Subway Freight
Exile on Market Street
In the current issue of _Almanac/Compass_, the feature section of Penn's
official weekly journal, Professor Edward Morlok of our Transportation
Program (in Systems Engineering) answers questions about the
Conrail/CSX/Norfolk Southern merger fight, and its implications for the
industry, stockholders, and the local and regional economy. You can read
it at http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/features/1997/021897/Morlok.html
One of the areas where he thinks rail freight could improve its competitive
position is along the Northeast Corridor, where, thanks to the turning over
of the best route to Amtrak, there is no really good high-speed freight
route right now. (He doesn't say this, but I suspect that he'd have in
mind a route that used CSX Washington-Philadelphia and Conrail Philly-New
York. New York-Boston would remain a problem.) He argues that a good fast
freight service along the Corridor would remove many trucks from the
Northeast's crowded expressways.
And he feels it need not be the kind of high-tonnage stuff the railroads
move now, either. It could include small less-than-carload shipments, "and
for local distribution, regional rail passenger lines could be used, *as
might the subways.*" [emphasis mine]
This is where the subject line of this post comes in.
I only know of one freight operation in the country -- the South Brooklyn
Railroad -- that makes use of subway facilities to haul goods, and AFAIK,
none of its customers are located directly on the 4th Avenue (Brooklyn) or
West End lines, sections of which the SBR uses.
It seems to me that most subway systems are ill-suited to handle freight:
stations do not have the space to store packages, there are no direct
connections to potential customers (some department stores excepted), and
providing for them would probably be quite costly. Add to that that just
about all freight moves would have to take place in the midnight/early
morning hours, when the subways are closed to passengers except in New
York.
Still, the idea is intriguing. How could we adapt metropolitan rapid
transit for freight, and would it be practical to do so? Are there any
other rapid-transit properties used by freight trains aside from the SBR?
If so, what are the arrangements?
Extra for m.t.u-t: Of course, many interurban systems, and some streetcar
compaines, operated freight services. It would seem to me that setting up
a light rail freight operation would be less of a problem and possibly more
cost-effective.
[Now all I have to do is sit back and wait for Big Don to point out that
this would make it easier for the scum to haul big-ticket stuff away.]
__________________________________________________________________________
Sandy Smith, Exile on Market Street, Philadelphia smi...@pobox.upenn.edu
Univ of Pennsylvania, News & Public Affairs 215.898.1423/fax 215.898.1203
I speak for myself here, not for Penn http://pobox.upenn.edu/~smiths/
"I constantly run into people who complain that America is becoming too
Mexican. I would like to suggest, with all due respect, that it is
becoming too Canadian."
--------Richard Rodriguez, speaking at U. of Texas-Permian Basin, 2/6/97--
John Kolassa
In article <smiths-ya02408000...@netnews.upenn.edu> smi...@pobox.upenn.edu (Exile on Market Street) writes:
>
>
>Still, the idea is intriguing. How could we adapt metropolitan rapid
>transit for freight, and would it be practical to do so? Are there any
>other rapid-transit properties used by freight trains aside from the SBR?
>If so, what are the arrangements?
>
pick up freight from steam railroad (this was some time ago) freight yards
and deliver it to sidings along the subway line, most of which was in an
open cut. There were a few sidings in the tunnel portion downtown,
including at the offices of what became the Gannett newspapers.
Ron Stoloff
re: trasit freight
I presume you also considered the use of the freight depot on the old EL
line at Front and Market in Philly where the EL went to tunnel.
Another type of "freight" you might consider would be the funeral
trolley that took the families from their homes to the stop nearest
trolley stop to the burial spot.
Ron Stoloff, Philly
Ron Stoloff
re: subway freight
So fearful were the railroads of trasit competition that in Pennsylvania
they forced the transit system to use a different guage so they couldn't
move boxcars on the transit tracks. This became Pennsylvania Broad
Guage and is why trolley museums have to change the trucks on ex-Philly
rolling stock.
Ron Stoloff, Philly
Lee Winson
Per Sandy's post...
In the old days, streetcar systems had freight cars that did a
considerable business in milk/produce from the country, mail, and LCL freight.
The advent of light trucks in the 1920s cut into this business and it was
discontinued pretty early for the most part.
Interurbans also handled a lot of LCL and modest carload freight, indeed,
that's what kept a lot of lines going until about the 1950s.
Before the days of Federal Express and UPS, the railroads had Railway
Express Agency, which had LCL carried in baggage cars on passenger trains.
Many trains got the bulk of their revenue from LCL, when that stopped, so
did the psgr train. Other passenger trains had "combines" where part of
the coach handled package freight.
The Reading Co. carried such stuff, such as dropping off newspapers and
small package goods into the 1970s. I remember on the West Trenton line
seeing packages of blood en route to Langhorne hospitals from Phila.
As to the present, it seems to me that the subway system would be pretty
good to carry LCL stuff over night. Unfortunately, subway systems usually
aren't too far reaching. In NYC, yes, but in Phila no.
Another alternative may be bringing back LCL on commuter railroads.
one
snip
> And he feels it need not be the kind of high-tonnage stuff the railroads
> move now, either. It could include small less-than-carload shipments,
"and
> for local distribution, regional rail passenger lines could be used, *as
> might the subways.*" [emphasis mine]
>
> This is where the subject line of this post comes in.
>
> I only know of one freight operation in the country -- the South Brooklyn
> Railroad -- that makes use of subway facilities to haul goods, and AFAIK,
> none of its customers are located directly on the 4th Avenue (Brooklyn)
or
> West End lines, sections of which the SBR uses.
>
> It seems to me that most subway systems are ill-suited to handle freight:
> stations do not have the space to store packages, there are no direct
> connections to potential customers (some department stores excepted), and
> providing for them would probably be quite costly. Add to that that just
> about all freight moves would have to take place in the midnight/early
> morning hours, when the subways are closed to passengers except in New
> York.
>
Chicago had a subway freight system from 1900 to 1959, the system was
called the
Chicago Tunnel Co, operated on 2 foot gauge track. Hauled ashes and package
freight.
The department stores hasd the trains come into the store. The freight was
hauled to
railroad freight house for shipment outside the city. Two things shut the
company
down: truck took away the package business and building in the loop stopped
using
coal for heating. Couple years ago, the tunnel under the river was
breached, causing
many buildings in the loop to have their basements flooded.
Today, the tunnel is use for phone, cable and the information highway,
power cable and
one small part is use by the Chicago Tribune.
Robert Schoenfeld
On Tue, 18 Feb 1997, Michael T. Griffith wrote:
> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 18:33:41 -0600 (CST)
> From: "Michael T. Griffith" <sy...@uwyo.edu>
> Reply-To: tran...@cc.UManitoba.CA
> To: Multiple recipients of list <tran...@cc.UManitoba.CA>
> Subject: Re: Subway Freight
>
> > I only know of one freight operation in the country -- the South Brooklyn
> > Railroad -- that makes use of subway facilities to haul goods.
>
> Didn't know about this--could you tell us about it?
>
> mg
>
>
The South Brooklyn Street Railway is a remnant of the Brooklyn City
Trolley system It now only goes from 2nd ave to the 39th Street Yard every
thing east and south of there has been cut off though some street trackage
does remain. It formally extended as far as Coney Island Yard with a
junction with the Bay Ridge branch of the LIRR
73 de Bob
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ +
+ e-mail:rob...@liii.com _____ +
+ HomePage:http://www.liii.com/~roberts \ / +
+ \ / +
+ | +
+ WA2AQQ | +
+ | +
+ Home repeater LIMARC 146.85 +
+ +
+ These opinion are MINE and tough if you don't like them +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Annoy a fascist confront him with the facts
The road of life is a railroad
>From syn...@MCS.COM Wed Sep 25 21:54:58 1996
Stupidity is bliss.
P. Wezeman
There was a dedicated freight subway system in Chicago in the downtown
area. The tunnels are still there. It got into the news a few years ago
when construction workers digging the foundations for a bridge over a
river broke through into one of the tunnels and caused some major
flooding.
