South western USA (CA, UT, AR) landscapes ?

On 22 Jan 2007 15:42:35 -0800, "PeterL"
wrote:

Hatunen wrote:

Using the top deck of the Bay Bridge to get to Berkeley is pretty
stupid, though,

Not so stupid because at one time the top deck was two ways.

Not in 1967, though. The Key Line tracks were gone.


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

Hatunen wrote:
On 22 Jan 2007 15:42:35 -0800, "PeterL"
wrote:

Hatunen wrote:

Using the top deck of the Bay Bridge to get to Berkeley is pretty
stupid, though,

Not so stupid because at one time the top deck was two ways.

Not in 1967, though. The Key Line tracks were gone.

The movie came out in 1967. But did they say what year the events took
place?

Parenthetically, the final scene at the church was shot at a church in
LaVerne, CA. Locals refer to that church as the Graduate Church.




--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

PeterL wrote:
at one time the top deck was two ways.

Both decks were two/way. The lower was for cars, buses, trucks, and
the Key System's street cars.

A few years ago some idiot proposed a multi-million dollar study to
learn whether rail could be put on the San Francisco Bay Bridge! Duh-uh.

-- __________________________________________________ ______________
San Francisco is awesome -- George Max
http://geocities.com/dancefest/ --- http://geocities.com/iconoc/
ICQ: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 ------- IClast at Gmail com

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 04:15:33 -0800, Icono Clast
wrote:

PeterL wrote:
at one time the top deck was two ways.

Both decks were two/way. The lower was for cars, buses, trucks, and
the Key System's street cars.

A few years ago some idiot proposed a multi-million dollar study to
learn whether rail could be put on the San Francisco Bay Bridge! Duh-uh.

Not as dumb as it seems when you haven't thought about it. While
the lower deck could obviously be made to carry the weight of a
light rail system, since it one had, it would take quite a study
to determine whether the old support systems were intact enough
and whther it would be cost effective to restore it all and to
remove a couple of lanes of traffic. And, of course, there's the
problem that two-way traffic would have to be restored since the
lanes taken out of service for rail would be on the lower deck
which would restrict traffic leaving SF. Given the crowding on
the bridge 24x7, crowding that didn't exist fifty years ago,
there's a serious question about the loss of traffic lanes.

BTW, is the new east span designed for the possible addition of
rail?


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

Hatunen wrote:
Icono Clast wrote:
PeterL wrote:
at one time the top deck was two ways.
Both decks were two/way. The lower was for cars, buses, trucks,
and the Key System's street cars.

A few years ago some idiot proposed a multi-million dollar study
to learn whether rail could be put on the San Francisco Bay
Bridge! Duh-uh.

Not as dumb as it seems when you haven't thought about it. While
the lower deck could obviously be made to carry the weight of a
light rail system, since it one had, it would take quite a study
to determine whether the old support systems were intact enough
and whther it would be cost effective to restore it all and to
remove a couple of lanes of traffic.

See? Your area of expertise!

And, of course, there's the problem that two-way traffic would
have to be restored since the lanes taken out of service for rail
would be on the lower deck which would restrict traffic leaving
SF.

Would they have to be? The five lanes we have now aren't wide but it
seems to me that if a streetcar is about ninety inches wide and a
barrier would add another six inches, the five lanes could be
narrowed nineteen inches. Whoops, they'd be much too narrow and
dangerous. I was thinking one direction's rail atop and the other's
below. We'd lose a lane each way no matter what.

BTW, is the new east span designed for the possible addition of
rail?

I don't know. According to Paul Verdier, the Golden Gate Bridge was
designed to carry a monorail.

-- __________________________________________________ ______________
A San Franciscan in 47.452 mile² San Francisco.
http://geocities.com/dancefest/ --- http://geocities.com/iconoc/
ICQ: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 ------- IClast at Gmail com


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 04:03:30 -0800, Icono Clast
wrote:

Hatunen wrote:
Icono Clast wrote:
PeterL wrote:
at one time the top deck was two ways.
Both decks were two/way. The lower was for cars, buses, trucks,
and the Key System's street cars.

A few years ago some idiot proposed a multi-million dollar study
to learn whether rail could be put on the San Francisco Bay
Bridge! Duh-uh.

Not as dumb as it seems when you haven't thought about it. While
the lower deck could obviously be made to carry the weight of a
light rail system, since it one had, it would take quite a study
to determine whether the old support systems were intact enough
and whther it would be cost effective to restore it all and to
remove a couple of lanes of traffic.

See? Your area of expertise!

And, of course, there's the problem that two-way traffic would
have to be restored since the lanes taken out of service for rail
would be on the lower deck which would restrict traffic leaving
SF.

Would they have to be? The five lanes we have now aren't wide but it
seems to me that if a streetcar is about ninety inches wide and a
barrier would add another six inches, the five lanes could be
narrowed nineteen inches. Whoops, they'd be much too narrow and
dangerous. I was thinking one direction's rail atop and the other's
below.

The bridge wasn't originally designed for rail on the top deck.
Although, when you come right down to it, light rail might be
lighter in weight than the cars displaced by the tracks and
rolling stock used on the bridge. Cars aren't as heavy as one
usually thinks. Remember how the pedestrian load on the Golden
Gate Bridge flattened the curvature of the bridge the day they
opened it to pedestrians only?

We'd lose a lane each way no matter what.

BTW, is the new east span designed for the possible addition of
rail?

I don't know. According to Paul Verdier, the Golden Gate Bridge was
designed to carry a monorail.

In the 1930s? Seems unlikely.



--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

Hello, Hatunen!
You wrote on Wed, 24 Jan 2007 08:54:09 -0700:

?? Hatunen wrote:
??
?? I don't know. According to Paul Verdier, the Golden Gate
?? Bridge was designed to carry a monorail.

H In the 1930s? Seems unlikely.

I had heard that rail track was originally intended but not that
a monorail was proposed. There was a monorail train in Germany
in the 30s.

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 10:58:16 -0500, "James Silverton"
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not wrote:

Hello, Hatunen!
You wrote on Wed, 24 Jan 2007 08:54:09 -0700:

?? Hatunen wrote:
??
?? I don't know. According to Paul Verdier, the Golden Gate
?? Bridge was designed to carry a monorail.

H In the 1930s? Seems unlikely.

I had heard that rail track was originally intended but not that
a monorail was proposed. There was a monorail train in Germany
in the 30s.

At Wuppertal. It was built back near 1901. I was on a
DeutscheBahn ICE passing by Wuppertal when I realized it was
where the monorail was when i saw the "tracks". The rails sort of
go up and down the river. I wanted so much to get off the ICE for
an hour or so. (My brother, a rial buff, has ridden it.)

http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/Wuprtal.html

But I still would doubt that teh original design of the GGB
included provision for a monorail.

The original plan for BART had BART using the GGB for the
northern line.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

wrote in message
ups.com...
Hi,

Three years ago I have visited south western USA. (Vegas, Bryce Canyon,
Canyonlands, Monument Valley, Grand Canyon). This year I will be in
Vegas too (begining of March) and I have about 6-7 days to fill.
This time I am considering Death Valley, Yosemite NP, and maybe
canyonlands one more time.

Do you have any suggestions where should I go this time ? Mostly I am
interested in landscapes.

Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

If someone is interested in gallery from last trip here is some
pictures:
http://hubi.net.pl/gallery/usa2004/usa2004.html

best regards,
Hubert


Great pics!