Think we could put an end to this????
_____
From: cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Steve Lucas
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2012 12:54 PM
To: cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [cpsig] Re: CPR Timetables and Yard Limits
Point taken, Vic. I got caught up in the immediate discussion about Rules 93
and 93A specifically in the GTOR and the Shushwap Sub., and did not think of
other rule applications referencing siding switches. It's been almost 22
years since the UCOR was replaced by the CROR, and I'm a little rusty with
the UCOR...
Steve Lucas.
--- In cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:cpsig%40yahoogroups.com> , Vic
<vic@...> wrote:
both in
Posted by: "K V Railway"kvrailway@... kvrailway
Date: Sat Apr 7, 2012 12:27 pm ((PDT))
<anip>
The only time on the CPR (and TH&B) that the location of siding switches
ever played a role in train movements on main track was in Rule 93A,
GTIR's.the GTIR and the 1951 and 1962 UCOR's.
Steve Lucas.
I'm not going to get into the yard limit argument pertaining to pre-1951
requirements as I wasn't born yet back then, and haven't studied the
I have, however, studied most UCOR's, worked under and instructed upon
the 1962 UCOR for many years (and the 1968 UCOR FWIW). First, Steve's
above comment is WAY OFF THE MARK. Location of siding switches was
quite important for train operations in lots of respects other than §
93. E.g., 1962 UCOR §§ 5; 17A; 87; 90; 105A; 113; 208A; train order
Form A in cases of board meets, Form C (Ex. 2), Form E in cases of
initial restrictions, Forms G H and Z; §§ 255, 265, 269, 403, 510, and
513. All concerned needed to know where these siding sws were in order
to properly govern themselves accordingly. Therefore Steve, you need to
review your UCOR's some more before making such wild statements.
VRP
Train Dispr, ret.
Ex. Relief Rules Instructor