Coincidentally, a book about the old system was published just after
the incident. I didn't read that book, but I did come across a work of
fiction in which guerilla fighters resisting an invasion of the United
States used the old tunnels to get around in occupied Chicago. If that
author did his research properly, the freight system was a narrow gauge
railway using electric locomotives. I presume the equipment was similar
to that used in underground coal mines; why re-invent the wheel?
I have wondered if the idea has merit today. I hear that New York,
Los Angeles and other large cities can get very congested with all the
delivery trucks that double park. A television program on the New York
traffic authority said that sometimes they sweep downtown areas with
officers and tow trucks, so they can ticket and tow immediately, to keep
it from getting out of hand. The occasional impound fee is just a cost
of doing business there to UPS etc.
A freight subway system would seem to be reasonably economical if part
of a city's initial plan. Every building has a basement anyway, so mostly
it's a matter of having all the basements the same depth and having
building mechanical and structural systems allowing space for the track.
If the cargo were palletized, two crewmen with a ten car train could
deliver a lot of freight in a day. They could carry a narrow aisle
electric forklift, and one person could shunt the needed car up to
the loading platform for the other to take the pallets off or on.
Working in an existing city, a freight elevated railway might be
feasible. It could be conventional or monorail. I'm thinking not heavy
duty, but limited to standard pallets. Delivery could be to second story
loading platforms or a hydraulic knuckle boom mounted on the train could
lower pallets to sidewalk level.
Peter Wezeman, anti-social Darwinist
"Carpe Cyprinidae"
Charles F Seyferlich
Until several years ago a very limited amount of interchange (coal
hoppers) was done between CM&StP (Milwaukee Road) and CTA. Late nights a
Electric engine would pick up hoppers on Milwaukee road tracks (on
ground level near Montrose Ave) and haul them to Lill Coal, near Berwyn
stop on Howard line (red line). I think this was a operation left over
after South Shore Line stopped operation in 1963.
This operation couldn't be repeated now, the Milwaukee Road tracks are
mostly gone in this area.
I doubt any real freight operation could be put into operation today
with spending much $$$$. Track clearances are such that I doubt any
standard freight equipment can be used today (the coal yard operation
involved mostly straight track).
William N. Demakakos
Exile on Market Street wrote:
>
> In the current issue of _Almanac/Compass_, the feature section of Penn's
> official weekly journal, Professor Edward Morlok of our Transportation
> Program (in Systems Engineering) answers questions about the
> Conrail/CSX/Norfolk Southern merger fight, and its implications for the
> industry, stockholders, and the local and regional economy. You can read
> it at http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/features/1997/021897/Morlok.html
>
> One of the areas where he thinks rail freight could improve its competitive
> position is along the Northeast Corridor, where, thanks to the turning over
> of the best route to Amtrak, there is no really good high-speed freight
> route right now. (He doesn't say this, but I suspect that he'd have in
> mind a route that used CSX Washington-Philadelphia and Conrail Philly-New
> York. New York-Boston would remain a problem.) He argues that a good fast
> freight service along the Corridor would remove many trucks from the
> Northeast's crowded expressways.
>
> move now, either. It could include small less-than-carload shipments, "and
> for local distribution, regional rail passenger lines could be used, *as
> might the subways.*" [emphasis mine]
>
> This is where the subject line of this post comes in.
>
> none of its customers are located directly on the 4th Avenue (Brooklyn) or
> West End lines, sections of which the SBR uses.
>
> It seems to me that most subway systems are ill-suited to handle freight:
> stations do not have the space to store packages, there are no direct
> connections to potential customers (some department stores excepted), and
> providing for them would probably be quite costly. Add to that that just
> about all freight moves would have to take place in the midnight/early
> morning hours, when the subways are closed to passengers except in New
> York.
>
> transit for freight, and would it be practical to do so? Are there any
> other rapid-transit properties used by freight trains aside from the SBR?
> If so, what are the arrangements?
>
> compaines, operated freight services. It would seem to me that setting up
> a light rail freight operation would be less of a problem and possibly more
> cost-effective.
>
> [Now all I have to do is sit back and wait for Big Don to point out that
> this would make it easier for the scum to haul big-ticket stuff away.]
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> Sandy Smith, Exile on Market Street, Philadelphia smi...@pobox.upenn.edu
> Univ of Pennsylvania, News & Public Affairs 215.898.1423/fax 215.898.1203
> I speak for myself here, not for Penn http://pobox.upenn.edu/~smiths/
>
> "I constantly run into people who complain that America is becoming too
> Mexican. I would like to suggest, with all due respect, that it is
> becoming too Canadian."
> --------Richard Rodriguez, speaking at U. of Texas-Permian Basin, 2/6/97--
SBRR no longer delivers freight. It's main mission is/was to deliver new
NYCTA subway rolling stock, and act as an interchange company between
the LIRR, and the subway system. The NYCTA operates transit lines that
are not authorized to carry freight, except balast for right of way
maintenence.
For the SBRR or the NYCTA to carry freight, it wouls have to reclassify
itself to the ICC as a rail road.
Michael T. Griffith
> I only know of one freight operation in the country -- the South Brooklyn
Iain Angus
The TGV system in France operates high speed 'mail' trains over their lines
overnight...when there is no demand for passenger services (at least on the
Paris to Leon line.)
>
>In the current issue of _Almanac/Compass_, the feature section of Penn's
>official weekly journal, Professor Edward Morlok of our Transportation
>Program (in Systems Engineering) answers questions about the
>Conrail/CSX/Norfolk Southern merger fight, and its implications for the
>industry, stockholders, and the local and regional economy. You can read
>it at http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/features/1997/021897/Morlok.html
>
>One of the areas where he thinks rail freight could improve its competitive
>position is along the Northeast Corridor, where, thanks to the turning over
>of the best route to Amtrak, there is no really good high-speed freight
>route right now. (He doesn't say this, but I suspect that he'd have in
>mind a route that used CSX Washington-Philadelphia and Conrail Philly-New
>York. New York-Boston would remain a problem.) He argues that a good fast
>freight service along the Corridor would remove many trucks from the
>Northeast's crowded expressways.
>
>And he feels it need not be the kind of high-tonnage stuff the railroads
>move now, either. It could include small less-than-carload shipments, "and
>for local distribution, regional rail passenger lines could be used, *as
>might the subways.*" [emphasis mine]
>
>This is where the subject line of this post comes in.
>
>I only know of one freight operation in the country -- the South Brooklyn
--
Iain Angus
ian...@mail.foxnet.net
Iain Angus and Associates
Michael Kotler
>It seems to me that most subway systems are ill-suited to handle freight:
>
>[Now all I have to do is sit back and wait for Big Don to point out that
>this would make it easier for the scum to haul big-ticket stuff away.]
Umm, according to a trade journal I read back in the mid-80s (either a
trucking journal or Railway Gazette International, an experiment of
this sort was tried in the London Underground. To reduce the number
of trucks in downtown London, they tried using the trains to bring in
freight, with local delivery via the elevators. What happened?
People in trench coats showed up and innocently carted off the
freight! Big Don? Schmig Schmon!
Still, I found one other thing quite interesting. Who among us has
not sat behind a diesel truck on the freeway during rush hour and
angrily pined "why can't they just put all these monsters on a train".
Yet, in that aforementioned trucking journal, in an article about
downtown congestion, it read something like "cities should be
responsible and provide subway facilities for downtown commuters, so
truck delivery into cities would be easier" Yep, as much of a railfan
as I've always been, it seems like everyone wants the _other_ guy to
take the train so they can have the highways to themselves.
----------------------------------------------------
Michael E. Kotler
mek...@radix.net
Dobrow Stephen
Since the South Brooklyn RR (SBK) used to carry common carrier freight,
it must if have had ICC authorization at one time. Was it under the
"Interurban Exemption"? Freight trains shared several blocks of tunnel
with the West End line and that didn't bring the subways under the ICC.
At the turn of the century, the BRT provided freight service on several
rapid transit lines.
Late at night when the trolley isn't running, the San Diego Trolley
handles carload freight.
---Stephen Dobrow
Access Systems
On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, Ron Newman wrote:
> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 15:34:56 -0600 (CST)
> From: Ron Newman <rne...@cybercom.net>
> Subject: Re: Subway Freight
>
> In article <5edeb8$e...@netaxs.com>, lwi...@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) wrote:
>
> > Per Sandy's post...
