"The Roundhouse" podcast about the WW&F

[Mike Fox]

For those who would like to listen, this is a podcast that was done recently about our museum. Steve Piwowarski tells about the history of the museum and a little of Maine Two Foot history, and recent high points of the museum. 58 minutes long, but give a listen.

https://theroundhousepodcast.com/?powerpress_pinw=2060-podcast

[Wayne Laepple]

Steve did a fine job in this podcast. He represented the WW&F well and was well spoken in his replies to the host's questions.

[Bob Holmes]

Nicely done Steve!

[ALAIN DELASSUS]

Fine job Steve. As every old retiree I've an hectic schedule so I ve not listened to the whole intervew yet. But I fully agree with what you said (06.40) when you first came over to Shipscot campus " Wow this is something utterly special" and what struck you most was the attention to the details,which made the difference with others railway preservation organizations and finally made you come back and stay. It was exactly what I felt  when I discovered on WW&F fb and website the outstanding goal  and work of the volunteers and  the way they wanted to achieve it  always sticking to the historical truth hence their commitment to details in rebuilding the railway and operating it, which was the reason I decided on joining WW&F.

[Bill Baskerville]

Alain,

What a, well deserved, nice complement for Steve.  Also, a well worded complement to the whole WW&F organization and their accomplishments.

[Stephen Piwowarski]

Thanks for the compliments folks, but I would have very little to talk about if it wasn't for the hard work that everybody puts in day in and day out to, as Steve Lennox says, "leave the Railroad a little better and a little safer."

Best,
Steve

[Joe Fox]

Very interesting to listen to, and I found it very interesting. It’s always neat to hear how others started volunteering. Many view the two footers as toy like, and it was great to listen to hopefully educate others on not only the efforts we put forth, but also how important the original railway was.

[Benjamin Richards]

"Is this a real train?" is among the top 5 questions visitors ask. (Or ask me, anyway.)

[Graham Buxton]

"Is this a real train?" is among the top 5 questions visitors ask.

So what do you tell them? 

[Steve Leet]

As a 29 year Rev War reenactor the most often question is - is that a real fill in the blank.
the question is asked because they have just encountered something the do not understand and feel the need to say something - so that is the question asked. is that a real campfire? is that what you are having for dinner? is that a real gun, is that a real baby and on and on it goes.

[Benjamin Richards]

That is insightful. I guess specific to the train, most folks' exposure to steam power these days is quite folklore-ish: maybe a C.P. Huntingdon at the amusement park, or Awdry's The Railway Series. Or other more blasphemous incantations...

It's not readily apparent that in its day, the WW&F was as plain and ordinary as the car they drove in. Every town had a RR, and those that didn't were trying mighty hard to change that fact.

"Is that a real campfire?" Now THERE'S a knee slapper. 

[Stephen Piwowarski]

Agreed, very insightful. Thank you Steve. I always thought of that question as getting at what Joe said earlier; that is, 'real' train versus 'toy' train. But I had never before considered that perspective, and its a real paradigm shift for me. Thanks Steve!

[Joe Fox]

Its fun to see the awe in people’s faces when you tell them how fast the trains used to go. 😁 Course then the common question is, why don’t you go that fast now? To which a nice response is the slower pace allows for a relaxing trip back to yesteryear. And the average 15mph we travel is a good speed for everyone to look at the scenery and enjoy themselves.

[Stephen Piwowarski]

...Which is an interesting point Joe. I know some of the ‘recorded’ stories of speeds on the WW&F, but I get the sense that typical speeds on the majority of the line were probably comparable to our 25mph limit or less.

In studying the old timetables lately, I’ve noticed that the WW&F schedule always allowed for more time northbound Alna Center to Head Tide, rather than Southbound, which I found surprising due to the mountain grade.

Do you think that is because they stopped to set brakes at Top of Mountain or some similar place or, conversely, because they expected to make a run at the hill coming out of Head Tide, so they’d cover the mountain relatively quickly. I also can’t get a sense of how the TT allowed for Loading and unloading LCL or switching out cars.

[Benjamin Richards]

I think it's probably more the need to set retainers northbound, than higher speeds southbound. The mathematics can be summarized like this: You always lose more time stopping than you can make up for by speeding. If you are going 20mph, and you stop for 3 minutes, you lose 1 mile. To regain your schedule, you need to double your speed (40 mph) for an equal time (3 min), and it takes twice the distance (2 miles). If you can only increase your speed by 50% (30 mph), you need 6 minutes and 3 miles to regain schedule.

I looked through the timetables in Jones & Register, and although there are only four examples, I found a couple of intricacies worth pointing out:

- In 1910, the southbound timings (in minutes) are 8, 10, 7, while the northbound timings are 7, 12, 8. Depending on which trains you pair up, you can make NB equal to or even faster than SB.
- The caption on p.354 makes the following assertion: "...the differences in the schedules undoubtedly were based on the amount of work each mixed train normally was expected to do."
- Alna Center is a flag stop, so the timing is going to be squidgy at that point anyway. I wonder what happens when you look at timings from SS to Head Tide.