Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #695455 > unrolled thread

Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off?

Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2023-05-10 13:31 -0700
    Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-05-10 23:04 +0200
      Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? SteveW <steve@walker-family.me.uk> - 2023-05-10 23:07 +0100
        Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Fredxx <fredxx@spam.uk> - 2023-05-11 01:19 +0100
          Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Tim W <nospam@example.com> - 2023-05-11 09:31 +0000
            Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-05-11 14:19 +0200
              Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2023-05-11 06:48 -0700
                Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-05-22 13:46 +0200
                  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-05-22 12:58 +0100
                    Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-05-22 23:16 +0200
                      Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2023-05-23 02:49 +0000
                        Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip Peeler <trolltrap@valid.invalid> - 2023-05-23 11:10 +0200
                  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2023-05-22 08:56 -0700
                    Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-05-22 23:21 +0200
                      Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2023-05-22 17:58 -0700
                        Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-05-23 13:13 +0200
                  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2023-05-22 14:10 -0400
                    Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-05-22 23:35 +0200
        Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> - 2023-05-10 19:09 -0700
        Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> - 2023-05-12 13:49 +0000
          Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2023-05-12 20:40 -0400
            Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2023-05-13 01:34 +0000
              Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip Peeler <trolltrap@valid.invalid> - 2023-05-13 09:26 +0200
              Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> - 2023-05-13 07:25 -0700
                Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2023-05-13 19:08 +0000
                  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> - 2023-05-13 12:39 -0700
                    Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2023-05-14 02:49 +0000
                      Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip Peeler <trolltrap@valid.invalid> - 2023-05-14 09:47 +0200
                      Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> - 2023-05-14 06:48 -0700
                        Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2023-05-14 18:12 +0000
                          Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> - 2023-05-14 11:45 -0700
                            Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2023-05-14 21:38 +0000
                              Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip Peeler <trolltrap@valid.invalid> - 2023-05-14 23:45 +0200
                              Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> - 2023-05-14 14:54 -0700
                                Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2023-05-15 11:50 +1000
                                  Re: Lonely Obnoxious Cantankerous Auto-contradicting Senile Ozzie Troll Alert! Peeler <trolltrap@valid.invalid> - 2023-05-15 10:10 +0200
                          Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip Peeler <trolltrap@valid.invalid> - 2023-05-14 21:03 +0200
                  Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip Peeler <trolltrap@valid.invalid> - 2023-05-13 23:39 +0200
            Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-05-13 03:53 +0200
              Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2023-05-13 03:31 -0400
                Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2023-05-13 21:14 +0000
                  Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip Peeler <trolltrap@valid.invalid> - 2023-05-13 23:41 +0200
                Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Commander Kinsey" <CK1@nospam.com> - 2023-06-23 06:16 +0100
            Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> - 2023-05-17 12:16 +0000
          Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2023-05-13 20:25 +0100
          Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Commander Kinsey" <CK1@nospam.com> - 2023-06-21 04:00 +0100
        Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Commander Kinsey" <CK1@nospam.com> - 2023-06-21 03:59 +0100
      Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Commander Kinsey" <CK1@nospam.com> - 2023-06-21 03:59 +0100
        Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> - 2023-06-21 06:57 +0000
          Re: Troll-feeding Senile HUGE ASSHOLE Alert! Peeler <trolltrap@valid.invalid> - 2023-06-21 09:53 +0200
          Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? jon <jon@nospam.cn> - 2023-06-21 09:14 +0000
            Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-21 17:05 +0100
              Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> - 2023-06-21 19:45 +0100
                Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-22 08:11 +0100
                  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? jon <jon@nospam.cn> - 2023-06-22 10:22 +0000
                  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Bing AI <bing_ai@example.com> - 2023-06-22 13:27 +0100
                    Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Commander Kinsey" <CK1@nospam.com> - 2023-07-25 04:02 +0100
                  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> - 2023-06-24 00:27 +0000
                    Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Commander Kinsey" <CK1@nospam.com> - 2023-07-25 04:03 +0100
            Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Fredxx <fredxx@spam.invalid> - 2023-06-21 17:16 +0100
              Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? jon <jon@nospam.cn> - 2023-06-21 17:44 +0000
                Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Fredxx <fredxx@spam.invalid> - 2023-06-21 20:02 +0100
                  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2023-06-21 18:14 -0700
                Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-22 08:11 +0100
                  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Jeff Gaines" <jgnewsid@outlook.com> - 2023-06-22 07:22 +0000
                    Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-22 08:35 +0100
                      Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Jeff Gaines" <jgnewsid@outlook.com> - 2023-06-22 09:05 +0000
                        Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Commander Kinsey" <CK1@nospam.com> - 2023-07-23 04:53 +0100
                          Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> - 2023-07-23 11:18 +0100
                            Re: Troll-feeding Senile HUGE ASSHOLE Alert! Peeler <trolltrap@valid.invalid> - 2023-07-23 16:56 +0200
                            Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Commander Kinsey" <CK1@nospam.com> - 2023-07-23 23:30 +0100
                      Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2023-06-22 04:34 -0700
                      Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> - 2023-06-22 07:09 -0700
                        Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2023-06-22 07:33 -0700
                        Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-22 16:18 +0100
                          Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2023-06-22 08:33 -0700
                  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2023-06-22 00:33 -0700
                  Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> - 2023-06-22 07:08 -0700
                    Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-22 16:17 +0100
                      Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2023-06-22 08:22 -0700
          Re: Why do circuit breakers go up for on and down for off? "Commander Kinsey" <CK1@nospam.com> - 2023-07-25 04:01 +0100

