Let's have a thread dedicated to electric freight in the U.S. and Canada (hard mode: no interurbans)
Please, no discussion of the Milwaukee Road's dieselization or the politics involved. Feel free to discuss the western portion of the railroad itself, though.
BC RAIL FUCK YEAH
>>777663
>Let's have a thread dedicated to electric freight in the U.S. and Canada (hard mode: no interurbans)
>but also abitrarily eliminate any discussion of one of the most successful and longest electric freight operations in the United States
Shit thread.
The Virginian Railway ran electric freight over their trackage in the Appalachian Mountains. The electrification was completed in 1925...
>>777695
...and dieselized in 1962, three years after purchase by the Norfolk and Western Railway.
The N&W had their own electrified route from 1913 to 1950.
>>777694
>Feel free to discuss the western portion of the railroad itself, though.
![gn5018[3].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/pZ6tayh.jpg "gn5018[3].jpg")
Everyone always talks about the Milwaukee Road, but they weren't the only railroad with electric locomotives through the Cascades. Great Northern also operated a 73-mile electrified portion of their line in the vicinity of the Cascade Tunnel.
>>777712
When was it de-electrified?
>>777716
1956, after the Cascade Tunnel received improved ventilation for diesel-electrics to pass through it.
Here's a few rare color photos.
>>777723
>>777724
>>777697
>...and dieselized in 1962, three years after purchase by the Norfolk and Western Railway.
You can thank Stuart T. Saunders for that.
![AVRRMDEBME21[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/L9jC5lG.jpg "AVRRMDEBME21[1].jpg")
Milwaukee Road GET
>>777777
that was botic. mod confirmed for foamer.
>>777777
mother of god...
>>777777
You again. Not only are you an angry butt hurt cantery foamer, you're a scriptfag too.
>>777695
That loco set looks awesome. What is it so I can look it up?
>>777797
Do you realize how slow this board is? I noticed the post numbers, opened another tab to monitor the catalog, and waited less than 10 minutes. No scripting required, just a little autism.
Stay mad, always.
>>777712
Meant to ask: why are these so big if they're electric? After all they don't have diesel engines in them. Or do they...? For traversing parts without overhead lines.
>>777799
Says the maddest guy on this board.
lol, ok pal.
>>777777
I'd rather see [s4s] get this get.
Top kek
![2006428194025_Milwaukee%20Road%20Electrics009[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/2Tnzqcz.jpg "2006428194025_Milwaukee%20Road%20Electrics009[1].jpg")
>>777801
I'm not the one constantly stalking posts I dislike and angrily responding to them while claiming the other party is mad.
Here's an image just for you. Don't get too mad now, it's on topic for this thread :^).
>>777803
I don't mind the trains,I think it's cool the had wires running out there with freight. But I run into you in train threads here and there with you bitching about it. I don't follow tit around, I run in to you. And I'm not the only one.
![gn5019_at_sky[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/SsLBtJF.jpg "gn5019_at_sky[1].jpg")
>>777800
They were meant to pull large freight and passenger trains entirely by themselves through the electrified portions, eliminating the need for diesel or electric helpers.
From Middleton's "When the Steam Railroads Electrified":
>Two W-1-class locomotives were built by General Electric's Erie (Pa.) plant and were delivered to GN early in 1947. The W-1's extended 101 feet between couplers, weighed 360 tons, and possessed a continuous rating of 5000 h.p. Billed as the most powerful single-unit electrics in the world, they readily qualified as "the Big Boys of North American electrification." Capable of a starting tractive effort of 180,000 pounds, a W-1 could outpull any two 4-8-4's and could exceed the pulling power of even a Union Pacific "Big Boy" by one third.
>In passenger service they were good for a top speed of 65 mph. In freight service they could pull a 2000-ton train up the line's 2.2 percent ruling grade without a helper, and their great regenerative braking capacity permitted downgrade operation of tonnage trains without the use of train air brakes.
>>777806
That's fine, but in this thread you started the drama.
>>777808
I see where all that tractive effort is coming from. Are all the wheels powered? That would def have better grip.