> >
> > In the old days, streetcar systems had freight cars that did a
> > considerable business in milk/produce from the country, mail, and LCL freight.
>
> What is "LCL"? (or is it just an abbreviation for "Local" ?)
Less than Car Load....ie, package express
Bob
>
> --
> Ron Newman rne...@cybercom.net
> Web: http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/home.html
>
Ray Mullins
In article <rnewman-1902...@mfd-dial1-16.cybercom.net>,
Ron Newman <rne...@cybercom.net> wrote:
>
>What is "LCL"? (or is it just an abbreviation for "Local" ?)
>
a boxcar (or nowadays, a trailer).
Later,
Ray
--
M. Ray Mullins, Roseville CA
(which has better transit service than Arlington TX, and 1/5 the population)
http://www.lerctr.org/~mrm
TIPs: http://socaltip.lerctr.org, norcaltip.lerctr.org, cencaltip.lerctr.org
Ron Newman
[nyc.transit added to Newsgroups: header]
In article <smiths-ya02408000...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
smi...@pobox.upenn.edu (Exile on Market Street) wrote:
> I only know of one freight operation in the country -- the South Brooklyn
> Railroad -- that makes use of subway facilities to haul goods, and AFAIK,
> none of its customers are located directly on the 4th Avenue (Brooklyn) or
> West End lines, sections of which the SBR uses.
I'd like to hear a lot more about this operation. During what hours
is freight hauled, adn between what points? What passenger stations do
the freight trains pass through? Since the NYC subway does not shut down
at night, how are passenger and freight trains kept out of each other's way?
Where are goods loaded and unloaded?
shuts
Ron Newman
> Per Sandy's post...
>
> In the old days, streetcar systems had freight cars that did a
> considerable business in milk/produce from the country, mail, and LCL freight.
What is "LCL"? (or is it just an abbreviation for "Local" ?)
--
Access Systems
On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, Dobrow Stephen wrote:
> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 14:52:01 -0600 (CST)
> From: Dobrow Stephen <dob...@alpha.fdu.edu>
> Subject: Re: Subway Freight
>
>
> Since the South Brooklyn RR (SBK) used to carry common carrier freight,
> it must if have had ICC authorization at one time. Was it under the
> "Interurban Exemption"? Freight trains shared several blocks of tunnel
> with the West End line and that didn't bring the subways under the ICC.
> At the turn of the century, the BRT provided freight service on several
> rapid transit lines.
>
> Late at night when the trolley isn't running, the San Diego Trolley
> handles carload freight.
>
Same on the Baltimore light rail line, hauls freight between 1-5 AM
also if I am not mistaken doesn't PATH and DRPA both have to comply with
ICC rules, one of the reasons the PATH and DRPA brakes both have to be
able to do running brake tests and things!!!
Bob
Dobrow Stephen
Conventional railroads really only do a good job of handling
long-distance freight. For shorter distances, you need the freight
equivalent of light rail. I believe one of the European equipment
builders is working on a freight light rail vehicle.
To reduce shorter distance trucking, you need some sort of
cross/combination between a freight light rail vehicle and a
road-railer. You would want a one-person crew and a system for quick
transfer between rail and road.
You might have a hybrid-electric freight "motor" that would handle small
transferable containers pulling some road-railer equivalents. Such
vehicles, depending on clearances, could use rail, rapid transit, and
light rail tracks. With proper signalling for short "trains" with
reasonable acceleration, there is capacity in off-hours on many rail lines.
A network of lines would have to be assembled and the system designed for
short "trains" operating frequently. To justify using rails for part of
trip, time to make the transfer must be minimized and the total time
comprable to staying on the road.
---Stephen Dobrow
Mark Ambrose
I thought about something like this when I lived in Tokyo. That city is
extremely congested, and lots of folks go shopping via public transit.
There are 2 or 3 private package delivery services operating in the city
so folks can have lg purchases delivered to their homes.
I've wondered if there couldn't be a way to use the subways at nioght to
get packages to the nearest station to people's homes. From there 1)
customers could pick the package up or 2) items could be delivered by
truck. This could be a great benefit to the city, because (If I recall
correctly) there was a study that showed a significant amount of the
congestion on local streets in the city was due to truck traffic rather
than cars (a much higher % than in US cities).
-- Mark
Marc
rne...@cybercom.net (Ron Newman) wrote:
>--
>Ron Newman rne...@cybercom.net
>Web: http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/home.html
for all intents and purposes the south brooklyn railway exists as a
spur with a connection to the subway system, there is very little if
any co mingling of operations
Alan P Howes
On Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:27:55 -0500, rne...@cybercom.net (Ron Newman)
posted to misc.transport.urban-transit:
>In article <5edeb8$e...@netaxs.com>, lwi...@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) wrote:
>> Per Sandy's post...
>> In the old days, streetcar systems had freight cars that did a
>> considerable business in milk/produce from the country, mail, and LCL freight.
>What is "LCL"? (or is it just an abbreviation for "Local" ?)
Less-than-Car-Load.
HTH <g>
--
Alan P Howes, Public Transport Consultant
Alan Howes Associates, Perthshire, Scotland
alan...@dial.pipex.com
http://dialspace.dial.pipex.com/alanhowes/
(coming on now)
Alan P Howes
On Wed, 19 Feb 1997 15:46:44 GMT, mek...@radix.net (Michael Kotler)
posted to misc.transport.urban-transit:
>Umm, according to a trade journal I read back in the mid-80s (either a
>trucking journal or Railway Gazette International, an experiment of
>this sort was tried in the London Underground. To reduce the number
>of trucks in downtown London, they tried using the trains to bring in
>freight, with local delivery via the elevators. What happened?
>People in trench coats showed up and innocently carted off the
>freight! Big Don? Schmig Schmon!
You sure that wasn't an April 1st edition of the mag in question? I
stand to be corrected, but the scheme is news to me. Logistically, I
don't see it working. (For one thing, most LUL stations have
escalators, not lifts (elevators). Second, it's hard to get a
suitcase onto a train, let alone freight. ... ... )
George Conklin
In article <330BD5...@unity.ncsu.edu>,
New York City used to have a large package delivery system
for people who purchased something at Macy*s and needed to
have it delivered because you can't carry stuff on the
subway. Problem? Sure. You buy something and find that
delivery date for your apartment house is Tuesday and
Thursday. Fine. Stay home from your job on Tuesday and
they don't come. Stay home from your job on Thursday and
they don't come. Maybe they come the next week, maybe they
don't. How much work can you lose? What is the true cost
of this?
Matthew Mitchell
In article <330A7A...@worldnet.att.net>,
"William N. Demakakos" <dema...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>The south Brooklyn RR is a subsidiary of the NYCTA, MTA parent org. The
>SBRR no longer delivers freight. It's main mission is/was to deliver new
>NYCTA subway rolling stock, and act as an interchange company between
>the LIRR, and the subway system. The NYCTA operates transit lines that
>are not authorized to carry freight, except balast for right of way
>maintenence.
>
>For the SBRR or the NYCTA to carry freight, it wouls have to reclassify
>itself to the ICC as a rail road.
And the resulting regulatory and tax costs (discriminatory taxes on
railroads) would be astronomical. What can be done is to offer trackage
rights to a freight carrier, which is done at the south end of the
Baltimore line and in in San Diego (IIRC)
/_\ Matthew Mitchell, Newsletter Editor
/[ ]\ Delaware Valley Association of Railroad Passengers
/ | \ PO Box 7505, Philadelphia PA 19101-7505
/ _|_ \ voice: 215-673-6445-message box 3, fax 215-885-7448
--------- http://www.libertynet.org/~dvarp
Robert Schoenfeld
On Thu, 20 Feb 1997, David McLoughlin wrote:
> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 16:51:22 +1200
> From: David McLoughlin <dav...@iprolink.co.nz>
> To: Robert Schoenfeld <rob...@liii.com>
> Subject: Re: Subway Freight
> Newsgroups: misc.transport.urban-transit
>
> Robert Schoenfeld wrote:
> >
> > The South Brooklyn Street Railway is a remnant of the Brooklyn City
> > Trolley system It now only goes from 2nd ave to the 39th Street Yard every
> > thing east and south of there has been cut off though some street trackage
> > does remain. It formally extended as far as Coney Island Yard with a
> > junction with the Bay Ridge branch of the LIRR
>
> You mean this is a working remnant of the Brooklyn streetcar system? What
> sort of vehicles are used? What is the motive power?
