and he notes - The lower floors on the domeliners would be no more a clearance problem than low hanging underbody equipment such as air conditioning, battery boxes, water tanks, skirts, etc found on the rest of the fleet. The Central's 3rd rail had to be far enough away from the running rails to provide adequate clearance for trucks on standard equipment (as well as electric locomotives) and had the height problem along the main line not existed there would be no reason why domes couldn't have entered GCT after the tunnels were enlarged.
Most of the Central's Chicago mainline was built in the 19th Century when locomotives and cars were shorter in height so overpasses were built with adequate clearance (for that era). Equipment bought in the 20th Century had to conform to the height restrictions of dozens of overpasses and the cost of replacing them far exceeded any advantage a domeliner would bring to the passenger business. The Niagara was a good example of making new equipment match the restrictions. The B&O had the same problems and had cars with lower domes built for the Capitol Limited. Southern had no domes on the Crescent because of the tunnel under Capitol Hill (as well as the Duke Street overpass in Alexandria). By the time the low-profile domes became available, both the Central and Pennsy were cutting service so investing in new equipment was not in the cards. I've seen private cars in GCT and in fact Roosevelt's private car was a frequent visitor so I can't se why (other than servicing) it would be a problem. Raleigh in even colder Maine!... At 07:10 PM 2/22/2011, [email protected] wrote: > > >Ed's rationale is correct, both the NYC and the PRR had clearance issues, >third rail or catenary, bridges, stations, etc. Some time ago, AMTRAK >tested their hi-level cars on the Keystone Main, for clearances, >they are said >to have cleared the catenary into 30th St Station in Philly by an INCH. >Rumor had it, AMTRAK had a set of hi-level cars in the "extra fleet" in >case they were needed or could be used. NOT on the old PRR and I would >guess nor the NYC. > >Jim "hats off to Ed for the job he's doing in Collyfornia" Lyle > > > >And, to carry a BUDD dome story a bit farther, the real BUDD domes could >not be run into Grand Central Terminal (GCT) because of two reasons: >(1)Tunnel clearances on the top, and (2)inadequate space between the >live third >rail and the bottom of the BUDD domes. I was told the BUDD domes had a >lower-than-normal floor/bottom directly beneath the dome area so that people >could walk the length of the car under the seats in the dome. This low floor >came too close to the 600 volt third rail for safety and so they were not >allowed into GCT even after tunnels were enlarged in more modern times. The >top problem was solved, but not the bottom problem. Private car owners >were disappointed and sad. > >Which explains why the NYC never had any dome cars in spite of what model >manufacturers produce. True or not, I dunno, but it makes for an >interesting story. Anyone know if this is real or imagined? > >Cheers...Ed L. ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