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →

#695618

On 5/12/2023 9:49 AM, Jasen Betts wrote:
> On 2023-05-10, SteveW <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 10/05/2023 22:04, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2023-05-10 22:31, Bob F wrote:
>>>> On 3/12/2023 7:43 PM, 😎 Mighty Wannabe ✅ wrote:
>>>>> rbowman wrote on 3/12/2023 10:05 PM:
>>>>>> On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 00:30:39 -0000, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 02 Mar 2023 03:09:14 -0000, rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 01 Mar 2023 15:05:31 -0000, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why were they never made of something more grippy than highly
>>>>>>>>> polished
>>>>>>>>> steel?
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Washington_Cog_Railway
>>>>>>> Should be used on all tracks, then perhaps trains could stop in the
>>>>>>> distance my car is required to by law.
>>>>>> Do the math. A fully laden coal car weighs about 140 tons. I've
>>>>>> never been
>>>>>> bored enough to count cars when I stopped at a crossing but there are a
>>>>>> lot of them. Let's say 30 for the sake of argument, 4200 tons plus the
>>>>>> weight of the engines. Let's say 4 at 200 tons each. So, roughly
>>>>>> 5000 tons
>>>>>> traveling at 50 mph. That's quite a bit of kinetic energy to dump in
>>>>>> 300'.
>>>>>> I can hear snapping axles and see flying wheels.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The wheels and the rails are steel. A train can never have enough
>>>>> friction to stop at a short distance. The brakes can lock all the
>>>>> wheels but the train will still move forward due to inertia.
>>>>
>>>> All that need is train wheels made of rubber as hard as steel.
>>>
>>> If you do that, then those wheels will be very low friction and braking
>>> will be as bad as with steel wheels.
>>>
>>> You need something that is soft to increase the contact surface and
>>> grip. You have to choose, one thing or the other. Can't have both.
>>
>> Well you could have a train having steel wheels, but with rubber tyred
>> wheels that could be dropped onto the track during heavy acceleration,
>> heavy braking and for steep hills. But generally, steel wheels work well
>> enough.
> 
> If they need extra traction they drop sand on the tracks.
> 

Having one derailment per day, is a testament to the
technical sophistication of rail.