>
> Thanks
>
> David McLoughlin
> Auckland New Zealand
>
Just so happens I had to go into Brooklyn yesterday. McDonald Ave where
the SBSRR ran is now paved over atleast north of 18th Ave and the private
ROW west from McDonald Ave to the 36th St Yard is used by others. Only
deisel engines are used on the remaining portion including the Davidson
Pipe Company probably the only remaining commercial costumer for SBSRR. It
connects with the NY Cross Bay RR at second ave All trackage to the NYXBRR
yard in the street is owned by NYC (not ther MTA or NYCTA but the City
itself)
David W. Barts
hen...@nina.pagesz.net (George Conklin) writes:
> New York City used to have a large package delivery system
>for people who purchased something at Macy*s and needed to
>have it delivered because you can't carry stuff on the
>subway. Problem? Sure. You buy something and find that
>delivery date for your apartment house is Tuesday and
>Thursday. Fine. Stay home from your job on Tuesday and
>they don't come. Stay home from your job on Thursday and
>they don't come. Maybe they come the next week, maybe they
>don't. How much work can you lose? What is the true cost
>of this?
What's this about "you can't carry stuff on the subway"? I carried my
luggage on the subway from Penn Station to the guest house where I was
staying and nobody batted an eye at me for doing it; in fact, (and not
surprisingly), I was not alone in taking my suitcase into the subway
from Penn Station.
I also *routinely* saw people taking all sorts of packages and small
hand carts onto the subway trains almost everytime I rode. If I
recall, NYCTA promotes the A train as ("the train to the plane") as a
way to get to JFK airport (via Howard Beach station and a free shuttle
bus). Obviously they wouldn't do this unless they expect people to
bring luggage onto the trains with them.
--
David Barts N5JRN | UW Civil Engineering, Box 352700 | Seattle, WA 98195-2700
dav...@ce.washington.edu | http://www.ce.washington.edu/~davidb
1823 GMT T: 44 F wind: S 3 gust 8 mph P: 1030 mbar
David McLoughlin
David Lesher
Dobrow Stephen <dob...@alpha.fdu.edu> writes:
>Since the South Brooklyn RR (SBK) used to carry common carrier freight,
>it must if have had ICC authorization at one time.
The "I" was Interstate. If intrastate, it's a different ballgame.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Michael Kotler
>On Thu, 20 Feb 1997, David McLoughlin wrote:
>
>Just so happens I had to go into Brooklyn yesterday. McDonald Ave where
>the SBSRR ran is now paved over atleast north of 18th Ave
Quite ironically, when the McDonald Ave. bridge over the Bay Ridge
LIRR tracks was rebuilt (at the site of the former junction between
the two lines) with a higher clearance in the late 1980s, that was the
beginning of the end of the SBSRR tracks; the bridge deck was rebuilt
with no tracks at all. Although there hadn't been a freight train on
those tracks since 1978 anyway, most of the rails were still in the
pavement up until that time.
Andrew Masin
kol...@genesee.bst.rochester.edu (John Kolassa) wrote:
>The Rochester subway used to haul freight. AFAIK, they used boxcabs to
>pick up freight from steam railroad (this was some time ago) freight yards
>and deliver it to sidings along the subway line, most of which was in an
>open cut. There were a few sidings in the tunnel portion downtown,
>including at the offices of what became the Gannett newspapers.
I believe there were separate tracks for freight and passenger
(trolley) service.
So, while the tunnel was shared, the freight service was a
conventional urban terminal operation, operating underground, rather
than on the surface.
Andrew.
Andrew Masin
"Michael T. Griffith" <sy...@uwyo.edu> wrote:
>> I only know of one freight operation in the country -- the South Brooklyn
>> Railroad -- that makes use of subway facilities to haul goods.
>Didn't know about this--could you tell us about it?
>mg
The South Brooklyn ran mainly on the surface, from 39th Street
(Brooklyn, of course) along McDonald Ave, to the BMT Coney Island
Shops.
The McDonald Ave. tracks were shared (until 1956) with BMT trolleys.
There was also a short section jointly operated with the West End
subway, this included the tunnel between 4th and Seventh Avenues.
There was a story, which I can't verify, that some wooden box cars
were so tight a fit, they had to be fitted with wire "girdles" to
avoid scraping the tunnel walls. The South Brooklyn was also supposed
to have served a few sidings on the BMT Sea Beach line, I believe
that this ceased pre-WWII.
I'm not sure that the company still exists, the McDonald Ave. tracks
were paved over in the 80's. In any case it was a NYCTA subsidiary.
Andrew.
Alan J. Munn
> >> I only know of one freight operation in the country -- the South Brooklyn
> >> Railroad -- that makes use of subway facilities to haul goods, and AFAIK,
> >> none of its customers are located directly on the 4th Avenue (Brooklyn) or
> >> West End lines, sections of which the SBR uses.
> >
> >I'd like to hear a lot more about this operation. During what hours
> >is freight hauled, adn between what points? What passenger stations do
> >the freight trains pass through? Since the NYC subway does not shut down
> >at night, how are passenger and freight trains kept out of each other's way?
> >Where are goods loaded and unloaded?
> >shuts
.........
You might be interested in what's now being introduced in Britain.
As far as I know, one government agency owns and maintains the stations
and railroad track.
A different agency owns and maintains the freight trains. A third agency
owns and maintains the passenger trains. Passengers (and freight
shippers) pay the (government-owned) train companies to ride on the trains
(and to ship freight on the trains). The train companies pay the
(government-owned) station-and-track company to use tracks and to stop in
stations. Supposedly, this permits better cost-accounting. If the
passenger or freight company consistently makes a profit, it will probably
be privatized. A popular goal is that, eventually, several private
companies will operate trains (with each company having its own routes,
schedules, and prices). It's sort of like what we have in America with
streets (owned by the government, but most cars and trucks not owned by
the government) and commercial airports (usually owned by the government,
but most planes privately owned).
Many British transport planners hope that, eventually, the government will
own only the
track-and-station agency. When the government does not have to
buy and operate trains, the government will lose less money
(subsidizing train service) every year.
If private companies have incompatible requests for access
to British tracks, then access may be auctionned off (to the
train companies) by
the track-and-station agency, it is widely thought.
Assuming that I understand the British system, it would be good in New
York City, I think, because the MTA would no longer have to pay to buy and
operate subway trains (and competing private companies could probably do a
better job for less money, I think).
--
Alan am...@pfmc.net
PO Box 750839
Flushing, NY 11375-0839 USA
Arwel Parry
In article <amunn-22029...@pool19.max-1.295l.nyc.pfmc.net>,
"Alan J. Munn" <am...@pfmc.net> writes
>.........
>
>You might be interested in what's now being introduced in Britain.
>As far as I know, one government agency owns and maintains the stations
>and railroad track.
Err, no. Railtrack is a privatised company with shares quoted on the
Stock Exchange. It does own the track, signalling and stations, though.
This week it announced it's going to spend 15.5 billion pounds over the
next 10 years upgrading things; whether this will actually happen
remains to be seen, particularly as it has already been heavily
criticised for underspending on maintenance last year in order to
maximise shareholders' returns.
>A different agency owns and maintains the freight trains.
Err, no. The freight trains are operated by English, Welsh & Scottish
Railways, a subsidiary of Wisconsin Central Transportation Corp. This
particularly well illustrates the lunacy of the privatisation concept -
the government ordered that British Rails' freight operations be split
into three geographically based companies (at considerable expense),
then WCTC come along and buy the three companies on the same day and put
them together again as EWS (at more expense, and considerable job losses
as EWS naturally have no need for three lots of headquarters staff).
They've painted their locos in a nice livery, though...
>A third agency owns and maintains the passenger trains.