Amazing machine.
![EmpBldrElec[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/4vyqDfI.jpg "EmpBldrElec[1].jpg")
>>777821
>Are all the wheels powered?
Yup.
>The big locomotives were equipped with a pair of cast-steel main frames connected by a pin at the center of the locomotive. Each frame carried four pairs of driving wheels and a four-wheel guiding truck. In a departure from most previous electric-locomotive designs, every axle on the W-1's was powered, giving the locomotives a B-D+D-B wheel arrangement. A dozen nose-suspended GE-746 series-wound D.C. traction motors, one for each axle, were geared to the 42-inch drivers.
>>777800
There's a shitload of ballast in there to help it pull heavier loads. A lightweight locomotive is a bad locomotive.
>>777825
So probably fuck hueg chunks of lead?
No diesel engines tho, right?
>>777829
Traction motors 50-70 years ago also used to be fuckhuge and small ones weren't as powerful. Nowadays you can of course get 500kW ones barely bigger than a rotary.
>>777808
It looks like they welded 2 locos back to back.
>>777777
awesome.
>>777823
12 motors
That is a ridiculous amount of power.
>>777725
holy shit electric mid train helpers
>>777777
>>777777
good double
>>777888
Nice trip dubs yourself friend :^)
![6927.1124510400[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/BOfe9Wt.jpg "6927.1124510400[1].jpg")
This video has some sweet footage from the cab of a BC Rail GF6C while the Tumbler Ridge line was in operation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmFZFJB4adc
Why do BC Rail engines have ditch lights in the cow catcher?
How about some electric railroad "what if" fantasy paint schemes on EMD AEM-7s.
>>777975
>>777979
>>777663
Fuel cells, at least conceptually, seem like a better idea.
Here's a non-MILW Little Joe.
>>778003
Did GE just paint them orange or something? Were the Brazilian ones also painted orange?
>>778012
Maybe? They look pretty red here though in this 1984 shot from Brazil.
>>777663
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGeVAbmAubI I feel shame for a reason and I was too litlle when everything changed, there's no more...
>>778077
Are you in the wrong thread bro? That isn't electric freight and it isn't even in Canada or the US.
Another South Shore Little Joe.
Muskigum Electric.
RC trains for a coal operation using the only two E50s ever built
>>778988
Its weird how little documentation exists on these small electric coal lines. I would have expected some railfan documentation.
Black Mesa and lake Powel railroad, utah. I never heard of it until I saw it
>>777777
kimo
>>778993
A lot of it has to do with how remote and not well known most of them are. Especially in the period before the internet a lot of railfans simply didn't know about them unless there were articles about them in Trains magazine or something.
But yeah it's surprising how little photos have surfaced even on TO.
>>778995
In the United States there are at least 3 active coal railroads utilizing electric power in their operations:
-Black Mesa and Lake Powell Railroad in Arizona
-Navajo Mine Railroad in New Mexico
-Deseret Power Railway in Utah and Colorado
All of the above use GE E60s in their operations.
Apparently during the 1970s oil crises, several railroads (though I'm not sure which ones exactly) considered electrification of freight operations to prevent being affected by future crises. Unfortunately, this never came to pass.
However, in anticipation of this, GM-EMD produced two models of electric freight engines in the hopes of attracting a buyer.
The first is the EMD GM6C, which is internally quite similar (if not identical) to the BC Rail locomotives in OP's picture. A lone demonstrator was built, and apparently saw limited service with Penn Central/Conrail. Unfortunately, it was scrapped.
>>779026
>(if not identical)
Aren't they completely different? I thought the BC Rail units used electric equipment from a Swedish company whereas the GM6C used American electrical equipement.
>>779026
This is the four-axle variation, the EMD GM10B. It too apparently saw limited service with those roads before its eventual return to EMD and subsequent scrapping.
Unfortunately, these were both designed at a time when railroad equipment, automobiles and design in general started to become increasingly ugly. I do think they have a sort of charm to them, though. Almost like a mutated GP30.
