Location of this LV line?

JoeS wrote:The curve matches the location.

I dont see this. Am I having a senior moment ? (Wouldn't be the first time.) In the original photo, the track bends very sharp to the right, beginning well before the curve.

From the point of the view of the curve, looking north at the Cayuta St bridge in Sayre seems a better fit. Both the main and some of the yard tracks have the right bend. Don't know about the rest of the issues though.
J S

pumpers wrote: In the original photo, the track bends very sharp to the right, beginning well before the curve.

I presume you meant to say "well before the bridge".

I agree the aerial pics do not seem to show as much of a curve as we see in the OP. On the other hand, those aerials also don't SEEM to show as much of a curve as we see in the pic on Page 6 with the bridge being demolished, either. And THAT location is exactly noted.

While I'm not well versed in photographic technicalities, that first pic seems to be taken with a pretty good telephoto or something similar - altho the Alcos seem to be right alongside the photographer, they are quite compressed and don't seem to be very long. Also note the rail joints - those 39 foot sticks appear pretty short and there are a lot of them.

I speculate the pic was taken back by Ithaca Street and the curve appears more pronounced because of the shot itself. But feel free to disagree.

I'll grant you that the depth of field is super short in the photo, I've pointed it out a few times. However, that's a 0°33' to 1° curve (per Conrail track charts) over the course of almost 1/2 a mile. It'd be one heck of a telephoto lens that could compress the depth that much to make the tracks under the bridge appear at a 45 degree or better angle as they do.

If the photographer did possess a lens of that capability it's actually possible they were all the way back on the Broad St bridge.

The phone locations are listed as 272.3 (State Line Westward Home Signal), 273.3 (East Waverly Pole), and 274.6 (Signal 2742) in the 1947 TT. Given the location offered as MP 273 in the Conrail TC that would actually put phone boxes right near the current Rt 17 overpasses, somewhere beyond the Chemung St overpass (ie, the bridge in question), and way out past Rt 34. That's not to say phone boxes weren't moved in those 20 years, but if this is the location there's no way that phone box is more than 20 years old in the picture.



All that said, I'm conceding too based on other factors in the photo compared to both historic and current views -- The large utility poles I kept mentioning before, for example -- in the photo the closer set has a close-supported triplex set, something not very common, and this still exists today cutting across the former yard area, as well as the further set of poles cutting across near the white building, in the area where the old Chemung St crossing would've been. Based on the angle and location of the phone box I'm not 100% sold, but enough so that it's not worth disagreeing anymore. Having no experience in the area I'm going strictly by old and current aerial views, so others of you definitely have an advantage.

FWIW, if you wanted to see trains on the LV, you generally went to Sayre; my dad was never a big railfan but even he has some old 126 prints from a trip down there before I was born.

So it makes some logical sense the photo is close to Sayre.

I'm not 100% sold, but enough so that it's not worth disagreeing anymore.

Personally, I look at this as an attempt to preserve historical accuracy, not a debate on who is right or wrong. If info shows my guesses are incorrect I take no offense whatever, I'm happy that we get it right. So if someone has doubts, don't be afraid to say so. This isn't bickering, it's research.

A couple "for what it's worth" observations: First, I'm convinced the train is moving, not standing. The photographer's father looks like he has just taken a shot as the train approached him, and now has lowered the camera and started to walk away.

By the way - obviously there is ANOTHER pic taken at this location, by the father. Wonder if it is available - maybe a view in the opposite direction would have detail to pinpoint where it is.

Also, blowing up the first pic and counting rail joints, from the engine to the start of the curve I get somewhere about 22 to 25 or even 30 - hard to say exactly. Those would be 39 foot rail so the train is ballpark 900 to 1000 feet from the curve. That's over 3 football fields, and the bridge itself is probably that far again once you leave the tangent. So altho my eye sees the train and bridge as close to each other, the train is probably a good half mile from the bridge. Maybe this will help when comparing signal locations and bridges.

Merry Christmas to y'all!

I'm agree with ctclark1 that the curve from the aerial doesn't seem to match. I've reposted the aerial. There a white building nearby but I'm not seeing any evidence of the street. From the looks of that track geometry, you could almost shoot straight under the bridge if you parked where that street is and climbed the embankment. No sharp right bend. Back further into the back yards, even with a telephoto, I'd don't think you'd get that sharp curve to the right in the photo. It's only subtly curved.

BR&P wrote:Received an email from TBDiamond with the attached pic, taken by our own Scotychaos. View is north, which would put the MP on the correct side. And if the Clarks were traveling Rt 17 taking railroad pics, this area would not be THAT far from the Elmira location which was related earlier - after 50 years it would be an easy mistake to make.

LV bridge.jpg

I think that this is the winner!

The bridge is very similar and has telltale sign of where concrete beam was along the steel beam. Unless there was other identify design of bridge somewhere else .

BR&P wrote:Received an email from TBDiamond with the attached pic, taken by our own Scotychaos. View is north, which would put the MP on the correct side. And if the Clarks were traveling Rt 17 taking railroad pics, this area would not be THAT far from the Elmira location which was related earlier - after 50 years it would be an easy mistake to make.

LV bridge.jpg

And I'll look up the record plan sometimes this eeek.

Charles, since you have already established contact with the guy, maybe you could gently ask about his father's photo. I'd bet it would be a neat shot on its own merits regardless of this discussion. And a peek at what is in the opposite direction could be VERY helpful.

Done.

BR&P wrote:Charles, since you have already established contact with the guy, maybe you could gently ask about his father's photo. I'd bet it would be a neat shot on its own merits regardless of this discussion. And a peek at what is in the opposite direction could be VERY helpful.

What about this quote from earlier? You have hardly a curve (0°33' to 1°) being transformed into a massive curve in the photo.

ctclark1 wrote:I'll grant you that the depth of field is super short in the photo, I've pointed it out a few times. However, that's a 0°33' to 1° curve (per Conrail track charts) over the course of almost 1/2 a mile. It'd be one heck of a telephoto lens that could compress the depth that much to make the tracks under the bridge appear at a 45 degree or better angle as they do.

Edit from previous response: George has confirmed that is his dad in the photo but he has no other photos of this train. "1967 is the year I left for southeast Asia in the Army. But I did spend 3 weeks with my parents in Corning NY Dec 66 - Jan 67. Dad and I went on several trips with his rail friend, Marty."

To digress just a moment, congrats to Ken for giving us a thread which took off like a hot potato! Less than a week and we're on the 7th page! Good to see some life on such a sleepy forum!

BR&P wrote:To digress just a moment, congrats to Ken for giving us a thread which took off like a hot potato! Less than a week and we're on the 7th page! Good to see some life on such a sleepy forum!

Agree, I've been watching this thread with much interest......happy to see lots of discussion on the board.

I hope all have enjoyed a Merry Christmas (or whichever holiday you celebrate)!

Charlie

BR&P wrote:To digress just a moment, congrats to Ken for giving us a thread which took off like a hot potato! Less than a week and we're on the 7th page! Good to see some life on such a sleepy forum!

Yes! I'll "third" that. A Christmas present a few days early.