Err, no. BR's passenger rolling stock and locomotives were split up
between three ROSCOs (Rolling Stock leasing companies), which then lease
them to the 25 passenger TOC's (Train Operating Companies). All three
ROSCOs were sold off in late 1995; two of them have since been sold
again for 50-100% more money than the government sold them for; the
managing director of Eversholt Leasing, resold this last week or so, is
to receive about 20 million pounds for shares he paid 110,000 for 15
months ago. This reinforces the public perception that much of BR was
sold far too cheaply, as the govt is determined to finish the sale
before the General Election expected on May 1st, when everybody expects
them to get thrown out. Frankly, if local government councillors had
acted with the fiscal irresponsibility of government ministers and MP's,
they'd have been disqualified from office and personally ordered to make
up the financial losses - I don't see why what's good for local
government shouldn't apply at national level too.
>Passengers (and freight
>shippers) pay the (government-owned) train companies to ride on the trains
>(and to ship freight on the trains). The train companies pay the
>(government-owned) station-and-track company to use tracks and to stop in
>stations. Supposedly, this permits better cost-accounting.
What it also does is ensure that connections will not be held if an
incoming train is running late - for delays caused by TOC's, they have
to pay Railtrack a fee (one of my friends has mentioned 60 pounds per
minutes' delay) - for late night trains it can be cheaper to let a
connecting train go, and put the few passengers who wanted to catch it
in a taxi; conversely if Railtrack causes delays, they have to pay the
TOC affected - it has been reported in the railway press that pressure
has been put on signalmen not to delay trains when they might otherwise
have done so if there was a possibilty of a dangerous movement.
>If the
>passenger or freight company consistently makes a profit, it will probably
>be privatized.
All already gone (except for Scotrail which has had a preferred bidder
announced, but there are possible legal difficulties being put in place
by the Strathclyde Passenger Transport Executive).
>A popular goal is that, eventually, several private
>companies will operate trains (with each company having its own routes,
>schedules, and prices).
It's worth noting that many of the train companies have been bought by
bus operators. This has led to a potential monopoly situation in several
areas where the same company runs both the trains and long-distance
buses (e.g. National Express runs the Midland Main Line and most long
distance buses in the East Midlands). Stagecoach bought South West
Trains (operating out of London Waterloo) a year ago and have recently
made a complete pigs' ear of things - they had a reorganisation and gave
10% of their drivers voluntary redundancy; the Stagecoach bosses
apparently ignored advice from their ex-BR managers that train drivers
have to know their routes before they can take trains out, and
consequently found they didn't have enough drivers to run the timetabled
service, amid great public criticism and terrible PR. They've had to
issue a temporary timetable with some 40 trains a day removed (for which
they are being fined by the regulatory authorities) until they get the
drivers they have left trained for the routes, and they let everybody
travelling from their stations last Thursday travel for free (however
far they were going - I've heard someone wanted a ticket to Fort
William!) at a reported cost of 1.2 million pounds.
>It's sort of like what we have in America with
>streets (owned by the government, but most cars and trucks not owned by
>the government) and commercial airports (usually owned by the government,
>but most planes privately owned).
Most of the big airports here are owned by BAA, the former British
Airports Authority, which was itself sold off many years ago. Some, such
as Manchester, are owned by local government councils or consortia of
councils.
>Many British transport planners hope that, eventually, the government will
>own only the
>track-and-station agency. When the government does not have to
>buy and operate trains, the government will lose less money
>(subsidizing train service) every year.
Err, no. ;-)! The actual amount paid to the various TOC's is currently
twice the amount which was formerly paid to BR.
>If private companies have incompatible requests for access
>to British tracks, then access may be auctionned off (to the
>train companies) by
>the track-and-station agency, it is widely thought.
It already happens. The timetable is determined by Railtrack in
negotiation with the TOCs.
>Assuming that I understand the British system, it would be good in New
>York City, I think, because the MTA would no longer have to pay to buy and
>operate subway trains (and competing private companies could probably do a
>better job for less money, I think).
Very much a matter of opinion!
Arwel
(until 3 weeks ago, employed by the IT department of British Rail; now
part of SEMA Group. Definitely my own opinions, not necessarily those
of my former or current employers).
--
============================================================
Arwel Parry apa...@cix.compulink.co.uk
ar...@cartref.demon.co.uk 10033...@compuserve.com
http://www.cartref.demon.co.uk/
Jim Guthrie
>> I only know of one freight operation in the country -- the South Brooklyn
>> Railroad -- that makes use of subway facilities to haul goods, and AFAIK,
>> none of its customers are located directly on the 4th Avenue (Brooklyn) or
>> West End lines, sections of which the SBR uses.
Of course, once upon a time, there were other freight customers around
-- the LIRR served the Consumer's Brewery near Ebbetts Field and the
Nasau Brewery near Bergen Street via a connection with the Franklin
Ave line near Dean Street .
I've also found some evidence to suggest the LIRR offered some sort of
freight service along the Canarsie Line -- perhaps an Ash Removal
Company and an Ice Distributor. Anyone know for sure?
Jim
Frank Kennedy
"one" <kan...@amlibs.com> wrote:
>coal for heating. Couple years ago, the tunnel under the river was
>breached, causing
>many buildings in the loop to have their basements flooded.
>Today, the tunnel is use for phone, cable and the information highway,
>power cable and
>one small part is use by the Chicago Tribune.
>
What is the Tribune using the old Chicago Tunnel Company for? Is this use
under the Tribune Tower on Michigan Avenue?
The east-west Kinzie section that is famous now as being the section that
burst open under teh Chicago River west of the Merchandise Mart, that Kinzie
section goes straight east to the Tribune Tower.
CityRail
The Tribune used a portion of the old freight tunnel when the paper was
still printed in Tribune Tower on Michigan Avenue. Essentially it was a
link between a newsprint storage building a block away and the press room.
Some years ago the Trib moved its presses to a new location at Grand
Avenue and the Chicago River. There was some talk of using the Kinzie
Street tunnel for various purposes, but nothing developed, and (AFAIK) the
original downtown segment is now idle.
See "Forty Feet Below", Bruce Moffat's book on the Chicago Tunnel Company,
which should still be in print from Pentrex.
George Conklin
In article <5ei4ta$9...@nntp1.u.washington.edu>,
Yes, especially on weekends, you can carry a suitcase with
you on the subway. But most packages were sent home. You
had to have a good package delivery system to shop. In NYC
people would shop for grocery purchases with little wire
carts. Those don't make it into the subway. My mother did
the usual thing: she stopped for grocery purchases every
day on the way home from work. You got things in small
packages, like half-pint sized ice cream and ran home with
it. And you did have to stay home for the package delivery
system.
Bill Joseph
Does anybody know anything about the South Brooklyn Railroad?
I used to pass by a lot when I lived in Bay Ridge. Never saw anyone
around, but the cars always moved. I still wonder, how/why do they get
the cars over to their yard? Do they use the LIRR Bay Ridge Line and
connect in the Navy Yard, or do they go over the subway tracks? Or, do
they just take things off ships, and not really go anywhere? When do
they move these trains?
For those of you who do not know the area, it is west of the BQE/3rd
Ave, on what I guess is/would be 1st Ave. The tracks leave the yard and
go right in the middle of the street from about 40th to the Navy Yard on
around 60th. Don't get confused with the old trolley tracks.
--Bill
Shalom Septimus
In article <3311CB...@ny.ubs.com>, Bill Joseph <bi...@ny.ubs.com> wrote:
>Does anybody know anything about the South Brooklyn Railroad?
>
>I used to pass by a lot when I lived in Bay Ridge. Never saw anyone
>around, but the cars always moved. I still wonder, how/why do they get
>the cars over to their yard? Do they use the LIRR Bay Ridge Line and
>connect in the Navy Yard, or do they go over the subway tracks? Or, do
>they just take things off ships, and not really go anywhere? When do
>they move these trains?
>
>For those of you who do not know the area, it is west of the BQE/3rd
>Ave, on what I guess is/would be 1st Ave. The tracks leave the yard and
>go right in the middle of the street from about 40th to the Navy Yard on
>around 60th. Don't get confused with the old trolley tracks.
Just passed there today.