>>779027
No, they both were designed partially in conjunction with ASEA (like the AEM-7). While the GMD GFC6 and EMD GM6C are not completely identical, they are quite similar internally.
Here's some photographic evidence that the GM6C did see at least some freight service with PC/Conrail.
>>779029
Oh alright thanks for correcting me.
Any idea why PC/Conrail didn't buy a few?
>>779031
PC went bankrupt shortly after the locomotive was introduced and Conrail wanted to get out of electric service after disputes with Amtrak.
>>779031
They were apparently leased to PC (and later Conrail), but given back to EMD when they de-electrified in 1982 (some sort of business regarding interference with Amtrak).
I'd wager that the future of their electric freight operations were somewhat uncertain, so they didn't want to risk a major investment like that. Especially since PC was dead-broke, and Conrail was formed, IIRC, to make Penn Central turn a profit.
>>778988
Fun fact: Southern Pacific gained control of the Muskingum Electric sometime in the 1960s and used the route as a test bed for electric service. During the 1970s SP was looking into electrifying Donner Pass and Beaumont Hill service, but unfortunately the return of low diesel prices killed those ideas.
>>779037
Know any of the other railroads that were considering it? That was why the EMD electrics were designed.
>>779038
>>779037
Never mind, found this on Trains Magazine's website.
So my fellow PPD-/n/OS-ers, what can we do to engineer a major oil crisis in North America?
>>779042
Sadly, nowadays a major oil crisis would probably simply drastically reduce rail traffic and railroads would be so capital starved (along with every other industry) that they probably wouldn't even think to electrify or improve infrastructure, instead choosing to eliminate their less efficient diesel locomotives and consolidate freight traffic into fewer trains.
Or, it could be that a major oil crisis eliminates long-haul trucking and everything now becomes shipped by rail, in which case there would be incentives to modernize infrastructure, expand service, and electrify. That is probably very unlikely though.
>you will never sit on a bench outside a small depot in rural Idaho feeding fish in a fish pond while watching Little Joes pass by
Fugg.
>>779053
You are such an annoying faggot.
>>779075
Seek help. Seriously.
You're basically just a shitposter at this point.
>>779075
He's not spamming conspiracy theories though. You have to admit that looks like a comfy place to conduct some railfanning whether or not you like that anon.
>>779042
Trains are still one of the most efficient ways to transport goods (outside of boats) even when they're powered by diesel locomotives so there would need to be a pretty drastic and sudden jolt in the price of oil.
>>779185
When was the last time you posted something on topic? I've been on-topic posting info and images relevant to this thread, meanwhile all you've done is autistically attack my posts while adding nothing of value.
Also, I'm pretty sure you don't know what "spammer" means, since I haven't been posting duplicate photos (posting multiple different images of the same type of locomotive in different settings doesn't count as spamming unless you are retarded) in places that aren't relevant to the topic being discussed.
Pretty sure the only person with a problem in this thread at this point is you, so fuck off or stop shitposting and start contributing to the thread.
>>779224
> still replying
> still getting btfo
>>779237
whatever
In 1957, Butte, Anaconda, and Pacific, a copper mine railroad that electrified operations in 1913, received two new locomotives from General Electric, each weighing 125 tons. These GE 125Ts ran until the end of electric freight hauling in 1967.
These may have been the only two of this type of locomotive that were produced, and I'm not sure what happened to them after 1967.
>>779645
Found this GE staged shot with one of their trains and a MILW train
(The line without any trains is NP.)
>>779017
>-Black Mesa and Lake Powell Railroad in Arizona
I got to tour the Black Mesa mining site and also the Navajo Generating Station at Lake Powell. Pretty fucking awesome.
Pic related is the terminus of the 17-miles of conveyor feeding coal from the mine into a silo that then fills the cars.
>>779789
Nice, please share more pics of the operation if you have any.
>>779789
What's the giant rollercoaster for?
>>779795
I don't have many, both sites were both strictly no-photography. These shots were along a ridge that takes you to the mine site. Pic is wider angle of the same valley.