And you don't just use any old sand. The picture on the
page, shows it comes in its own spice rack. Classy.

https://www.olimag.com/en/traction/

I think sand (and not the best sand), was more popular
in steam days. Diesel-electric have smoother application
of power. The relatively new passenger rail here, I've taken
it once, and the acceleration and deceleration is fully
automated. You hardly ever hear the clank of couplers
on the new one. The old one, it was like riding a freight.

And I have ridden a freight, but only in a sense. The
family went on vacation one summer, down the coast. Bought
passenger tickets. Get to the departure point, a single
engine, six box cars, and one passenger car show up.
The passenger car has a conductor, who takes the tickets
and punches them. The single passenger car is divided into
two sections. Royal Mail (so called) in the front of the car,
passengers in the back. In the middle of the car,
is a pot belly stove (not running, because its summer).
The trip would not be noteworthy, except the bloody thing
only did 40MPH for the entire trip (took about six hours).
Um, "scenic" is the most positive term that comes to mind.

    Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695620

On Fri, 12 May 2023 20:40:06 -0400, Paul wrote:


> Having one derailment per day, is a testament to the technical
> sophistication of rail.

In the US it's a testament to ignoring maintenance to squeeze out the last 
dollar.

https://hungryhorsenews.com/news/2023/apr/05/train-derailment-spills-
cases-beer-clark-fork/

Some derailments have a silver lining. This one was even more special by 
having seven of the derailed cars in a tunnel. 

We've had others that dumped grain cars. The bears really appreciate 
those.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695637 — Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip

On 13 May 2023 01:34:13 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> In the US it's a testament to ignoring maintenance to squeeze out the last 
> dollar.
> 
> https://hungryhorsenews.com/news/2023/apr/05/train-derailment-spills-
> cases-beer-clark-fork/
> 
> Some derailments have a silver lining. This one was even more special by 
> having seven of the derailed cars in a tunnel. 
> 
> We've had others that dumped grain cars. The bears really appreciate 
> those.

See, you even can bigmouth about derailments, you pathological gossip! LOL

-- 
More absolutely idiotic blather by the resident senile gossip:
"My mother sometimes made a cherry chiffon cake that started with a 
packaged mix. It wasn't bad if you squished a slice down to resemble real 
cake."
MID: <kaldt8F22l6U12@mid.individual.net>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695646

On 13 May 2023 01:34:13 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 12 May 2023 20:40:06 -0400, Paul wrote:
>
>
>> Having one derailment per day, is a testament to the technical
>> sophistication of rail.
>
>In the US it's a testament to ignoring maintenance to squeeze out the last 
>dollar.

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/railroad_quality/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695670

On Sat, 13 May 2023 07:25:37 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

> On 13 May 2023 01:34:13 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> 
>>On Fri, 12 May 2023 20:40:06 -0400, Paul wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Having one derailment per day, is a testament to the technical
>>> sophistication of rail.
>>
>>In the US it's a testament to ignoring maintenance to squeeze out the
>>last dollar.
> 
> https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/railroad_quality/

At least the US is better than Canada...

"The score for railroad infrastrucutre quality is based on only one 
question. The respondents are asked to rate the railroads in their country 
of operation on a scale from 1 (underdeveloped) to 7 (extensive and 
efficient by international standards)."

The rail system in the US is extensive, I'll give it that. It probably is 
fairly efficient. They don't lose too many boxcars but then a boxcar can't 
stray too far from the rails.

I may be a little prejudiced. I briefly worked for Penn Central during its 
two year path from merger to the largest at the time bankruptcy. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Penn_Central_Transportation_Company#Merger_begins

It was before my employment but I worked at the Selkirk yard where they 
mislaid most of Maine's potato crop. 

It was sad. When I was a young kid you could take a train from Union 
Station in Troy NY to Boston or NYC and expect to get home the same day. 
By the time I was in my teens the station was gone, but you could take the 
train to NYC from the station in Albany if you didn't have any pressing 
engagements in the city. You might get there someday, and in the winter 
the cars might even have heat. You did get to admire the scenic Hudson at 
20 mph, which was what the track was good for in many stretches.

