Cutting down on the amount of pages we create

Find any mistakes such as dead links, misspelled text, or any other inaccuracies? Post them here to get them fixed.

Moderators: freebrickproductions, mlgillson, TommyBNSF, Raco_GS

User avatar
freebrickproductions
Posts: 8449
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 11:12 am
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: Cutting down on the amount of pages we create

Post by freebrickproductions » Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:38 pm

PaulSP wrote:
ToledoRailfan wrote:I'd say it was more of a website to showcase crossings with a blogish type feel with more (for lack of a better term) emotion.
You got that right, Mike would never hesitate to post his thoughts on the pages he made... Sometimes for better or worst haha.

I remember on some SJVR crossing in Bakersfield that was abandoned for the longest time and eventually had its signals removed, him writing something to the effect of "SVJR removed the signals!!! Not very smart SJVR!!!!" Haha classic overly angry Mike.
I'm actually looking at doing that myself, but haven't quite been sure enough on how to insert my opinions about various signals onto the webpages, likely due to me being somewhat reserved in real life (even if my post count doesn't reflect it...).
They/Them for me, please.

Click here if you want to submit crossing photos to the site!

Avatar by runesprite on Twitter.
User avatar
McK&H.Aust
Posts: 926
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 8:16 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Cutting down on the amount of pages we create

Post by McK&H.Aust » Wed Oct 11, 2017 10:31 am

Very interesting topic, I think it's a good idea to sometimes evaluate where the site is going and establish priorities. One question I would like to ask is what are the long term consequences of staying with the status quo and accepting any and every crossing? Could it just end up making the site harder to navigate and maintain, or are there more ramifications such as chewing up extra bandwidth and eventually needing a better server? Sorry that's more than one question :LOL4:

Probably stating the obvious, but the one thing we all have in common is that we like railroad crossings. After that I guess it depends on where we live when it comes down to deciding which crossings are rare or odd, and what is an everyday setup. Personally when it comes to filming/photographing crossings my time is limited, so I like to give priority to crossings with rare equipment and odd setups, specially old equipment, mechanical bells and old/rare gate mechs. I really enjoy looking at other people's videos and pictures because I get to see different things to what's in my area, it's like seeing the world through somebody else's eyes.

One suggestion is maybe priority could be given to old and rare crossings, but with some newer and more common setups thrown into the mix as well. After all, what is new and common today is old and rare tomorrow. Maybe a ratio of 60% old/rare crossings and 40% newer stuff. It's just a thought and I respect the fact that others will have different ideas.
User avatar
ToledoRailfan
No Longer Associated With The Forum
Posts: 3315
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 2:38 pm

Re: Cutting down on the amount of pages we create

Post by ToledoRailfan » Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:10 pm

McK&H.Aust wrote:Very interesting topic, I think it's a good idea to sometimes evaluate where the site is going and establish priorities. One question I would like to ask is what are the long term consequences of staying with the status quo and accepting any and every crossing? Could it just end up making the site harder to navigate and maintain, or are there more ramifications such as chewing up extra bandwidth and eventually needing a better server? Sorry that's more than one question :LOL4:

Probably stating the obvious, but the one thing we all have in common is that we like railroad crossings. After that I guess it depends on where we live when it comes down to deciding which crossings are rare or odd, and what is an everyday setup. Personally when it comes to filming/photographing crossings my time is limited, so I like to give priority to crossings with rare equipment and odd setups, specially old equipment, mechanical bells and old/rare gate mechs. I really enjoy looking at other people's videos and pictures because I get to see different things to what's in my area, it's like seeing the world through somebody else's eyes.

One suggestion is maybe priority could be given to old and rare crossings, but with some newer and more common setups thrown into the mix as well. After all, what is new and common today is old and rare tomorrow. Maybe a ratio of 60% old/rare crossings and 40% newer stuff. It's just a thought and I respect the fact that others will have different ideas.
Your post pretty much nailed right on the ball with what I was thinking about! :cool:

I would also to say that in my opinion that I think you might share, crossing equipment doesn't always have to be what makes a crossing interesting/unique/whatever.

