 | | Switches vs. Turnouts (was Re: APOLOGY —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) Not really. Let me clarify my position. I don't feel it's appropriate to suppress information sharing, and I don't think the originator of a thread has some sort of exclusive say about what is on or off topic. I'm not sure I care to comment (...) (26 years ago, 8-Feb-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | |
| | | | | (canceled) —Kurt Eilers
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Switches vs. Turnouts —Matthew Bates
|
| | | | (...) In the UK, I always understood them to be called points, because that's what they were called in model railway catalogues and is what they were called in common usage. However someone recently told me that actually the name is different (...) (26 years ago, 9-Feb-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Switches vs. Turnouts —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) Crossover. This typically will mark the beginning or end of a block in CTC territory. It typically did not require an interlocking tower. (...) A crossing. There is no implication of connection from one track to the other. However, since the (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Switches vs. Turnouts —Jeff Christner
|
| | | | (...) Most of the times on the railroad that I work for (Norfolk Southern), if one is referring to the points of a switch, we call them points, as in to make sure there is nothing fouling the points before throwing a switch, i.e. something that fell (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