The SBkRR starts on a pier off 36th Street and 2nd Avenue, used to go
straight through what is now the CostCo parking lot (appears to have been
re-aligned fairly recently around the south end of the lot), crosses
3d Avenue at grade, goes through a small yard between 3d and 4th avenues,
is joined by the West End subway line (which supposedly has trackage
rights over the SBk, not the other way around; since the SBk is owned
by the NYCTA, I'm not sure what practical difference, if any, this makes)
goes through a tunnel, the 9th Avenue station (lower level), and
dead-ends at Fort Hamilton Parkway just past the 37th-39th street yard.
There's a new set of two sidings (with third rail) off this track in the
yard where the trash train unloads to trucks.
Once upon a time, these tracks continued beneath the Culver Line all the
way down 37th Street and McDonald Ave, with sidings at various places
along the way (one still visible at Kings Highway), a transfer track to
the LIRR Bedford Branch at Avenue I, a transfer into the Coney Island
Yard somewhere around Avenue Y, and a balloon turnaround loop approxi-
mately under the Van Sicklen [Neptune Ave] station. This line was
shared by freight and passenger service, although the loop at the
south end was way too sharp for anything but a trolley car. The rails
were paved over a few years back.
The yard seems to have undergone some heavy work fairly recently. There's
new ballast, a pile of new ties (blocking one of the main tracks!) and
a stretch of one of the yard tracks is jacked up in the air, probably so
the aforementioned ties can be installed underneath. There are also a
couple of MoW cars hanging about.
The tracks you refer to, however, are the property of the New York
Regional Railroad (railway? not sure), formerly the NY Cross Harbor,
previously IIRC the Bush Terminal RR. These originate at the same
pier as the SBk, split off right at the pier's gate, and head southwest
along 2nd Avenue to about 41st Street or thereabouts, turn right on
that street, then left onto 1st Avenue. There are also tracks visible
in 2nd Avenue northeast of the pier, but these are abandoned: no longer
connected to the rest of the tracks going south. Even if they were,
the track is in horrendous shape: split switches, broken rails, hogbacks
in the roadbed (due to humpy asphalt), etc. Still, it's fascinating to
see the huge amount of paved-over sidings: seems almost every building
on the street had one... there are some diamond crossings visible on
the abandoned section, too. (Some buildings must have had their own
tracks going straight to a pier, crossing but not interchanging with
the BTRR.) I didn't follow this to the end to see where it went; I've
got to go back sometime and see.
South of the pier, it looks old, but maintained. (Cobblestones between
the rails, with holes filled up with what looks like recent asphalt.)
There were once two tracks, but one is abandoned and mostly paved over.
A few blocks along 1st Ave, it leaves the street for trackage in a
yard west of the street; here are two ancient ALCo/GE diesels, with
plates over the windows, still in NYCH markings; a NYC boxcar, various
other dreck, and lots of relatively new boxcars that seem to be still
in service. Lots of sidings here too, some abandoned, others active
(evidence: one had a boxcar on it, sticking out of the company's
driveway onto the sidewalk).
I followed these tracks until they disappeared into the Brooklyn Army
Terminal (not the Navy Yard: that's in Williamsburg, with its own
network of street-running tracks once owned by the Brooklyn Eastern
District Terminal RR); evidence suggests that they link up with the
LIRR Bedford Branch. at 65th Street, where there is another transfer bridge.
Note though, that you can't go directly from the SBk to the NYRR without
going out on the pier past the switch, then reversing.
There is what looks like an abandoned subway train, not on rails, sitting
on this pier. Anybody have any idea what this is for?
Anyhow, to answer your question, the SBkRR mostly is used for delivery of
new subway cars, via the center (express) track on the West End el, to the
Coney Island yards. Freight won't fit through the tunnel southeast of 4th
Avenue, and there's noplace for it to go anyhow past there.
The NYRR is used for delivery of boxcars to various industries along 1st
and Second Avenues; also for transfer of freight from the metro area to
New Jersey via carfloat, which is slow but faster than sending them up
to Albany.
For more info: http://bjr.acf.nyu.edu/ ("Penny Bridge") note that this
is NOT my site, but I recommend it strongly.
NYRR has their own web site, accessible via a link from the above page.
>Jim Guthrie wrote:
>> I've also found some evidence to suggest the LIRR offered some sort of
>> freight service along the Canarsie Line -- perhaps an Ash Removal
>> Company and an Ice Distributor. Anyone know for sure?
There is a plainly-visible freight siding along the Canarsie Line,
adjacent to the 105th St. Station. I can't see, however, if it ever
connected physically with that trackage, or if the other end of it
(still visible crossing the street) connected to the LIRR somewhere
--
||J.Alan Septimus||You can't have everything...||sept...@acsu.buffalo.edu
|| KA2GYP ||...where would you put it? ||NYS Pharmacy Intern # 071612
||===============||==========Stephen Wright====||NYC Locksmith License 824141
Robert Schoenfeld
On Mon, 24 Feb 1997, Bill Joseph wrote:
> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 11:48:38 -0600 (CST)
> From: Bill Joseph <bi...@ny.ubs.com>
> Reply-To: tran...@cc.UManitoba.CA
> To: Multiple recipients of list <tran...@cc.UManitoba.CA>
> Subject: Re: Subway Freight - South Brooklyn
>
> Does anybody know anything about the South Brooklyn Railroad?
>
> I used to pass by a lot when I lived in Bay Ridge. Never saw anyone
> around, but the cars always moved. I still wonder, how/why do they get
> the cars over to their yard? Do they use the LIRR Bay Ridge Line and
> connect in the Navy Yard, or do they go over the subway tracks? Or, do
> they just take things off ships, and not really go anywhere? When do
> they move these trains?
>
> For those of you who do not know the area, it is west of the BQE/3rd
> Ave, on what I guess is/would be 1st Ave. The tracks leave the yard and
> go right in the middle of the street from about 40th to the Navy Yard on
> around 60th. Don't get confused with the old trolley tracks.
>
> --Bill
That is the NY CrossBay RR Still in use anddoes connect to the LIRR via
the old Brooklyn Army Terminal. Also connects to the Xouth Brooklyn at
39th St and 1st Ave
David W. Barts
hen...@nina.pagesz.net (George Conklin) writes:
So, you admit that you were lying when you earlier said that you
couldn't carry packages on the subway.
> But most packages were sent home.
Apparently by choice, since as you now admit they could have chosen to
take them home on the subway.
> You
>had to have a good package delivery system to shop. In NYC
>people would shop for grocery purchases with little wire
>carts.
They still do, based on the number of such carts I saw.
> Those don't make it into the subway.
False. I saw many people taking these little wire carts onto the
trains. They are apparently quite easy to handle and can be rolled up
and down the stairs into stations with little difficulty.
> My mother did
>the usual thing: she stopped for grocery purchases every
>day on the way home from work. You got things in small
>packages, like half-pint sized ice cream and ran home with
>it. And you did have to stay home for the package delivery
>system.
So what? If people choose that they would rather stay home and wait
for something to be delivered than to carry it back themselves on the
subway, they obviously view that as the preferable choice. Who are we
to second-guess them?
-----------
Someone should collect a list of Conklin's Subway Lies. So far, I've
noticed the following assertions by him that are demonstrably false
based on my own experiences during a visit to NYC:
1. The elderly can't ride the subway.
2. The IRT has an average speed of three miles per hour.
3. You can't carry packages on the subway.
--
David Barts N5JRN | UW Civil Engineering, Box 352700 | Seattle, WA 98195-2700
dav...@ce.washington.edu | http://www.ce.washington.edu/~davidb
1743 GMT T: 46 F wind: E 2 gust 3 mph P: 1026 mbar
Joseph D. Korman
Shalom Septimus wrote:
> the LIRR Bedford Branch at Avenue I, a transfer into the Coney Island
> Yard somewhere around Avenue Y, and a balloon turnaround loop approxi-
> mately under the Van Sicklen [Neptune Ave] station. This line was
> shared by freight and passenger service, although the loop at the
> south end was way too sharp for anything but a trolley car. The rails
> were paved over a few years back.
The JoeKorNer has photos of PCC cars under the Neptune Ave (nee Van
Sicklen) station of the F train taken by Don Harold in the late 1940'
and early 1950's. There's also a shot in Coney Island Yard.
Visit the JoeKorNer (URL below) click what's new the look for the Don
Harold Pages.