>>779789
Are they open pits or is it an underground mine?
>>779803
>What's the giant rollercoaster for?
>>779809
>That's the conveyor belt that shuttles the coal to the loading facility.
Correct. It's an enclosed belt system. The mining operation and freight train feature in the book 'The Money Wrench Gang" by Edward Abbey.
>>779811
They're open. They have these massive electrically-powered earth movers that scoop away the topsoil so the layers of coal are exposed. The scoops are huge, maybe 12-15' across. We were able to take a whole class picture of about 24 of us standing in one.
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4483701,-110.3135354,321m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en
>>779813
They're obligated to reclaim the land and you can see on google maps where they have tried to do so but it's just not the same, very liable to erosion.
Here's a zoomed-in shot of the silo and the cars being loaded. Sadly it's the last photo I have worth showing of this operation.
Here is the NGS where you can see the coal deposit point and the train loop and yard.
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.9063845,-111.3860324,711m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en
>>779812
>'The Money Wrench Gang"
Monkey Wrench, rather.
>>779819
I was taking a class at ASU called Energy and the Environment and we had a three-day field trip to Northern AZ. Got to see all kinds of stuff. My degree was PoliSci but I really liked the professor and the subject. I actually work in the airline industry which is why I lurk /n/...
>>779821
Huh, neat. Thanks again for sharing this information anon.
I have two questions in relation to the site, how many people do they have working on mines of that size and why do they prohibit photography? Its just a coal mine, what are they trying to hide?
>>779822
No problem. I'm not sure how many people work at Black Mesa. Peabody Western is who does the mining there. My guess would be a few hundred, mostly equipment operators, machinists and mechanics. Probably more in the summer when the energy demand at the NGS is higher (thanks to the Phoenix Metro area's vast requirements for power and water). PW is obligated to have a certain % of their workforce be native since it's on reservation land, it might be as high as 80%.
The photo issue - which I was told didn't really used to be an issue - comes down to I think security and optics. They take an "over-abundance of caution" approach to it. Specifically the book I mentioned details environmental activists sabotaging equipment at Black Mesa and they may fear copycats. Generally, I think it's the possibility of sites essential to energy generation becoming terrorist targets...they don't want to take chances. Also energy companies are very protective of their public image and don't want photos of so many acres of pristine plateauland being raped by their giant electrical machines getting out and around. They'd rather people not see the real costs of cheap water and cheap energy.
>>779822
Not that guy (would be interested in his answer though) but I would guess they prohibit photography for security and to minimize negative publicity - read The Monkey Wrench Gang and you'll understand (you should read Desert Solitaire first though, imho).
Bump with some more South Shore action.
>The North Shore had two huge articulated B-B+B-B units homebuilt by the Oregon Electric in 1940 and 1941 and acquired by the North Shore in 1947. The 458 (Oregon Electric 50) had a big boxcab carbody with tiny steeple cab noses at each end, while the 459 (OE 51) had a center cab and long hoods at either end. In spite of their drastically different appearances, both units were essentially the same mechanically. (lifted from "North Shore Line: 25 Years Gone" by Jim Boyd in Railfan & Railroad Classics - January 1988)
>>782368
NO INTERURBANS YOU FAG
>>783280
CSS&SB straddles the line between interurban and regular electric railroad, tbh.
It was pretty similar to the adjacent Illinois Central electric, which isn't usually considered an interurban.
>De-electrifying hundreds of miles of railway
lol america
>>783284
don't be a gay idiot
Bump with some Texas Transportation Co. from 1983.
And here's a few from Kennecott Copper's Bingham Pit operations in Utah.
>>785505
>>785506
>>785507
>>785508
>>785505
Do they still have a railroad to haul the stuff out?
>>785792
Electric locomotives were discontinued by the early 1980s and all rail operations in the pit ceased by the 1990s, with ore now transported by trucks and conveyors from the pit to the mill.
Most of the company's 61 85-ton electric locomotives operated from 1927 to 1983, a service life of over 50 years.