I was pleasantly surprised when I took the train from the Rensselaer 
station in the mid-80s after it had become AmTrak. On time, and with 
comfortable, modern cars. I think it owed that to being an extension of 
the AmTrak corridor loved by Biden to the NYS capitol. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695672

On 13 May 2023 19:08:22 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 13 May 2023 07:25:37 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
>
>> On 13 May 2023 01:34:13 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>On Fri, 12 May 2023 20:40:06 -0400, Paul wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Having one derailment per day, is a testament to the technical
>>>> sophistication of rail.
>>>
>>>In the US it's a testament to ignoring maintenance to squeeze out the
>>>last dollar.
>> 
>> https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/railroad_quality/
>
>At least the US is better than Canada...
>
>"The score for railroad infrastrucutre quality is based on only one 
>question. The respondents are asked to rate the railroads in their country 
>of operation on a scale from 1 (underdeveloped) to 7 (extensive and 
>efficient by international standards)."
>
>The rail system in the US is extensive, I'll give it that. It probably is 
>fairly efficient. They don't lose too many boxcars but then a boxcar can't 
>stray too far from the rails.

This is a wonderful book:

https://www.amazon.com/Nothing-Like-World-Transcontinental-1863-1869/dp/0743203178

The baddest tunnel, Tunnel 6, is a great hike near the Sierra summit. 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/57xtxl8yiioiyat/CW_inside.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/owiekev3bvjcbgr/Landmark.JPG?raw=1

>
>I may be a little prejudiced. I briefly worked for Penn Central during its 
>two year path from merger to the largest at the time bankruptcy. 
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
>Penn_Central_Transportation_Company#Merger_begins
>
>It was before my employment but I worked at the Selkirk yard where they 
>mislaid most of Maine's potato crop. 
>
>It was sad. When I was a young kid you could take a train from Union 
>Station in Troy NY to Boston or NYC and expect to get home the same day. 
>By the time I was in my teens the station was gone, but you could take the 
>train to NYC from the station in Albany if you didn't have any pressing 
>engagements in the city. You might get there someday, and in the winter 
>the cars might even have heat. You did get to admire the scenic Hudson at 
>20 mph, which was what the track was good for in many stretches.
>
>I was pleasantly surprised when I took the train from the Rensselaer 
>station in the mid-80s after it had become AmTrak. On time, and with 
>comfortable, modern cars. I think it owed that to being an extension of 
>the AmTrak corridor loved by Biden to the NYS capitol. 

The California Zephyr is a very scenic tourist route. Passes through
Truckee and under Sugar Bowl.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695693

On Sat, 13 May 2023 12:39:16 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

> The baddest tunnel, Tunnel 6, is a great hike near the Sierra summit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Paul_Pass_Tunnel

Being contrary, I started at the Pearson trailhead on the Idaho side and 
pedaled uphill. It's a gentle grade so that was no problem. A bike light 
is required so I bought the cheapest one REI had. Mistake. After going 
through nine shorter tunnels as blind as a bat when I got to the mouth of 
that one I turned around and coasted back to the car. 

https://www.singletracks.com/bike-trails/thompson-park-13393/

That's another chunk of the Milwaukee Road near Butte. It has tunnels but 
I walked it. Walking in the dark is a lot easier than trying to ride a 
bike in the dark. 

There is another stretch near St. Regis that convinced me a suspension 
seat post was a good idea. It's also open to motorized vehicles so it's 
not all that appealing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695700 — Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip

On 14 May 2023 02:49:04 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Paul_Pass_Tunnel
> 
> Being contrary, I started at the Pearson trailhead on the Idaho side and 
> pedaled uphill. It's a gentle grade so that was no problem. A bike light 
> is required so I bought the cheapest one REI had. Mistake. After going 
> through nine shorter tunnels as blind as a bat when I got to the mouth of 
> that one I turned around and coasted back to the car. 

