd rail. This situation was to remain the status quo, and the only utilized form of 3rd rail on that route, and thru its later connection to the E. 180th street "new" terminal and shops opened circa (IIRC) 1918-20. (Thus having NO "Dual" 3rd rail) However, when the White Plains Road extension was built to E. 241st street in 1918-20, it WAS fitted from E. 180th street northward with DUAL 3rd rails on each track. WHY "dual" on that newer portion, I dont understand - except perhaps as City financed, possibly the provision (subway type 3rd rails also) was required in and of advance-plans to possibly run steel subway cars only some day and eliminate the "wooden el trains"...along with removal then also of their old style "unsafe" anmd duplicate 3rd rail ! When the Bergen Cutoff was service abandoned (IIRC late 1946 or was it 1947) for revenue service and removed about 1948-9 - the original earlier connection at E. 150th St. & 3rd Ave., which ceased revenue passenger service around 1918-19, was kept operationally alive for the occasional work train and non revenue transfer move needs and as for emergency Bergen bypass usage. It was a 2 block long still remaining connection - but was likewise removed in 1950-1, and therefore there was no more need for EL ONLY style 3rd rail below Bronx Park East and E.180th street Stations. Therfore, it was removed replaced solely by subway style covered 3rd rail by circa 1950-1 at least. Third Avenue EL Mainline trains that could have used the intact E.150th St & 3rd Ave. "original" connector between years 1946 and 1950 for non revenue shop or layup yard bound, or work train moves, to the E. 180th Street Yards, shops, or E. 239th St Yards, shops, via West Farms /White Plains Rd Line - now had to use the 3rd Ave EL Bronx mainline north up thru to Gun Hill Rd Joint Station connection to White Plains Rd. Line. elevated and its E. 180th St. or E. 239th St. shops, yards. As the new INTERBPOROUGH Company had "leased" the Manhattan Railway Co. Elevated Lines "for 999 years" in (IIRC) 1901-2, with the idea of unifying its first (and later) subway line route(s) with joint operation on some of the Elevated ONLY Bronx routes - a dual "contact pad" paddle shoe was developed for the first initial subway cars (the wooden Composites and steel Gibbs) - and long carried on thereafter to later IRT fleets. One NOTE: Steel IRT subway cars COULD NOT electrically operate under their own power on ANY of the 4 old Manhattan El routes - even unloaded 'light" in non revenue moves - SOLELY because of the, that, high wooden back safety board used on the Manhattan EL lines on their El style 3rd rails. It would foul (*) the subway car paddle shoes ! In fact, IRT steel subway cars towed empty along the Manhattan Els (to and from shops, yards, ie: those EL Shops and yards at E. 99th, E. 129th or E.155th streets) - and towed to Manhattan's 2nd Avenue EL over the Queensboro Bridge from the IRT operated Flushing and Astoria line Els (up to June 1942 closing of 2nd Avenue EL connection to Queens!) had to have their subway paddle shoes removed (*) from the insulated shoe beams !!! But of course Randy, you and I long well knew about all this anyway ! Regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (778985) | |
Re: Outside catwalks |
|
|
Posted by bklynsubwaybob on Fri May 1 17:36:43 2009, in response to Re: Outside catwalks, posted by ChicagoPCCLCars on Fri May 1 15:28:51 2009. Hi David,Really nice photos with equally descriptive captions. Thanks for sending them along. Best wished, Bob Hasselbach |
|
|
| (778987) | |
Re: Outside catwalks |
|
|
Posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Fri May 1 17:37:46 2009, in response to Re: Outside catwalks, posted by ChicagoPCCLCars on Fri May 1 15:28:51 2009. Hello again David H Good answer heh - only NON Chicagoans worry about CTA's fully unprotected 3d rail...much be a macho thingy up in Chi town. Well, likewise, the earlier older BMT and IRT ELs' had it here for 50 + years in snow, ice, rain and darkness. I've stated it somewhere before...but again, I always very much enjoy viewing your consistently well composed and exposed CTA Elevated R-o-W and structure shots - being I have long been heavily interested in, with many books, publications and some movies on, the CRT, CTA systems and the Interurban lines and histories of traction in your area since the late 1950's ! No fan, however, of the brutal winters and cold up there, tho...heh - especially in older age. REGARDS - Joe F |
|
|
| (778991) | |
Re: Outside catwalks |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoPCCLCars on Fri May 1 18:24:07 2009, in response to Re: Outside catwalks, posted by bklynsubwaybob on Fri May 1 17:36:43 2009. Thanks...glad you enjoyed them.David Harrison |
|
|
| (779171) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by gbs on Sat May 2 01:12:19 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Fri May 1 15:22:29 2009. Thanks, Joe, and everyone, for the great explanations! |
|
|
| (779191) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Sat May 2 03:34:53 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by randyo on Fri May 1 15:19:13 2009. Hello Randy O Yes, very good explanation re: subway paddle shoe clearances on some Brooklyn older ELs'. On the IRT, that and another few reasons were why the Manhattan Elevated Division wooden rolling stock always retained the earlier design Drop Sled "EL" style third rail shoes and their 3rd rail position..as follows: (a) -- For the very thrifty and expense-conscious IRT, it would have been deemed extensively much too costly to replace ALL (4 per EL motor car, EL trailer cars had no shoes) Drop Sled shoes on many thousands of Elevated Cars, both in brand new paddle shoes material, and labor/time, combined costs; (b) -- Additional time and labor/ material costs to reposition and apply cover boards over ALL the original EL style 3rd rails and as such outfit each of a few hundred collective accumulative miles of "Manhattan EL Division" route trackage as such. (c) -- Per a and b, perhaps because