--
-------------------------------------------------
| Joseph D. Korman - joe...@earthlink.net |
| WWW site http://home.earthlink.net/~joekor/ |
|-------------------------------------------------|
|Follow the YELLOW Brick Road to the Land of OZ |
| to learn about writing HTML pages |
| http://www.buffnet.net/~paulk/oz.htm |
| The Page Masters Ultimate Web Page from |
| the Virtual University: http://horizons.org/ |
|-------------------------------------------------|
| The light at the end of the tunnel ... |
| may be a train going the other way! |
| Bad Trek is better than No Trek! |
| I have become a (computer) chip potato. |
-------------------------------------------------
Marc Dufour
==============================================================
ian...@foxnet.net (Iain Angus)
écrivit le - wrote on Tue, 18 Feb 1997 16:05:56 -0600 (CST):
--------------------------------------------------------------
>The TGV system in France operates high speed 'mail' trains over their lines
>overnight...when there is no demand for passenger services (at least on the
>Paris to Leon line.)
There is some freight service on some Paris regional express subway
(RER) that is assured by SNCF (french national railroad) switchers.
The RER is a mainline-sized railroad (and 100% compatible with mainline
rolling stock, electrification and signalling - TGV have been routed on
it for special occasions), but that is operated and scheduled like a
subway (one line has 120 seconds intervals between trains!).
Switching is performed at night...
-- -------------- Pour la Republique Francaise du Quebec -------------- --
I love big ($1 & $2) coins: the last time I was flat broke, I checked
my pockets and I found out that I was $20 richer than I thought.
~~ Last real dive: Still the almost fully frozen canal Soulanges, 5mfw ~~
Marc Dufour -- [\] ACUC6 31874 - TDI CD-0197 -- http://www.accent.net/emdx
Marc Dufour
==============================================================
rsto...@bbs.cpcn.com (Ron Stoloff)
écrivit le - wrote on 18 Feb 1997 23:10:56 GMT:
--------------------------------------------------------------
>re: subway freight
>So fearful were the railroads of trasit competition that in Pennsylvania
>they forced the transit system to use a different guage so they couldn't
>move boxcars on the transit tracks. This became Pennsylvania Broad
>Guage and is why trolley museums have to change the trucks on ex-Philly
>rolling stock.
Funny, the Toronto streetcars (and subway) adopted wide gauge for
exactly the opposite reason: they were afraid that the railroads would
send their boxcars onto their tracks!!!
jab...@hoflink.com
> >Jim Guthrie wrote:
> >> I've also found some evidence to suggest the LIRR offered some sort of
> >> freight service along the Canarsie Line -- perhaps an Ash Removal
> >> Company and an Ice Distributor. Anyone know for sure?
>
> There is a plainly-visible freight siding along the Canarsie Line,
> adjacent to the 105th St. Station. I can't see, however, if it ever
> connected physically with that trackage, or if the other end of it
> (still visible crossing the street) connected to the LIRR somewhere
>
> --
Industrial Park in what was a residentual area between the LIRR Bay Ridge
Division and the Canarsie L Line in Brooklyn. New 2 family houses were
town down, factories were built and two spurs were constructed that
branched off of the LIRR Bay Ridge division south of Linden Boulevald.
Most of the factories closed any complanies like UPS, NY Telephone, Jetro,
etc. purchased the buildings and contructed parking lots over and around
the abandoned spur tracks which basically are still there.
bbrey...@aol.com
In article <Pine.A41.3.95.970218...@green.weeg.uiowa.edu>, "P. Wezeman" <pwez...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu> wrote:
>Subject: Re: Subway Freight
>From: "P. Wezeman" <pwez...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu>
>Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 20:00:12 -0600
>
> There was a dedicated freight subway system in Chicago in the downtown
>area. The tunnels are still there. It got into the news a few years ago
>when construction workers digging the foundations for a bridge over a
>river broke through into one of the tunnels and caused some major
>flooding.
> Coincidentally, a book about the old system was published just after
>the incident. I didn't read that book, but I did come across a work of
>fiction in which guerilla fighters resisting an invasion of the United
>States used the old tunnels to get around in occupied Chicago. If that
>author did his research properly, the freight system was a narrow gauge
>railway using electric locomotives. I presume the equipment was similar
>to that used in underground coal mines; why re-invent the wheel?
> I have wondered if the idea has merit today. I hear that New York,
>Los Angeles and other large cities can get very congested with all the
>delivery trucks that double park. A television program on the New York
>traffic authority said that sometimes they sweep downtown areas with
>officers and tow trucks, so they can ticket and tow immediately, to keep
>it from getting out of hand. The occasional impound fee is just a cost
>of doing business there to UPS etc.
> A freight subway system would seem to be reasonably economical if part
>of a city's initial plan. Every building has a basement anyway, so mostly
>it's a matter of having all the basements the same depth and having
>building mechanical and structural systems allowing space for the track.
>If the cargo were palletized, two crewmen with a ten car train could
>deliver a lot of freight in a day. They could carry a narrow aisle
>electric forklift, and one person could shunt the needed car up to
>the loading platform for the other to take the pallets off or on.
> Working in an existing city, a freight elevated railway might be
>feasible. It could be conventional or monorail. I'm thinking not heavy
>duty, but limited to standard pallets. Delivery could be to second story
>loading platforms or a hydraulic knuckle boom mounted on the train could
>lower pallets to sidewalk level.
>
> Peter Wezeman, anti-social Darwinist
>
> "Carpe Cyprinidae"
>
>
Backfilling on this old thread: new or old city is not the key---the building of the Chicago freight subway system was uniquely facilitated by the geologic structure
beneath the downtown area: a uniform layer of clay which could be cut with a butter knife. Trying to build a similar system in New York would be stymied by the alternating areas of filled-in streams and SOLID rock; in Los Angeles by the great amount of unconsolidated subterrean structures; in Philadelphia by underground streams, etc. Toronto might have a chance, as it lakefront situation is similar to
Chicago, by I believe is has deep, deep, loams rather than a clay layer.
I can't imagine that a new technology elevated freight system would be any improvement, unless it was scaled to handle containers (not pallets), and then you're back to the scale of grade sepaated railroads (e.g., the St. John's Park
Terminal on the west side of Manhatten or the numerous spurs (now all gone, but still seen in the shape of the stonework) along the Reading's Ninth Street Branch in Philadelphia, or (again in Philadelphia) facilities such as Reading's building on
North Broad St. where there was (is) a freight car elevator from the "City Subway" to each level of an equivalent of the Chicago Mechandise Mart.
===
P.S. The book "Thirty Feet Under" was published long before the big leak a few years ago---the publicity of that event got it into reprint.
Bruce B. Reynolds, Systems Consultant: Founder of Trailing Edge Technologies---If It Ain't Broke It Still Might Need Fixing for the Year 2000
Colin R. Leech
(bbrey...@aol.com) writes:
> I can't imagine that a new technology elevated freight system would be
> any improvement, unless it was scaled to handle containers (not pallets),
> and then you're back to the scale of grade sepaated railroads (e.g., the
> St. John's Park
> Terminal on the west side of Manhatten or the numerous spurs (now all
> gone, but still seen in the shape of the stonework) along the Reading's
> Ninth Street Branch in Philadelphia, or (again in Philadelphia)
> facilities such as Reading's building on
> North Broad St. where there was (is) a freight car elevator from the
>"City Subway" to each level of an equivalent of the Chicago Mechandise Mart.
I'll point out that most industrial rail spurs have been eliminated in
major cities in favour of deliveries by truck (except to the largest
industrial plant customers), so I don't wee why an elevated railway (huge
$$$) would be successful at freight delivery where the mainline railroads
were not.
--
#### |\^/| Colin R. Leech ag414 or crl...@freenet.carleton.ca
#### _|\| |/|_ Civil engineer by training, transport planner by choice.
#### > < Opinions are my own. You may consider them shareware.
#### >_./|\._< "If you can't return a favour, pass it on." - A.L. Brown
Julio Perez
bbrey...@aol.com wrote:
[excerpts deleted for clarity]
: > Working in an existing city, a freight elevated railway might be
: >feasible. It could be conventional or monorail. I'm thinking not heavy
: >duty, but limited to standard pallets. Delivery could be to second story
: >loading platforms or a hydraulic knuckle boom mounted on the train could
: >lower pallets to sidewalk level.