Incredible, but your life is really one endless series of dramas, you
ridiculous drama queen. LOL

-- 
Self-admiring lowbrowwoman telling everyone yet another "thrilling" story
about her great life:
"In a role reversal my mother taught her father to drive. She was in the 
back seat when he took his first test, trying a little telepathy: "release 
the handbrake. release the handbrake'. He didn't, stalled the engine and 
failed. The next time went better."
MID: <kafp0uF6vi1U5@mid.individual.net>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695715

On 14 May 2023 02:49:04 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 13 May 2023 12:39:16 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
>
>> The baddest tunnel, Tunnel 6, is a great hike near the Sierra summit.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Paul_Pass_Tunnel
>
>Being contrary, I started at the Pearson trailhead on the Idaho side and 
>pedaled uphill. It's a gentle grade so that was no problem. A bike light 
>is required so I bought the cheapest one REI had. Mistake. After going 
>through nine shorter tunnels as blind as a bat when I got to the mouth of 
>that one I turned around and coasted back to the car. 
>
>https://www.singletracks.com/bike-trails/thompson-park-13393/
>
>That's another chunk of the Milwaukee Road near Butte. It has tunnels but 
>I walked it. Walking in the dark is a lot easier than trying to ride a 
>bike in the dark. 
>
>There is another stretch near St. Regis that convinced me a suspension 
>seat post was a good idea. It's also open to motorized vehicles so it's 
>not all that appealing.

There's something magical and eerie and sort of sad about the old
railroad tunnels.

Tunnel6 used to be open to vehicles (it needed a jeep) but I don't
think it is any more. There was a rumor that it might be re-tracked
and used for trains again.

We drove a jeep about 4 miles, starting on the west entrance, through
the tunnels, and then through miles of snow sheds back into daylight.
Very cool.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qmit7g5ass5smpn/AADXp8NT1SHD1vzCv8uTySpTa?dl=0

They built the transcontinental railroad with muscles and mules and
black powder. No GPS, no flashlights, no CAD tools.

The old Lincoln Highway is just below the tunnel, running below the
Rainbow Bridge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695757

On Sun, 14 May 2023 06:48:45 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

> There's something magical and eerie and sort of sad about the old
> railroad tunnels.

We have the Kim Williams trail which is another chunk of the Milwaukee 
Road. It runs along the river so is a gentle grade, with one exception. 

https://fwp.mt.gov/stateparks/milltown/

The new state park is nice but railroad went under the mentioned overlook 
through Tunnel 16 1/2. It's a short tunnel and from what I can see is in 
good shape but the state is risk adverse and has fenced off the entrances. 
That means a steep climb up the ridge and down the other side. I hike it 
fairly often but I don't think I could have done it on a bicycle in my 
younger days. 

There are other stretches with tunnels that are accessible but aren't even 
formal trail to trails with some really shaky looking tunnels compared to 
16 1/2. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milwaukee_Road

It's not as well known as the Northern Pacific or Union Pacific but for 
something that started as a short line from Milwaukee to the river it had 
big dreams. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695758

On 14 May 2023 18:12:30 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 14 May 2023 06:48:45 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
>
>> There's something magical and eerie and sort of sad about the old
>> railroad tunnels.
>
>We have the Kim Williams trail which is another chunk of the Milwaukee 
>Road. It runs along the river so is a gentle grade, with one exception. 
>
>https://fwp.mt.gov/stateparks/milltown/

Pretty.

We have the Foresthill Bridge.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/tr40e89actsa5tz/Foresthill_Bridge_Auburn.jpg?raw=1

There's a group of people who post little colorful inspirational notes
along the footpath to dissuade suicides.