the Manhattan El Division, thanks to the anti streetcar and EL legislation and attitudes of some then "very short insight" people of the likes of Mayor Laguardia and his minion followers...it was deemed a wasted cost investment, as was thought likewise of installing complete blocks and signaling on all route trackage of the FOUR Manhattan ELs' -- which was never done EXCEPT only at ALL track interlockings, and also full installation of blocks and signals done on ALL trackage of their two more heavily, stronger built Bronx route EL mainline extensions. (d) -- As the Manhattan EL Division elevated structures were too lightly built - mainly 1880's era built lattice construction columns and girders - to handle revenue loaded steel subway trains, the DROP SLED shoes and their EL style 3rd rail with THE HIGHER WOOD PLANK BACK SAFETY BOARD, and rail position, guaranteed that even accidentally, as follows: (1) -- Steel subway trains would not be able to draw power to operate on "Manhnattan EL Division" only assigned trackages, as their "paddle" type subway shoes would foul and ride up ONTO the "higher than 3rd rail head" safety backboard and up off of the power rail head. Thats WHY the high wooden safety backboard was missing on "EL" style 3rd rails on the IRT Bronx and Queens EL operated routes fitted with DUAL type 3rd rails ! (2) -- "Wooden" car constructed trains were banned from mainline subway tunnel revenue operation by earlier (IIRC in 1912-13) PSC legislation, and thus would not "accidentally" be able to draw power from an unreachable, further away and lower positioned, and covered, subway style 3rd rail on trackage with such. Also, the approx. ONE FOOT + higher EL Car roofs would not clear most IRT Subway tunnels. In one text-documented instance, this in fact prevented a Manhattan bound 2nd Ave EL wooden "EL" train from accidentally operating down to and into the IRT E. 149t St. West Farms Line subway tunnel, Bronx, when it was improperly towerman-switched to the right onto the westward descending subway-tunnel bound mainline local track, instead of the the left onto the westward upward-rising ramp S/B local "EL Division" mainline track having ONLY EL style 3rd rail - of the Bergen Cutoff EL branch back in the late 1920's ! The entire wooden EL train cleared the switch and immediately LOST all power, and was immediately stopped by the errant motorman, when ALL of its drop sled shoes dropped into mid air due to not ALSO having an EL style 3rd rail on the subway tunnel approach downramp trackage ! A following EL train was coupled to the rear car of the "dead" train and pulled it back, upward and eastward, to the DUAL 3rd rail trackage EAST of the switch. Both "EL" trains were then sent, properly re-routed, on their way to the upper level ramp of the BERGEN Cutoff Line, towards the 3rd Avenue EL mainline. (3) -- Thats WHY the BMT Elevated system NEVER used the safety wooden high backboard on their EL style 3rd rails on ANY of their EL lines, and mainly so NOT on EL lines of which both steel subway trains and wooden EL trains ran in joint-route operations...using their single one and only "EL" style 3rd rail at trackside for use by BOTH train types to collect power ! Regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (779341) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by Mellow One on Sat May 2 13:01:30 2009, in response to Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by gbs on Fri May 1 01:22:31 2009. I have made several postings concerning the Dual Third Rails on the IRT Lines. Here is an example of the of one of the Queens Dual Third Rail lines showing a BMT Q car with subway paddle shoes. You may also want to reference some previous postings w/photos here and and here. My text started here. |
|
|
| (779461) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat May 2 20:35:05 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Sat May 2 03:34:53 2009. One thing puzzles me since you mentioned the "thrify and expense conscious" IRT. If the IRT did not want to go to the expense of re equipping its el rolling stock with paddle type shoes, why did it go to the expense of installing 2 types of 3rd rail in dual operation areas? It seems to me that it would have been cheaper to have only el type 3rd rail which could have been used by both subway and el equipment on those lines as the BMT did. |
|
|
| (779680) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Sun May 3 09:56:28 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by ChicagoPCCLCars on Fri May 1 16:04:14 2009. Except south of London, I'm sure. lol |
|
|
| (779887) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sun May 3 16:38:03 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Fri May 1 17:12:22 2009. Joe, why didn't the leased Manhattan els have subway type third rail, when they were electrified? Why install 2 types of rail on the Bronx els, instead of one? It was stupid and costly! |
|
|
| (780061) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon May 4 02:47:53 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by Elkeeper on Sun May 3 16:38:03 2009. As Joe and I both discussed in various posts, elevated 3rd rail was developed first and since the Manhattan els received 3rd rail ahead of the subway, they received what was state of the art at the time. By the time the subway construction was underway the subway type third rail and paddle type contact shoes had been developed and so that was what was installed on the subway. |
|
|
| (780068) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by 5119 on Mon May 4 04:07:41 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by randyo on Mon May 4 02:47:53 2009. Excellent article from 2 well informed rail fans. Thanks, Randy and Joe |
|
|
| (780069) | |
Re: Covered/uncovered third rail |
|
|
Posted by 5119 on Mon May 4 04:11:04 2009, in response to Re: Covered/uncovered third rail, posted by Joe @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Fri May 1 15:36:11 2009. Doesn't Boston (MBTA) also used exposed contact rails? |
|
|
