# Two Railroading Stories



## Anderson (Mar 23, 2011)

I'm posting this either from aboard 98 in DC or another, later stop; or from NYP. I don't know at the time of writing it which it is, but I am en route.

Yesterday, I went into the office of the family business to talk with the President (who is a longtime friend of my family's). Said business is a reasonably sized machine shop in Virginia, and the president decided to share a pair of stories concerning trains.

The first was relatively mundane in many respects; in sum, it was an account of the "lower end" of railroading in the old days: He aced the CA Zephyr, San Francisco (metro) to Chicago, in 1964...on a hard seat in coach during his honeymoon because the airline he was planning to travel on suffered a badly-timed strike. As he said it, the scenery was excellent (this was on the old route through Feather River Canyon...I brought up the temporary reroute and that reminded him of said story) but for obvious reasons the accomodations were a bit...rough.

The other, however, was a bit more interesting: From 1972 until the 1980s, we did work on track geometry cars for a number of railroads, ranging from the Santa Fe to the Canadian National. Most of our business at the time (and a fair share even to this day) is in precision calibration. For those who don't know, said cars were usually old business cars that the RR was re-purposing.

Anyhow, he was out in Topeka on the job in 1973 or 74 (at this point, the work was for the Santa Fe, and the car was #86), working to install the mechanisms we built for them. The RR President was out observing the work, and when they finished, they decided to take them out for...let's call it a test drive of the equipment. As this was a "special train" not in revenue service or hauling freight (it was, if I understand the story correctly, a locomotive, a track geometry car, and I believe the President's business car), it wasn't subject to the usual FRA speed limits...and it was on the Santa Fe main line, which was Class 6 track anyway.

So...they left town and apparently had the run of the track (one suspects that RR Presidents are able to arrange such things on occasion), and the President gave the order to (in essence) cut loose. The train peaked out at 130 MPH (yes, they outpaced the Metroliners of the era...it is apparently amazing what you can do with a short consist, a powerful engine, and pretty much nobody but the technical staff telling you what you can't do), and I believe it held that speed a fair portion of the way from Topeka to Oklahoma City.

The fact that we did the work is pretty well documented (I saw a bunch of articles from papers in Kansas City, Topeka, etc. on the work as well as the photos of the machinery)...but that story does interest me, if just because of what it suggests the theoretical capabilities of some of those lines happen to be. Somehow, the 130 MPH figure seems reasonable as well, both with what the BR Intercity 125s do regularly and with the construction on those lines (the main lines out west having concrete ties and so forth), but it was faster than _any_ commercial run in service at the time IIRC.


----------



## George Harris (Mar 23, 2011)

Write this 100 times:

*A straight line has no speed limit!*

Other than, of course track conditions and available power.

Remember that for many years Santa Fe ran fast passenger trains almost as a matter of habit, I find the story completely believable.

Even back as far ast the steam era, the Santa Fe had many miles with an official 100 mph speed limit for passenger traains. In the employee timetables there was a list of steam engines allowed 100 mph, and another of steam engines allowed 90 mph. Given known events on other lines, the likely speed in practice would have been higher if needed to achieve schedule. The examples I am thinking about are on both the N&W and the NC&St.L their last new 4-8-4 steam engines were known to achieve 100 mph on more than one occasion, and that on track with a nominal speed limit of 70 mph.


----------



## Anderson (Mar 23, 2011)

George,

That's why I specifically referred to "FRA speed limits" (the obnoxious 79 MPH ones that most trains can't go past because of regulatory hell).


----------



## MikefromCrete (Mar 23, 2011)

Anderson said:


> George,
> 
> That's why I specifically referred to "FRA speed limits" (the obnoxious 79 MPH ones that most trains can't go past because of regulatory hell).


Any railroad that wants to install the necessary signal and safety equipment can run faster than 79 mph. Amtrak does it in the northeast corridor, the harrisburg line and the the michigan line. BNSF has a few 90 mph routes, but most freight railroads have no need to go faster than 79 mph and no need to install cab signals and lengthen the crossing warning limits. Safety should always be the first concern of any railroad employee and I would imagine the ATSF official authorizing the 130 mph run without proper signal protection made sure that there were no other trains on the route and that employees were out flagging road crossings.


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Mar 23, 2011)

Why is it 79MPH why not make it a even 80. Is one MPH that big of a deal?


----------



## Ryan (Mar 23, 2011)

Because the law is written that signaling equipment to achieve "speeds of 80 MPH or greater". The speed limit really isn't 79 MPH, it's really 79.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999... (but 79 is a lot easier to write).


----------



## George Harris (Mar 23, 2011)

There are two things that come into play:

1. Track Safety Standards

2. Signal and train control standards

And, if you want to go faster than 150 mph, there is what the FRA calls the "Rule of Particular Applicibility" which in essence says that if you want to go faster than 150 mph, you have to describe all details of track, equipment, signals, train control system, communications, etc and get their approval.

Ryan: KCS used to be more conservative and set the speed limit at 78 mph.

There is also a lower step. If there is no signal system, then the limits are cannot run passenger trains 60 mph or faster and freight trains 59 mph or faster. This, some lines had speed limits of 59P/49F. This last constraint applied to the Sunset East between Flomaton AL and TAllahassee FL, and currently applies to the Vermonter north of White River junction. Probably applies to the Ethan Allen as well. The KCS, again being slightly more conservative, had their speed limit set at 58P/48F when they ran passenger trains on their unsignaled main line between Shreveport LA and Baton Rouge LA.

If you read the Track Safety Standards it is obvious that they are safety standards, not comfort standards. Track can be so rough that it will literally throw you around inside the car and still be safe.

There are other lines that the BNSF line that have the equipment in place to permit speeds above 79 mph but do not at this time carry passenger trains. The UP out of Chicago all the way to Ogden UT is one. When the CZ was running on the UP between Cheyenne and Ogden, the speed limit for it was 90 mph. The ex RF&P line between Washington DC and Richmond VA is also equipped, but so far as I know, the speed limit is now 70 mph and always has been.


----------



## Anderson (Mar 24, 2011)

George Harris said:


> There are two things that come into play:
> 
> 1. Track Safety Standards
> 
> ...


Unless all of your trains ran non-stop Richmond-Washington, I think it may have been 80 at some time in the past given the occasional sub-two hour schedule.


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Mar 24, 2011)

My point is why doesn't the FRA just make it 80MPH instead of 79MPH whats the big deal. Somethings the FRA is dumb about. 1MPH is not going to kill anyone FFS.


----------



## Ryan (Mar 24, 2011)

It's just the way that it's written. To use your argument against you, it's just 1 MPH, what's the big deal? Spend a lot of time and money for no gain whatsoever.


----------