>
>The new state park is nice but railroad went under the mentioned overlook 
>through Tunnel 16 1/2. It's a short tunnel and from what I can see is in 
>good shape but the state is risk adverse and has fenced off the entrances. 
>That means a steep climb up the ridge and down the other side. I hike it 
>fairly often but I don't think I could have done it on a bicycle in my 
>younger days. 

Tunnel6 would be tough on a bike; it's tricky to walk. The floor is
gravel and mud and the railroad cinder things, puddles in places,
dripping from above, pitch black in places with a dull glow from one
end. Fun acoustics.

If you're ever out this way, hike it.



>
>There are other stretches with tunnels that are accessible but aren't even 
>formal trail to trails with some really shaky looking tunnels compared to 
>16 1/2. 
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milwaukee_Road
>
>It's not as well known as the Northern Pacific or Union Pacific but for 
>something that started as a short line from Milwaukee to the river it had 
>big dreams. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695773

On Sun, 14 May 2023 11:45:48 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

> We have the Foresthill Bridge.
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/tr40e89actsa5tz/Foresthill_Bridge_Auburn.jpg?
raw=1
> 
> There's a group of people who post little colorful inspirational notes
> along the footpath to dissuade suicides.

I have days and days. On bad days I'd be walking very gingerly. I had no 
problem walking across the Golden Gate but that doesn't have the visual 
relief. 

There was a small airport on the north side of Ft. Wayne. One takeoff from 
one of the runways you climbed past an WOWO's AM antenna array. It was a 
strange feeling visualizing yourself on the antenna rather than the 
cockpit of the Tomahawk. Somebody has to change the light bulbs but it 
ain't me.

The CN Tower in Toronto is another one. I've been in tall buildings like 
the John Hancock in Chicago but something in that needle like structure 
caused my reptilian brain to say "NO!"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695777 — Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip

On 14 May 2023 21:38:04 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> I have days and days. On bad days I'd be walking very gingerly. I had no 
> problem walking across the Golden Gate but that doesn't have the visual 
> relief. 

FASCINATING, as always! Seriously, do you know at all what a great guy you
are? In case you don't know, let me tell you: you are simply great! And I
believe, everyone else here thinks so too! <VBG>

-- 
Self-admiring lowbrowwoman telling everyone yet another "thrilling" story
about her great life:
"In a role reversal my mother taught her father to drive. She was in the 
back seat when he took his first test, trying a little telepathy: "release 
the handbrake. release the handbrake'. He didn't, stalled the engine and 
failed. The next time went better."
MID: <kafp0uF6vi1U5@mid.individual.net>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695778

On 14 May 2023 21:38:04 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 14 May 2023 11:45:48 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
>
>> We have the Foresthill Bridge.
>> 
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/tr40e89actsa5tz/Foresthill_Bridge_Auburn.jpg?
>raw=1
>> 
>> There's a group of people who post little colorful inspirational notes
>> along the footpath to dissuade suicides.
>
>I have days and days. On bad days I'd be walking very gingerly. I had no 
>problem walking across the Golden Gate but that doesn't have the visual 
>relief. 
>
>There was a small airport on the north side of Ft. Wayne. One takeoff from 
>one of the runways you climbed past an WOWO's AM antenna array. It was a 
>strange feeling visualizing yourself on the antenna rather than the 
>cockpit of the Tomahawk. Somebody has to change the light bulbs but it 
>ain't me.
>
>The CN Tower in Toronto is another one. I've been in tall buildings like 
>the John Hancock in Chicago but something in that needle like structure 
>caused my reptilian brain to say "NO!"

I was riding a steep chairlift a few weeks ago. The guy with me asked
if we could pull the safety bar down, almost apologetically. We
started talking and I asked him how old he was. 42.

I had zero fear of heights when I was young. About the age of 40, I
started getting intense vertigo. I couldn't walk along a cliff (the
cliffs of moher were intense) and it was scary to climb a ladder. And
it gradually faded away, mostly gone now. I've had other guys say the
same thing, fear of heights kicking in around the age of 40.

