CMSL service Rio Grande to Cape May

Understood - I don't agree with his style but that's the way he does things. I sometimes wonder if he's afraid to say anything because so many things have gone wrong over the years. But he does get tax dollars to fix things so yeah it would be nice to stop being secretive. But there are people here that know what goes on there and don't post anything....

......but does he really want this to work?

12/13/2014
2014 CMSL Santa Express ran this morning with NS 5803 on the south end and PRR 7000 on the north.

Pulling out of the yard-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4058877" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Across from Tuckahoe tower-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4058878" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pulling up to the station-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4058879" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

CNJ 1523 resting on the super-elevated track-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4058900" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Corbin City-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4058892" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Heading through Weymouth-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4058893" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4058894" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PRR 7000 and passengers waiting to board at Richland-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4058895" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4058896" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PRSL M410-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4058897" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NS 5803 next to the WI tower-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4058898" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

John D.

scottso699 wrote:

Meghan wrote: WHen they posted tickets for their dinner train on their Facebook page at $75 a ticket advertising a great night out I almost fell off my chair. I had to stand up and say it was completely ridiculous at $75 a ticket and what planet were they living on that they thought $150 is reasonable to pay for a night out for 2.

$150 a couple is not much considering I could drop that at a decent restaurant with three courses and drinks.

bluedash2 wrote:Understood - I don't agree with his style but that's the way he does things. I sometimes wonder if he's afraid to say anything because so many things have gone wrong over the years. But he does get tax dollars to fix things so yeah it would be nice to stop being secretive. But there are people here that know what goes on there and don't post anything....

I checked and indeed the CNJ 1523 does need wheel work. It can be used for freight, but not passenger on Conrail tracks.

Did they us the cnj geep thjat much sience last year?

Ken W2KB wrote:

bluedash2 wrote:Understood - I don't agree with his style but that's the way he does things. I sometimes wonder if he's afraid to say anything because so many things have gone wrong over the years. But he does get tax dollars to fix things so yeah it would be nice to stop being secretive. But there are people here that know what goes on there and don't post anything....

I checked and indeed the CNJ 1523 does need wheel work. It can be used for freight, but not passenger on Conrail tracks.

Interesting - what differentiates the two? What would allow it to pull freight cars but not passenger trains? (makes me laugh a little considering this was originally a passenger engine!) I know the one is freight cargo and the other is human cargo but is it a matter of ability or just some silly rule that the FRA came up with? Something like "We don't care if you dump a ton of oil tankers but them people are important!" Is it something they measure or is it something that can be seen? I only ask out of curiosity and nutty rail fan interest.

Scott- my guess, and I emphasize guess, is that if something happens, us humans can do what freight cars can't do - sue them....

bluedash2 wrote:Scott- my guess, and I emphasize guess, is that if something happens, us humans can do what freight cars can't do - sue them....

I strongly suspect that is the case, especially since the current CMSL freight consists of movement of storage cars, hence empty with no hazmat potential. Potential tort liability for passenger damages vastly exceeds that for empty freight cars.

scottso699 wrote:

Ken W2KB wrote:

bluedash2 wrote:Understood - I don't agree with his style but that's the way he does things. I sometimes wonder if he's afraid to say anything because so many things have gone wrong over the years. But he does get tax dollars to fix things so yeah it would be nice to stop being secretive. But there are people here that know what goes on there and don't post anything....

I checked and indeed the CNJ 1523 does need wheel work. It can be used for freight, but not passenger on Conrail tracks.

Interesting - what differentiates the two? What would allow it to pull freight cars but not passenger trains? (makes me laugh a little considering this was originally a passenger engine!) I know the one is freight cargo and the other is human cargo but is it a matter of ability or just some silly rule that the FRA came up with? Something like "We don't care if you dump a ton of oil tankers but them people are important!" Is it something they measure or is it something that can be seen? I only ask out of curiosity and nutty rail fan interest.

Besides the aforementioned liability issues, I wonder if approved speed is also a factor. Many tracks have different maximum authorized speed for passenger and freight. As for the wheels themselves, in addition to visual inspection for cracks, the flanges and tread would typically be measured with a caliper to ensure minimum thickness. There are also specifications for flat spots and other defects.

Ken W2KB wrote:

bluedash2 wrote:Scott- my guess, and I emphasize guess, is that if something happens, us humans can do what freight cars can't do - sue them....

