Railroad Forums 

  • Grand Junction Branch (The North/South Side Connection)

  • Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.
Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: sery2831, CRail

 #1340030  by 130MM
 
GP40MC1118 wrote:Given the current track throws necessitated by the GLX extension to Union Square, any redesign to
make a direct GJ connection to the FRML problematic.
D
Apparently, nobody here has seen the plans for the "new" Swift. The connection to the GJ will be a realigned track crossing the FML #2 on a moveable point frog, and connecting to the FML #1 with a standard #10 turnout(a la Beverly Jct - albeit with a smaller turnout). I've got the plans upstairs, if you want to see them, D.

DAW
 #1340104  by sery2831
 
130MM wrote:
GP40MC1118 wrote:Given the current track throws necessitated by the GLX extension to Union Square, any redesign to
make a direct GJ connection to the FRML problematic.
D
Apparently, nobody here has seen the plans for the "new" Swift. The connection to the GJ will be a realigned track crossing the FML #2 on a moveable point frog, and connecting to the FML #1 with a standard #10 turnout(a la Beverly Jct - albeit with a smaller turnout). I've got the plans upstairs, if you want to see them, D.

DAW
Will this only lead to Tower A on the number one? Will you have to reverse West towards Porter(shuffle) to continue on the Grand Junction? Or is the switching lead on the west end of BET being reconfigured as well?
 #1340158  by GP40MC1118
 
Moveable point frogs are fine when the work, but a royal pain when they don't. At one
point, there was a directive requiring C&S personnel only to handthrow it when a failure
occurred. Never liked them and needlessly complicates things. A diamond with a single
power switch for No.2 Track would've sufficed.

As for the Swift caper, having not seen a recent rendering of plan, I understood that, by
example, for CSX to get off the GJ to the 4th Iron, would require coming across the
switching lead for BET. Duh...

D
 #1340239  by sery2831
 
GP40MC1118 wrote:
As for the Swift caper, having not seen a recent rendering of plan, I understood that, by
example, for CSX to get off the GJ to the 4th Iron, would require coming across the
switching lead for BET. Duh...

D
So the switching lead gets connected to the Fitchburg? There isn't a whole lot of room to play with there. They will have to install more derails in BET. As the entire yard is downhill going west.
 #1340323  by ExCon90
 
MBTA3247 wrote:Yes, along with vastly less wear to the rails. Though I've never heard of a diamond with movable point frogs, just regular turnouts.
The Reading had a lot of them, and some still remain. They were fond of British-style double-track junctions with two turnouts and one diamond, and the diamonds mostly had movable-point frogs. There's one at CARMEL, where the Warminster line diverges from Lansdale-Doylestown, and I think the ones at 16th St. Junction, where the Norristown trains diverge, have movable-point frogs. The one at Jenkintown was recently removed and replaced by standard turnouts.
  • 1
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 29