Actually, it is my understanding this was done in New York City in the
40's and 50's or so. Many industrial buildings along 12th Avenue running
parallel to the West Side Highway (or whatever it's called today) have
openings in the second or third floor. Apparently, a freight elevated
railroad did serve these companies, hence the elevated building openings.
Of course, the railway is long gone.
Julio Perez
Thor Lancelot Simon
In article <5g8u9i$o...@isis.fiu.edu>,
Julio Perez <per...@solix.fiu.edu> wrote:
>bbrey...@aol.com wrote:
>
>[excerpts deleted for clarity]
>
>: > Working in an existing city, a freight elevated railway might be
>: >feasible. It could be conventional or monorail. I'm thinking not heavy
>: >duty, but limited to standard pallets. Delivery could be to second story
>: >loading platforms or a hydraulic knuckle boom mounted on the train could
>: >lower pallets to sidewalk level.
>
>Actually, it is my understanding this was done in New York City in the
>40's and 50's or so. Many industrial buildings along 12th Avenue running
Uh, try the 1930s through the 1970s.
>parallel to the West Side Highway (or whatever it's called today) have
>openings in the second or third floor. Apparently, a freight elevated
With, in fact, railroad tracks running through them.
>railroad did serve these companies, hence the elevated building openings.
>Of course, the railway is long gone.
Only south of Gansevoort Street. North of there, it's still in place, though
not in such a condition that it could be quickly returned to service. Every
few years Conrail is forced to sue a few building owners who have gates across
the tracks, trying to regain the space (which they were once duly compensated
for, mind you) by adverse posession.
I've written a long rant on the subject of this rail line's current
out-of-service state which you can probably find if you do an AltaVista search
for "Thor Simon" AND Javits.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon t...@rek.tjls.com
But as he knew no bad language, he had called him all the names of common
objects that he could think of, and had screamed: "You lamp! You towel! You
plate!" and so on. --Sigmund Freud
jab...@hoflink.com
On 13 Mar 1997, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
>
> With, in fact, railroad tracks running through them.
>
> >railroad did serve these companies, hence the elevated building openings.
> >Of course, the railway is long gone.
>
> Only south of Gansevoort Street. North of there, it's still in place, though
> not in such a condition that it could be quickly returned to service. Every
> few years Conrail is forced to sue a few building owners who have gates across
> the tracks, trying to regain the space (which they were once duly compensated
> for, mind you) by adverse posession.
>
There really aren't any buildings north of the Gansevoort Street
area that the tracks go through. There are two spurs that go into the two
buildings north of 14th Street. There are two big fences accross the
tracks as it leaves the yards at 31st Street. There was a branch that
crossed 10th Ave, but the section was removed when the Post Office
building was built there.
Aron Eisenpress
In article <Pine.BSI.3.95.970313...@hoflink.com>, <jab...@hoflink.com> says:
>
> [...snip...]
>>
> There really aren't any buildings north of the Gansevoort Street
>area that the tracks go through. There are two spurs that go into the two
>buildings north of 14th Street. There are two big fences accross the
at the ground floor entrance to one of the buildings. These spurs are
pretty extensive!
Please don't forget the meat district buildings south of these - they've
got platforms for a couple of blocks - and I think there were also
platforms around 22nd-23rd streets.
>tracks as it leaves the yards at 31st Street. There was a branch that
>crossed 10th Ave, but the section was removed when the Post Office
>building was built there.
the elevated freight line. (Was it originally the Morgan Parcel Post
Building, or was that a later incarnation?) The railroad ran daily
mail-only trains through between Spuyten Duyvil and the Post Office,
and the building had a private siding inside on the second floor, with
six tracks that could accomodate 36 cars at a time! Now it all goes
by truck.
This is the site of the original passenger station of the old Hudson
River Railroad, by the way.
-------
-- Aron Eisenpress, City U of NY / Computing & Information Services
(email: af...@cunyvm.cuny.edu)
P. Wezeman
On 12 Mar 1997, Colin R. Leech wrote:
>
> (bbrey...@aol.com) writes:
> > I can't imagine that a new technology elevated freight system would be
> > any improvement, unless it was scaled to handle containers (not pallets),
> > and then you're back to the scale of grade sepaated railroads (e.g., the
> > St. John's Park
> > Terminal on the west side of Manhatten or the numerous spurs (now all
> > gone, but still seen in the shape of the stonework) along the Reading's
> > Ninth Street Branch in Philadelphia, or (again in Philadelphia)
> > facilities such as Reading's building on
> > North Broad St. where there was (is) a freight car elevator from the
> >"City Subway" to each level of an equivalent of the Chicago Mechandise Mart.
>
> I'll point out that most industrial rail spurs have been eliminated in
> major cities in favour of deliveries by truck (except to the largest
> industrial plant customers), so I don't wee why an elevated railway (huge
> $$$) would be successful at freight delivery where the mainline railroads
> were not.
I have read of numerous instances where a new owner of cast-off routes
from a major railroad was able to make it into a profitable short line.
There seems to be something about the sheer size of a big railroad that
sometimes makes it difficult for them to serve smaller customers. I wonder
if intracity spurs might be successful as independent businesses.
In reference to an urban elevated freight rail system, I was thinking
of freight service to downtown business rather than industrial areas,
in the manner of the Chicago freight subway system, and so I thought
of pallet loads rather than containers.
Most such businesses at present do not have loading docks and get their
deliveries via non-articulated trucks, often equipped with hydraulic
lift gates, while they double park on the streets. Some stores have
sidewalk freight elevators. The largest items, probably refrigerators
or freezers at appliance stores, can be man-handled by a few people with
hand trucks and dollies. Much of the goods are on pallets which are
usually moved with hand pallet trucks, sometimes called pallet jacks.
There is seldom a container load of anything and when there is, there
would be no place to park a container except on the street or sidewalk.
Vehicles weighing 20,000-30,000 lb. would be sufficient to move pallet
loads and the overhead structure to support them would be much lighter and
cheaper than that needed for containers. Small, slow, electric pallet
trucks could service businesses several blocks away from the line and
would be compatible with pedestrians, as are those assistance vehicles
that run through airport concourses carrying passengers who cannot walk
long distances.
No such urban rail service as I propose exists anywhere that I
know of, and it may very well be that it would not be viable. However,
there are a some factors that might make more likely now than it was
in the past.
Traffic congestion is such that delivery by truck into major cities
is more difficult. I read that increases in the speed of intermodal
freight to Los Angeles that result in time savings of less than a whole
day are useless, since a trailer that isn't there before morning rush hour
will have to wait until the next day.
I have also heard that the numbers of delivery trucks are such that
they are a significant part of traffic congestion, especially since they
have to double park to load and unload.
Los Angeles is trying hard to reduce exhaust emissions. Electric
powered trains would be better than natural gas or alcohol fueled
trucks for this purpose.
An elevated rail system might be used for passengers as well as
freight, with many costs shared between the two uses. An "El" is the
cheapest way of providing mass transit with its own right of way so it
is not affected by street congestion. It also provides its own advertising
as drivers stalled in traffic see vehicles pass overhead.
Of course this is expensive, but that must be matched against the value
and the alternatives. I suspect that the total cost would not be much
more than that of the system of skyways that has transformed the downtown
of Minneapolis into an all-weather pedestrian environment over the past
decades.
Riverline
>Morgan Post Office in NYC had a private siding running into the second
floor.
Trains mag had a picture in 1956 or '57 showing a Lima switcher pulling
express cars out of the building. If I remember the description correctly,
NYC used several idler cars to make sure the diesel didn't enter the
building.
Was there access to the lower level from the Pennsylvania tracks?
Paul Reiss
da...@blackiris.com
In article <19970309200...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
bbrey...@aol.com wrote:
[SNIP]
> P.S. The book "Thirty Feet Under" was published long before the big leak
a few years ago---the publicity of that event got it into reprint.
>
The book is "FORTY FEET BELOW" and there is/was also a video of the same
name put out by Pentrex the includes scenes from the subway and the story
of the flooding of the tunnels.