Follow-up: CV catenary/Graham wye

[NW Mailing List]

This discussion continued with John and Bruce, with Jim, and with an 
engineer (h. 1940) who ran the electrics or "motors". About turning 
electrics, he gave Jim's answer and was unaware of turning for any 
maintenance issues or for any other reason. About the Graham wye, there 
was no wye when he hired and had no recollection of one prior to hiring. 
He remembered the wire on the CV, but never saw it used. It could have 
been used for helpers, but steam pushers were used.

The photo Joe cites from the Archives, Bruce cited from "Clinch 
Valley--Norfolk & Western District Line" (Alex Schust and Mason Cooper, 
NWHS) as dated 1950 that put catenary over the CV main (only) and a 1938 
track plan that shows only vestiges of the wye. So the CV catenary 
stayed up until the end of electrification, long after it could have 
been taken out along with the wye. Another plan in Alex and Mason's book 
shows that the wye track had become an industrial track by 1912, so the 
wye track was then cleared of car spots and electrified before being 
taken up (?).

Grant Carpenter

On 9/13/2017 3:46 PM, NW Mailing List wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Any use of the catenary on the Clinch Valley predates recollections 
> I've heard. My best guess is that it was used earlier for electric 
> helper service to assist eastbounds up Bluefield Hill (1.22%). The 
> eastbound could stop short of the signal and crossing(s) at Furnace 
> for the helper to approach from the siding or from CV Junction. For 
> this same grade, main line eastbounds would pick up an electric pusher 
> at Pinhook, but this lasted until the end of electrification in 1950. 
> For better utilization, the helper on the Valley side could have been 
> cut off earlier when the run of Valley pushers out of Richlands was 
> extended past the shove up to Tip Top (1.0%), going down to Furnace 
> and up into Bluefield Yard.
>
> Grant Carpenter
>
> On 9/13/2017 8:47 AM, NW Mailing List wrote:
>> The Virginian turned their electrics on occasion to balance the wear 
>> and tear.
>>
>> Tom marshall
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
>> To: NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
>> Sent: Tue, Sep 12, 2017 5:20 pm
>> Subject: Re: Photo locations
>>
>> Except that they never had to turn the electrics, since the double 
>> units had a cab on each end.
>>
>> Jim Nichols
>>
>> On Tuesday, September 12, 2017 3:20 PM, NW Mailing List 
>> <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org <mailto:list at nwhs.org>> wrote:
>>
>> John Garner asked:
>> > Anyone know how far and why catenary was extended down the CV line?
>>
>> According to N&W Engineering Dept. drawing 10672A (NWHS Archives drawing
>> HS-CC10898) ( http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=136771 ),
>> in 1920 electrification ended right at milepost N367 (CV367 today), 
>> at the end
>> of Montgomery St., which was before the west end of the siding was 
>> reached.
>> As the drawing was created for extending the siding to the west, the 
>> drawing
>> is unclear on whether the sidings were electrified or just the main 
>> track.
>> It does show a few electrification poles on the south side of the tracks
>> opposite ones on the north side, which is suggestive but not conclusive.
>>
>> Looking at this photo, which is looking in the opposite direction 
>> than the
>> photo that started this discussion, it appears the siding was not 
>> electrified,
>> at least by the late 1940s. Whether the siding was previusly 
>> electrified at
>> some point is still undetermined.
>> http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=70516
>>
>> > Was the Graham wye still in at the time of initial electrification?
>>
>> According to N&W Engineering Dept. drawing 10063A (NWHS Archives drawing
>> HS-G00133), ( http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=146988 ), the
>> Graham wye existed and was (already) electrified in 1923.
>>
>> This wye was presumably the only place the railroad had to turn the 
>> electrics
>> under their own power when needed, at least until the electrification was
>> extended to Iaeger.
>>
>> Joe Shaw
>>
>> Except that they never had to turn the electrics, since the double 
>> units had a cab on each end.
>>
>> Jim Nichols
>>
>> On Tuesday, September 12, 2017 3:20 PM, NW Mailing List 
>> <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org> wrote:
>>
>> John Garner asked:
>> > Anyone know how far and why catenary was extended down the CV line?
>>
>> According to N&W Engineering Dept. drawing 10672A (NWHS Archives drawing
>> HS-CC10898) ( http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=136771 ),
>> in 1920 electrification ended right at milepost N367 (CV367 today), 
>> at the end
>> of Montgomery St., which was before the west end of the siding was 
>> reached.
>> As the drawing was created for extending the siding to the west, the 
>> drawing
>> is unclear on whether the sidings were electrified or just the main 
>> track.
>> It does show a few electrification poles on the south side of the tracks
>> opposite ones on the north side, which is suggestive but not conclusive.
>>
>> Looking at this photo, which is looking in the opposite direction 
>> than the
>> photo that started this discussion, it appears the siding was not 
>> electrified,
>> at least by the late 1940s. Whether the siding was previusly 
>> electrified at
>> some point is still undetermined.
>> http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=70516
>>
>> > Was the Graham wye still in at the time of initial electrification?
>>
>> According to N&W Engineering Dept. drawing 10063A (NWHS Archives drawing
>> HS-G00133), ( http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=146988 ), the
>> Graham wye existed and was (already) electrified in 1923.
>>
>> This wye was presumably the only place the railroad had to turn the 
>> electrics
>> under their own power when needed, at least until the electrification was
>> extended to Iaeger.
>>
>> Joe Shaw
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist6.pair.net/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/attachments/20171029/3ae57ac9/attachment.html>