Re: Ballasting the C&TS

o anderson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ballasting and track maintenance has been a big
> issue for this railroad, especially in the last 15
> years that they were trying to catch up on perhaps
> deferred maintenance that probably went back 35
> years at that time. Thankfully this wonderful
> discussion group has a history where you can find
> out these things!
> See here-
> [url=http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,365
> 36,36583#msg-36583]2003 Post Bartholomew
> Maintenance Issues on NGDF[/url]

Excellent discussion. Key to any discussion on the level of track work needed is the tonnage moved on the rail system- on the C&TS it's almost laughably light, so cinders would work OK, but increase the amount of annual track maintenance involved. Better quality components (tiesm rail, ballast, etc.) means less maintenance needed to keep surface and line. When we rebuilt the connector from the Santa Fe through Pueblo Army Terminal to the TTC in the early '90's, we used slag from CF&I. I think it's working just fine, probably a lot of credit for that goes to it being a very dry region. Later, we rebuilt the track at Bayonne Army Terminal across from NYC. Slag had been used when that was built in the '40's, and due to the dampness, had caused heavy corrosion damage to the rail and OTM. No problem, we rebuilt the entire system with new 115RE rail and special trackwork. Had to hurry up and finish because the Army wanted to abandon the terminal, and somebody later removed all of the new stuff. Our Government at work.