If a time table showed scheduled freights in one direction only, it wouldn't
matter whether that direction was eastbound or westbound. The normal
superiority of eastbound trains was only effective against westbound trains of
the same class. Extras in one direction would be inferior to all opposing
scheduled trains regardless of which direction they were going. The choice of
which direction to print in the time table would likely depend on which was
more convenient for dispatching purposes.
Don Thomas
----- Original Message -----
From: KVRailway
To: cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2009 11:59 PM
Subject: Re: [cpsig] Re: Farnham & EmployeeTimetables
Subject: Re: [cpsig] Re: Farnham & EmployeeTimetables
> Your post makes a lot of sense, John. CNR/CV also tended to show
> scheduled manifests in the superior direction. GT(NE) ETT's ceased
> scheduled manifests in both directions. Both CPR and CNR/U.S.
> subsidiaries operated under the Uniform Code rulebook, 1962 edition
> by that time.
>
> John
>
> John Hutchins, P.O. Box 595, Littleton, MA 01460-0595
Interesting to see how practises varied around the country. The exact
opposite was the case in KV territory. So far as I know, east was usually
considered the superior direction, but for most of the years that scheduled
freights were run across Kettle Valley territory, the scheduled trains ran
westbound and the eastbounds were run as extras. This was the case right
into the early 1970s. The exception was the Carmi Subdivision which, for
reasons unknown to me, during the last couple of years or so, showed a
scheduled freight in both directions even though it was only a 3 time per
week wayfreight.
Joe Smuin
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