I strongly suspect that is the case, especially since the current CMSL freight consists of movement of storage cars, hence empty with no hazmat potential. Potential tort liability for passenger damages vastly exceeds that for empty freight cars.

That was my guess too. Having this problem with the flange - I assume that would make the engine more prone to derailment? And I assume like a car - this means the engine needs new "tires"? That can't be cheap. Now I assume that would be the responsibility of the CMSL right? If I remember part of the lease agreement was that they were responsible for the maintenance of these engines.

Also, Do the F7s and the RS3m run? It's been years since I've seen the F7s run and god only knows the last time anyone has told me about the RS3m running.

scottso699 wrote:

Ken W2KB wrote:

bluedash2 wrote:Scott- my guess, and I emphasize guess, is that if something happens, us humans can do what freight cars can't do - sue them....

I strongly suspect that is the case, especially since the current CMSL freight consists of movement of storage cars, hence empty with no hazmat potential. Potential tort liability for passenger damages vastly exceeds that for empty freight cars.

That was my guess too. Having this problem with the flange - I assume that would make the engine more prone to derailment? And I assume like a car - this means the engine needs new "tires"? That can't be cheap. Now I assume that would be the responsibility of the CMSL right? If I remember part of the lease agreement was that they were responsible for the maintenance of these engines.

Also, Do the F7s and the RS3m run? It's been years since I've seen the F7s run and god only knows the last time anyone has told me about the RS3m running.

While the thickness of a flange in itself would not likely result in a derailment, the failure of a flange certainly would. It is an obvious stress point given the lateral forces placed against the side of the wheels, especially when negotiating curves, turnouts or any track that might have a tight gauge. Wheel replacement or truing needs to be performed in a shop that is set up for that work, not something easily accomplished in the field. I suppose that the locomotive could be jacked up and the truck sent out and know that CMSL has replaced axles / wheelsets on some of the passenger coaches but a loco is a different story.

As for the F7's, to the best of my knowledge, they do run but I have not seen them fired up in quite some time. They are most likely drained and capped but could be considered as stored serviceable. I have no idea about the RS3m.

glennk419 wrote:

scottso699 wrote:

Ken W2KB wrote:

bluedash2 wrote:Scott- my guess, and I emphasize guess, is that if something happens, us humans can do what freight cars can't do - sue them....

I strongly suspect that is the case, especially since the current CMSL freight consists of movement of storage cars, hence empty with no hazmat potential. Potential tort liability for passenger damages vastly exceeds that for empty freight cars.

That was my guess too. Having this problem with the flange - I assume that would make the engine more prone to derailment? And I assume like a car - this means the engine needs new "tires"? That can't be cheap. Now I assume that would be the responsibility of the CMSL right? If I remember part of the lease agreement was that they were responsible for the maintenance of these engines.

Also, Do the F7s and the RS3m run? It's been years since I've seen the F7s run and god only knows the last time anyone has told me about the RS3m running.

While the thickness of a flange in itself would not likely result in a derailment, the failure of a flange certainly would. It is an obvious stress point given the lateral forces placed against the side of the wheels, especially when negotiating curves, turnouts or any track that might have a tight gauge. Wheel replacement or truing needs to be performed in a shop that is set up for that work, not something easily accomplished in the field. I suppose that the locomotive could be jacked up and the truck sent out and know that CMSL has replaced axles / wheelsets on some of the passenger coaches but a loco is a different story.

As for the F7's, to the best of my knowledge, they do run but I have not seen them fired up in quite some time. They are most likely drained and capped but could be considered as stored serviceable. I have no idea about the RS3m.

Thanks Glenn - Interesting insight!

somebody told me that the freight train doesn't go on ConRail track so they don't care but the Santa train goes on ConRial track so they have to inspect the trains. He said that a thin flangc can get stuck in a switch and cause a derail.

bystander wrote:somebody told me that the freight train doesn't go on ConRail track so they don't care but the Santa train goes on ConRial track so they have to inspect the trains. He said that a thin flangc can get stuck in a switch and cause a derail.

"Somebody" hasn't a clue.

CSAO (Conrail) has been delivering / picking up freight cars to and from storage on CMSL on a regular basis on these same tracks so the track inspections are ongoing. The train symbol is WPCA51 if you're keeping track. As for the flange issue, they have bad ordered that locomotive and it is not running.