For example I think this crossing is pretty neat because it is in the middle of downtown Chicago, it isn't really everyday that you come across crossings like that in the middle of a large downtown! It is also only used by trains going to and from Union Station which I think is also pretty interesting.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8878416 ... 6656?hl=en

Another example that I'd like to show is this pedestrian crossing! Its located within the Wildwood Metropark in Sylvania Twp., Ohio. It also has an 80s/90s Conrail setup which is a bonus! :Clap: I've been wanting to get to this crossing for a while but I haven't gotten around to it yet. The line that it is on is pretty infrequently used as well.


These crossings are only passive but I think they're interesting because the tracks that the crossings are on runs along the road, sidewalk, businesses, and even in people's front yards!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0061212 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0052418 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0040089 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0038637 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0031196 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0028124 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.00148,- ... 6656?hl=en

This crossing is also pretty interesting because it has a former street running junction in it!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0001849 ... 6656?hl=en
User avatar
McK&H.Aust
Posts: 926
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 8:16 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Cutting down on the amount of pages we create

Post by McK&H.Aust » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:16 pm

ToledoRailfan wrote: Your post pretty much nailed right on the ball with what I was thinking about! :cool:

I would also to say that in my opinion that I think you might share, crossing equipment doesn't always have to be what makes a crossing interesting/unique/whatever.

For example I think this crossing is pretty neat because it is in the middle of downtown Chicago, it isn't really everyday that you come across crossings like that in the middle of a large downtown! It is also only used by trains going to and from Union Station which I think is also pretty interesting.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8878416 ... 6656?hl=en

Another example that I'd like to show is this pedestrian crossing! Its located within the Wildwood Metropark in Sylvania Twp., Ohio. It also has an 80s/90s Conrail setup which is a bonus! :Clap: I've been wanting to get to this crossing for a while but I haven't gotten around to it yet. The line that it is on is pretty infrequently used as well.


These crossings are only passive but I think they're interesting because the tracks that the crossings are on runs along the road, sidewalk, businesses, and even in people's front yards!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0061212 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0052418 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0040089 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0038637 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0031196 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0028124 ... 6656?hl=en
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.00148,- ... 6656?hl=en

This crossing is also pretty interesting because it has a former street running junction in it!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0001849 ... 6656?hl=en
Yes I would agree that all of those crossings you mentioned are interesting and would be worth having on the site. The Chicago crossing would probably fall into the category of crossings which are unexpected or "out of place" in their location.

I really like street running (or sidewalk running) as there is very little of it left in Australia. The last crossing you posted with the old street running junction would probably fall into the category of railroad crossing "archaeology" or something like that, something which I also consider interesting and worthy of recording.

Other crossings I consider to be worthy of recording are those which are about to be removed. An example would be two crossings in Sydney which will be removed in the next year or so, I have already filmed the first one and hope to catch the other in the coming months.
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-33.933 ... 312!8i6656
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-33.832 ... 312!8i6656

Yet another thing that I like is industrial spurs and the odd/interesting crossings and arrangements that they often have.
User avatar
freebrickproductions
Posts: 8449
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 11:12 am
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: Cutting down on the amount of pages we create

Post by freebrickproductions » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:45 pm

Also, any crossing with 8 inch lights, including 1990s Conrail installs, should be given slightly higher priority. Especially with the way that the Class Is and other railroads are trying to get rid of as many of the 8 inch lights as they can as quickly as they can.

Also, it's worth noting that 1990s Conrail installs are pretty unique in the fact that Conrail still installed 8 inch lights on those set-ups, when all but one other railroad had already swapped to 12 inch lights at the time (here in America, that is). The last railroad here in the US to still use 8 inch lights is the Strasburg Railroad.
They/Them for me, please.

Click here if you want to submit crossing photos to the site!