KCC 700, along with two 125-ton electric locomotives were donated to the Western Railway Museum in Rio Vista in 1984 after they were retired. During my visit there in 2006 I photographed all 3 locomotives, but I'm not sure if they are still displayed in a public area today.
Pic related, KCC 700, an 85-ton electric.
>>787913
Here's KCC 407, a GE 125-ton electric built in 1947 and retired from active service in 1978.
>>787919
And finally, GE 125-ton KCC 771, built in 1955 and retired in 1983.
If you are fan of electric traction, you definitely need to visit the WRM.
>>787919
the lack of suspension on that thing... must hurt like hell to run an engine like that
![Caterpillar_797_Truck2[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/YbvizRy.jpg "Caterpillar_797_Truck2[1].jpg")
>>787930
The Caterpillar 797 costs $5 million per unit and has an estimated service life of 25 years, so half that of an 85 ton electric locomotive. I'm guessing the locomotives probably cost much less when purchased, even adjusting for inflation.
>>779816
That would make an amazing water slide...
>>787936
I wonder which cost less to maintain factoring in track and substation maintenance.
>>787964
Obviously the trucks offer greater utility or cost savings or else the company wouldn't have discarded their rail.
>>787913
>1927 to 1983, a service life of over 50 years.
That's amazing. They really don't build them like they used to.
>>788983
Depends what you're comparing. Many trains are tossed before their service life ends because newer units come along using more efficient engines, materials etc. Many trains being used today were built in the 1970s and 80s, giving them about 30-40 years working so far. 50 years is pretty average for large industrial equipment.
>>788983
>>788994
Milwaukee Road's 42 EF-1 electrics were built in 1915 and one such unit remained in active operation all the way until final de-electrification of the railroad in 1974. Most of them lasted into the mid-1960s.
>>785495
>1 mile electric line.
Proof that Texans are fucking retarded.
>>789444
I'm not discounting any of that, it's impressive. Unfortunate that they were replaced. But 50 years from now UP and BNSF will still have EMDs and GP units everywhere.
>>790241
I hope you are right, but even SD40-2s and SD45s are becoming rare on mainline, non-local/branch service. I will always prefer the classic EMDs to the most recent generation of GE garbage and gensets.
Although 70+ year old EMD and ALCO switchers are still working industrial yards so that's a good sign.
>>779782
that's some real model layout shit
>>777777
>>777777
AMAX's Henderson Mine in Colorado had a few Swedish ASEA electrics in operation during the 1970s+.
>>793910
Forgot the pic.
>>779017
>-Black Mesa and Lake Powell Railroad in Arizona
heyyy i seen that before
>>778003
that's not a little joe. that's an 800-series. south shore line never called them little joes
to the best of my knowledge even though progress rail bought it, iowa traction railroad is still operating
>>794246
>>794244
Iowa Traction started as an interurban.
All of Iowa's electric freight was handled by Interurbans
The Iowa Transfer Railway was formed in 1907 and was co-owned by the CB&Q, CGW, RI, Des Moines Union, Des Moines Western (Owned by the Fort Dodge, Des Moines, & Southern interurban), CNW, & M&StL and had one electric locomotive, which was in use from 1920-1932, and again from 1936-1950.
(
>>795513
>Filename calls it MILW
>Image is clearly GN
kek
>>794239
Don't you have models to be posting in the other thread?
:^)
>>796370
That wasn't even my post bro, but thanks for caring.
>>796376
How many of there of you guys lol
>>796380
We are leegum :^)
>>796383
That was fast. Carry on then.
>>777777
![PC%20GG1s-711228%20Eng%20Term,%2030th%20St.%20Sta%20Philadelphia,%20PA[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Q3416DS.jpg "PC%20GG1s-711228%20Eng%20Term,%2030th%20St.%20Sta%20Philadelphia,%20PA[1].jpg")
Freightliner of North America when viewed from the Japanese is too very long. great :)
>>800363
This is why people hate you.
Legitimate question.
Why couldn't they electrify the rails like a model train?
