Re: Courant: CHS seeks to boost Loop revenue, ridership

Skip Wrote:

> My biggest concern was not the "high bridge" but
> the smaller ones (plate girder above Devil's Gate)
> and the "Pin Truss" bridge above the mine stop. As
> much as their strength, I am concerned about #1203
> being able to fit, as they are both on curves and
> clearance was already tight with our GTL power.

I know Skip -- like you, I was there on the GLRR Inc's final weekend, when the high bridge carried #12 and #14 coupled together, pulling a full GLRR, Inc. train. Both locomotives were carrying extra ballast, as they were weighed down by big-ass burritos on their backheads and fat-ass railfans in their cabs...

I mentioned your earlier post because I found it interesting that, per the article, the CHS engaged engineering firms to look at the bridges *after* you posted your concerns about those bridges. Honestly, I think someone read your comment, exclaimed "Oh (expletive-deleted)!", then quickly hired those engineering firms.

Would you buy a locomotive and then check to see if your bridges will support that locomotive after the locomotive is on its way.... or do you first figure out what your bridges can handle and then buy a locomotive that fits those bridges? I would have done the latter; the CHS is doing the former, per the article.

On a different note, I see that the Georgetown Colorado website includes a line that gives the 1-888-456-6777 phone number for Georgetown Loop tickets. I'm surprised nobody mentioned that in the recent thread about the Georgetown Colorado website.

--
Chris Webster
[www.speakeasy.org]