The guy and I agreed that it didn't affect our skiing.

This doesn't bother me now.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dmfelqyufr8ng5u/20230410_125737.jpg?raw=1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695811

On Mon, 15 May 2023 07:54:51 +1000, John Larkin  
<jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

> On 14 May 2023 21:38:04 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 14 May 2023 11:45:48 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
>>
>>> We have the Foresthill Bridge.
>>>
>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/tr40e89actsa5tz/Foresthill_Bridge_Auburn.jpg?
>> raw=1
>>>
>>> There's a group of people who post little colorful inspirational notes
>>> along the footpath to dissuade suicides.
>>
>> I have days and days. On bad days I'd be walking very gingerly. I had no
>> problem walking across the Golden Gate but that doesn't have the visual
>> relief.
>>
>> There was a small airport on the north side of Ft. Wayne. One takeoff  
>> from
>> one of the runways you climbed past an WOWO's AM antenna array. It was a
>> strange feeling visualizing yourself on the antenna rather than the
>> cockpit of the Tomahawk. Somebody has to change the light bulbs but it
>> ain't me.
>>
>> The CN Tower in Toronto is another one. I've been in tall buildings like
>> the John Hancock in Chicago but something in that needle like structure
>> caused my reptilian brain to say "NO!"
>
> I was riding a steep chairlift a few weeks ago. The guy with me asked
> if we could pull the safety bar down, almost apologetically. We
> started talking and I asked him how old he was. 42.

> I had zero fear of heights when I was young.

I had the reverse, wasnt keen on heights when a young adult.

Got used to it when building my single story house with a flat
roof only a few years later, to still a bit wary when getting back
onto the ladder when getting off the roof but thats mainly
because the ladder doesnt reach that far past the barge board.

> About the age of 40, I
> started getting intense vertigo. I couldn't walk along a cliff (the
> cliffs of moher were intense) and it was scary to climb a ladder.

Never got that.

> And
> it gradually faded away, mostly gone now. I've had other guys say the
> same thing, fear of heights kicking in around the age of 40.

No one I know has ever said that. Weird.

> The guy and I agreed that it didn't affect our skiing.

> This doesn't bother me now.

> https://www.dropbox.com/s/dmfelqyufr8ng5u/20230410_125737.jpg?raw=1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695824 — Re: Lonely Obnoxious Cantankerous Auto-contradicting Senile Ozzie Troll Alert!

On Mon, 15 May 2023 11:50:57 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

-- 
Sqwertz to Rodent Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID: <ev1p6ml7ywd5$.dlg@sqwertz.com>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695761 — Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip

On 14 May 2023 18:12:30 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> We have the Kim Williams trail 

WTF??? YOU only have shit in your senile head and you keep squeezing it into
these ngs, every day!

-- 
More absolutely idiotic blather by the resident senile gossip:
"My mother sometimes made a cherry chiffon cake that started with a 
packaged mix. It wasn't bad if you squished a slice down to resemble real 
cake."
MID: <kaldt8F22l6U12@mid.individual.net>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695679 — Re: lowbrowwoman, the Endlessly Driveling Senile Gossip

On 13 May 2023 19:08:22 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> At least the US is better than Canada...

ONLY in your dumb Yankee "mind", bigmouthed senile Trumptard!

-- 
Self-admiring lowbrowwoman telling everyone yet another "thrilling" story
about her great life:
"In a role reversal my mother taught her father to drive. She was in the 
back seat when he took his first test, trying a little telepathy: "release 
the handbrake. release the handbrake'. He didn't, stalled the engine and 
failed. The next time went better."
MID: <kafp0uF6vi1U5@mid.individual.net>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695622