>>802994
They can, it's just a really bad idea
>>802996
Oh boy now I get it. Yeah that's a bad idea.
>>802994
The first electrinc tram in Berlin was powered like that.
>Each car was originally equipped with a 180 Volt DC 4 kW electric motor, the current supplied via the running rails in a manner similar to that used by most present-day model railways. Therefore the metre gauge tracks were generally separated from driveways and trespassing was prohibited.
--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross-Lichterfelde_Tramway
>>777777
Someone uploaded one of the Pentrex Milwaukee Road videos on jewtube and it was actually breddy gud.
>you will never ride the Hiawatha into Yosemite National Park
>>803406
>Yosemite
>>803423
he's autistic enough to be a cyclist
>>803513
>on 4chan
>/n/
>calling other people autists
>>803536
le
![2274[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/peYZUXK.jpg "2274[1].jpg")
>>804785
>tfw dreams about wandering through the woods behind your neighborhood and finding stuff like this
>>804790
That would be so fun and awesome.
>>808260
So melancholy
>>811591
E33! I have a Williams Conrail E44.
>>808385
Because Conrail is le stupid and so is electric locomotives
>>816605
If you can't appreciate the pictures being posted (most of which are fresh scans) then you are the autist, my friend.
>>816605
>actually giving a shit
I hope you realize that once Caltrain gets electrified in a few years /n/ will have constant threads about it from the few bay area fags here.
>>816722
im ok with that. sure beats more bike queers making the same thread n+1 times
>>816597
I'm not sure I understand your response. I was just stating that the picture was sad to see.
>>817133
he's anti-rivet. he's weldist.
>>802994
There doesn't exist an insulator that could withstand the weight of the train. Also the would exist problems to mount the rails well enough to the insulator even if such material existed.
That said, few historical streetcar systems have used something called conduit current collection, where the powerlines were hidden in a chennel buried between the rails, accessed through slot between them.
See yourseld:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conduit_current_collection
Also a very few systems used a system of electrified studs and a skate under the tramcar. Each stud had a magnetic switch to activate only when the tram (with magnet) was above it.
Modern incarnations of the stud-system still exist.
>>816447
foamer
>>826548
electric trains are for morans
>>777777
czeched republic
>>826691
and Milwaukee Road is for autists
>>826691
So why aren't you a fan then?
>>826703
What about Pennsy? What is your favorite railroad so I can start liking it and make you start hating it?
>>777777
This is why I come back to /n/ for a break from all the hatred.
>>826708
I hate all railroads since they will be replaced by the interstate trucking industry within 20 years. Screencap my post and mark my words.
>>827038
Lol no. More freight is moved farther by rail. You could not possibly meet the needs of the grain, auto, coal, and chemical industries with trucking.
>>827038
all aboard
>>827038
Literally impossible. The tonnage of coal we devour could never delivered by trucks.
>>828192
lol u tk him 2 da bar
>>830196
Inb4 b&
>>827038
that's what people thought in the 50s
problem is that semi trucks are shit for bulk transport beyond a single 50ft container
I just am here to say powered rail is delicious. I'll go out the way I came.
>>779239
Why do they have those black soulless eyes of windows? Are they tinted or what?
>>833493
They're black because they consume the souls of foamers.
New Haven E33s, originally Virginian, later Penn Central and Conrail.
![$_57[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/kpZW9Ko.jpg "$_57[1].jpg")
>>838426
literally tumblr: the ridge division
>>841088
get those filthy diesels out of here
>>842376
Y...You're joking, right?
>>844940
>a thread dedicated to electric freight
Why would I be joking?
![$_57[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/kUxU7sn.jpg "$_57[1].jpg")
>>849091
From the styling of that it's really odd to see it has a pantograph.
>>849772
It'd look much more unusual if it had trolley poles.
>americans putting electromotors in diesel trains
>look guise we modern
pic related is more like it.
>>853453
>Comparing 2010s and 1950s technology
>>853453
big talk for some shit that uses chains and buffers
>>853470
>still using 1950's technology
>>854202
then post a contemporary photo
>>854024
I think he means that it is diesel-electric
>>777777
Son of a whore..
