Subject:
|
Re: Relative height of cars and cabooses
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Wed, 23 Aug 2000 08:23:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
711 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, James Powell writes:
> Cabeese are not as regulated as interchange stock, although there are
> special rules concerning material of construction/strength.
Right. And cabeese in hilly country often had to have specially reinforced
frames because they might have several pusher units coupled on behind them to
help get over steep grades.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Relative height of cars and cabooses
|
| (...) Hence the PRR's early use of all steel cabeese. However, it was illegal in some areas to put the pushers behind the caboose, they had to be cut in in front of the caboose. One simple reason why: who cares if a coal car is converted into (...) (24 years ago, 23-Aug-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Relative height of cars and cabooses
|
| (...) shorter? (...) Does someone have copies of the various plates? Chris, what I can say is that there are different "plates" (Loading gauges), the common one is Plate "C", and that -just about everywhere- in the US is a minimum of Plate "C" (...) (24 years ago, 22-Aug-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