On 2023-05-13 02:40, Paul wrote:
> On 5/12/2023 9:49 AM, Jasen Betts wrote:
>> On 2023-05-10, SteveW <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote:
>>> On 10/05/2023 22:04, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>> On 2023-05-10 22:31, Bob F wrote:
>>>>> On 3/12/2023 7:43 PM, 😎 Mighty Wannabe ✅ wrote:
>>>>>> rbowman wrote on 3/12/2023 10:05 PM:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 00:30:39 -0000, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 02 Mar 2023 03:09:14 -0000, rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 01 Mar 2023 15:05:31 -0000, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why were they never made of something more grippy than highly
>>>>>>>>>> polished
>>>>>>>>>> steel?
>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Washington_Cog_Railway
>>>>>>>> Should be used on all tracks, then perhaps trains could stop in the
>>>>>>>> distance my car is required to by law.
>>>>>>> Do the math. A fully laden coal car weighs about 140 tons. I've
>>>>>>> never been
>>>>>>> bored enough to count cars when I stopped at a crossing but there 
>>>>>>> are a
>>>>>>> lot of them. Let's say 30 for the sake of argument, 4200 tons 
>>>>>>> plus the
>>>>>>> weight of the engines. Let's say 4 at 200 tons each. So, roughly
>>>>>>> 5000 tons
>>>>>>> traveling at 50 mph. That's quite a bit of kinetic energy to dump in
>>>>>>> 300'.
>>>>>>> I can hear snapping axles and see flying wheels.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The wheels and the rails are steel. A train can never have enough
>>>>>> friction to stop at a short distance. The brakes can lock all the
>>>>>> wheels but the train will still move forward due to inertia.
>>>>>
>>>>> All that need is train wheels made of rubber as hard as steel.
>>>>
>>>> If you do that, then those wheels will be very low friction and braking
>>>> will be as bad as with steel wheels.
>>>>
>>>> You need something that is soft to increase the contact surface and
>>>> grip. You have to choose, one thing or the other. Can't have both.
>>>
>>> Well you could have a train having steel wheels, but with rubber tyred
>>> wheels that could be dropped onto the track during heavy acceleration,
>>> heavy braking and for steep hills. But generally, steel wheels work well
>>> enough.
>>
>> If they need extra traction they drop sand on the tracks.
>>
> 
> Having one derailment per day, is a testament to the
> technical sophistication of rail.

Only in the USA.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#695638

On 5/12/2023 9:53 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2023-05-13 02:40, Paul wrote:

>> Having one derailment per day, is a testament to the
>> technical sophistication of rail.
> 
> Only in the USA.

There is more than one rail company, and set of rail lines.

A company that is not capitalized properly, can't really
afford to fix anything.

The tracks that are used for passenger rail, are likely
better than some of these little spur lines.

*******

When the Hudsons Bay line flooded out, and there was
a lot of track damage, the owners didn't want to fix it,
so a group bought the line, and that group paid to fix it up.
That's mainly for grain shipments, via the port at Hudsons Bay.
This shows you what a rail line looks like, after flood damage.

https://www.railwayage.com/freight/omnitrax-sells-hudson-bay-railway/

https://globalnews.ca/news/3523871/photos-show-widespread-damage-on-rail-line-to-churchill/

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/feds-ready-to-deliver-on-lawsuit-ultimatum-over-stalled-churchill-rail-repairs-1.3675810

And that's an example of a rail line, with a lot of challenges,
because mother nature doesn't want a rail line there. You can see
how they tried to build up the rail bed, above grade a bit.

It seems they're still pouring money into that line.

https://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/feds-province-pump-more-money-into-rail-line-to-churchill-man-1.6012873

    "The railway has been prone to disruptions, in part due to the
     remote boggy terrain it runs through. Railcars sometimes have had
     to slow to a near-crawl, and area residents complained it was
     not being maintained properly."

Sounds normal to me :-) You don't always get to choose where
a rail line goes.

And the fools want to run oil trains on those rails.
Who are they kidding ? :-) Regular tracks don't like oil trains,
what chance does that rickety mess have.

    Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design

csiph-web