>>854024
>How's it going with no overhead wires?
That model comes with an auxiliary diesel for last mile movement.
>>853506
No use changing that, they are strong enough for the train lenghts that make sense on such a dense network. Can't wait a week for enough cars clog up to make giant trains.
Switching locomotive have fully automatic couplings for these btw, so that isn't a problem either. And most passenger trains use scharfenberg-couplings anyways.
What would a BR with double nationality (br and italian) need to do to become a freight train machinist in canada?
>>855038
>He thinks trains wait in the USA to build up freight.
We just get enough business to run trains that large.
>>855050
The mainline network in the US isn't exactly dense and cities tend to be big, so getting traffic on one line isn't that hard. Over here, mid-sized towns with companies are everywhere. Railway lines are close together and distances between railyards are short. For a two mile train we'd have to wait weeks on some lines. No point in doing that, people want their stuff to arrive quickly. So it's usually more but smaller (and faster) trains, with a few lines actually running a high amount of longer trains (800m, typically), where it makes sense. Those branch out into different directions though.
A select few freight trains are equipped with stronger central couplings. Typically ore-trains to (sweden) or from (germany) ports to mines/ iron works.
>>855053
> For a two mile train we'd have to wait weeks on some lines.
No, I'm saying that our industries ship out enough cars to run trains that large. One of the locals here usually brings in about 50-60 out bound cars a night. And that's just servicing two industries. You'll have 3 scheduled trains leaving a day with over 85 cars to either be interchanged or sent further along the network.
>>855057
Buisness around here doesn't usually get such large amounts of cars, big industrial premises aside. Some sidings aren't even built to handle more than ten cars on the line I take regularly (which has a lot fo traffic), while others do make quite a few more. These are moved (by various different companies) either directly to the customers, or to local hubs for further distribution.
>>855047
immigrating to Canada is easy, all you need is a BA as well as fluentcy in English or French
however, at that point you're better off taking a better paying job especially when Canada is entering a rescession
>>855091
>immigrating to Canada is easy, all you need is a BA as well as fluentcy in English or French
Bullshit, if that were true lots of Americans would become Canadian citizens.
>>855093
no because for as much as liberals shittalk the US they 1) don't have the balls to actually move and 2) the US is by far a better country than Canada if only because our entire economy isn't based on lumber and oil exports
>>855091
What's a BA?
>>855529
Bachelor of Arts.
>>858695
I love those roof mounted insulating pots.
>>858786
50000v does that to you
>>854343
We don't have any ;_;
Unless you count the isolated electrified coal mine to power plant lines in the US that are still operating.
>>855091
Yeah but I heard the railroad industry hates people with degrees
>>862493
Depends on the degree tbh
bros, what's the best page on Facebook that shares train content?
I've checked out I Love Trains, but the fan posts are a bit odd
>>866206
>fan posts are a bit odd
What do you expect from a bunch of foamers? Hate to break it to ya but wherever you go you'll find weirdos.
>>853756
More like 1910s technology, to be accurate.
>3,000 VDC and resistor bank controls.
I wonder if they even ever upgraded to mercury arc rectifiers, or did they use rotary converters to the end? (That said, nothing too wrong with them, really: long lived, not very maintenance hungry, just need it regularly, very good efficiency too, specially with the bigger units, just that mercury arc was even better.)
>>867612
When I say this, I get some typical American answer, I supposed.
>but the mercury would have been stolen from the trackside for the scrap-value!
![Milwaukee+Road+Substation+Montana[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/bbNWyb8.jpg "Milwaukee+Road+Substation+Montana[1].jpg")
>>867612
>>867614
>Motor-generators were used, because mercury arc and solid state rectifiers had not been invented in 1914.
>tfw even fucking Albania has more electrified freight rail than America
>>874330
So what?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUzGKM5MfiQ
>>874335
implications
>>874330
Albania: 28,748 km2
US: 9,857,306 km
CAN: 9,984,670 km2
See a difference?