Avatar by runesprite on Twitter.
User avatar
ToledoRailfan
No Longer Associated With The Forum
Posts: 3315
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 2:38 pm

Re: Cutting down on the amount of pages we create

Post by ToledoRailfan » Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:08 pm

freebrickproductions wrote:Also, any crossing with 8 inch lights, including 1990s Conrail installs, should be given slightly higher priority. Especially with the way that the Class Is and other railroads are trying to get rid of as many of the 8 inch lights as they can as quickly as they can.
True but I don't think we need to get this crossing on the site when we already have these on the site:
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Ohio/Curtice/Meyers/
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Ohio/Genoa/163/
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Ohio/Perrysburg/Lime_City/
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Ohio/Toledo/Schneider/
freebrickproductions wrote: The last railroad here in the US to still use 8 inch lights is the Strasburg Railroad.
Not true. The Adrian & Blissfield in southeast Michigan used them when they upgraded this crossing. I wouldn't be surprised if there are other railroads too.
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Michigan/Blissfield/Lane/
User avatar
ToledoRailfan
No Longer Associated With The Forum
Posts: 3315
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 2:38 pm

Re: Cutting down on the amount of pages we create

Post by ToledoRailfan » Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:13 pm

Why did I think it would've been a good idea to put these on the site? :Confused:
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Michigan/Blis ... pholstery/
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Ohio/Perrysburg/Perrysburg/
User avatar
McK&H.Aust
Posts: 926
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 8:16 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Cutting down on the amount of pages we create

Post by McK&H.Aust » Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:28 pm

freebrickproductions wrote:Also, any crossing with 8 inch lights, including 1990s Conrail installs, should be given slightly higher priority. Especially with the way that the Class Is and other railroads are trying to get rid of as many of the 8 inch lights as they can as quickly as they can.

Also, it's worth noting that 1990s Conrail installs are pretty unique in the fact that Conrail still installed 8 inch lights on those set-ups, when all but one other railroad had already swapped to 12 inch lights at the time (here in America, that is). The last railroad here in the US to still use 8 inch lights is the Strasburg Railroad.
Conrail sure had some nice installations, guess I forgot about 8 inch lights being rare in the US :Blush:
Personally I would put that crossing on the site as it has WABCO gate mechs which the others don't have.
ToledoRailfan wrote:Why did I think it would've been a good idea to put these on the site? :Confused:
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Michigan/Blis ... pholstery/
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Ohio/Perrysburg/Perrysburg/
Although it doesn't have any special equipment, it's not often you see a pedestrian crossing out front of a court house, so it is kinda unique!
User avatar
freebrickproductions
Posts: 8449
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 11:12 am
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: Cutting down on the amount of pages we create

Post by freebrickproductions » Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:46 pm

ToledoRailfan wrote:
freebrickproductions wrote: The last railroad here in the US to still use 8 inch lights is the Strasburg Railroad.
Not true. The Adrian & Blissfield in southeast Michigan used them when they upgraded this crossing. I wouldn't be surprised if there are other railroads too.
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Michigan/Blissfield/Lane/
I had forgotten about that. Make that two railroads that still use 8 inch lights then.
McK&H.Aust wrote:
Personally I would put that crossing on the site as it has WABCO gate mechs which the others don't have.
It's also a 1980s (I believe, could be 1970s) Conrail install, though the original lights were replaced with Safetran 8 inchers.
They/Them for me, please.

Click here if you want to submit crossing photos to the site!

Avatar by runesprite on Twitter.
User avatar
ToledoRailfan
No Longer Associated With The Forum
Posts: 3315
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 2:38 pm

Re: Cutting down on the amount of pages we create

Post by ToledoRailfan » Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:54 pm

freebrickproductions wrote:
ToledoRailfan wrote:
freebrickproductions wrote: The last railroad here in the US to still use 8 inch lights is the Strasburg Railroad.
Not true. The Adrian & Blissfield in southeast Michigan used them when they upgraded this crossing. I wouldn't be surprised if there are other railroads too.
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Michigan/Blissfield/Lane/
I had forgotten about that. [/quote]

Thats why you shouldn't make assumptions! :Tongue2:
Last edited by ToledoRailfan on Wed Oct 11, 2017 8:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply