Less Than Helpful Description

[+Red_Cedars]

I went looking for SY0069. Found some of the reference landmarks in the description, but couldn't find the mark because I didn't know how long "2 rails south" was. The rest of the description could have been anywhere. This mark is along an active but not terribly busy railroad track. The entire railroad grade is made up of granite blocks (as described) and the area is thoroughly covered in large gravel. It'd really help to have a better idea as to where to dig.

 

Any thoughts? How long is "2 rails south"?

 

R_C

[+ddnutzy]

One of the rails should have a joint close to the square concrete box. Count down two joints to get two rails. Usually the track joints are staggard so that the train wheels don't hit the joints of each track at the same time. The 12 1/2 and 9 1/2 will be on that tracks on the other side from the concrete box. Measure 10.2 ft from the right rail and you should be in the area. A metal detector will help.

[holograph]

There have been threads in the past that discussed "rails" as a unit of measure. It's a problem when the railroad is abandoned and the rails are gone. Roughly, a rail is anything from afout 25 fee to 35 feet, depending on the railroad. I recently found KV1267 that was described "5 rails south" of an intersection to be about 120 feet.

[Z15]

I seem to recall someone mentioning 33 ft for a length of rail. But take that with a grain of salt, its been 40 yrs since first described and the rails could have been changed.

[+bicknell]

My second hobby is model trains, so perhaps I can help.

 

The most common length for segmented rail is 39 feet. The reason? It had to fit onto 40' rail cars for transport. If you're pre-1900, 31 feet was popular because it fit on the early 33' rail cars. Of course, other sizes were seen, it was far from a "standard" thing.

 

If it's a line seeing any sort of regular traffic today that rail has likely been replaced with continuously welded rail. Note, all rail has a date stamped in it, so look at the side of it. If the date is after the last recovery report, well, you know.

 

Remember, railroads are private property (and, for those interested under federal law jurisdiction), and you want to be darn sure you can get clear of the tracks quickly. A modern locomotive can be amazingly quite coming up if there's no crossing or other reason to whistle nearby, and often there is very little space beside the tracks to jump off somewhere. Don't get squished.

[+Red_Cedars]

My second hobby is model trains, so perhaps I can help.

 

The most common length for segmented rail is 39 feet. The reason? It had to fit onto 40' rail cars for transport. . . .

If it's a line seeing any sort of regular traffic today that rail has likely been replaced with continuously welded rail.

 

. . .

 

Don't get squished.

Thanks for the info. When I read the description, I was figuring on finding some obvious sign of "rail joints" or something. When I got there, I found a grand total of about 1 joint per roughly 300 feet of track or so. I figured surely they'd have chosen closer landmarks than that. I suspect it is as you say, now continuous track of some sort.

 

The track IS active. Amtrack came by during my search. But there is plenty of room to get well clear, and yes, it is VITALLY important to keep your eyes open. But I used to work on an aircraft carrier flight deck, so I'm rather used to that.

 

So, could I then use the 33 or 39 foot idea as a baseline for where to start looking? It really doesn't help much, given the original data says "about 2 rails" which could mean just about anything I suppose. That's still a lot of heavy gravel to remove.

 

R_C

[Bill93]

You have another distance clue on this data sheet; the same distance is given in poles and rails. Poles are telegraph poles, which were usually placed at a constant measured spacing in open country, plus some extra ones where needed for corners and to clear obstacles. Different railroads used different pole spacing, as was appropriate for the average type of wood, weight of lines, and terrain in the general area. Around here the most common was 40 poles to the mile, 132 ft, but I've heard of other numbers being used.

 

If we take 3-3/4 POLES times 132 feet and divide by 12 1/2 RAILS we get 39.6 feet per rail. So the 39 foot rail could have been the standard there and it was really 3.69 pole spacings eyeballed at 3-3/4.

 

Or it could have been a 33 foot rail which exactly makes 48 poles to the mile.

 

See if you can identify some remaining poles along this line and measure the average spacing using your GPS. Watch out for that occasional closer spacing.

 

Also, if you can find other benchmarks along this line, or even piece together their descriptions, you may be able to confirm the pole spacing, and maybe even deduce where the mile posts were.

 

After you get it narrowed down, a metal detector may be the best hope.

 

Near a RR line, active or torn out, you will find lots of discarded iron hardware, and if unlucky, iron-bearing slag used as roadbed ballast. But it still can narrow down the search, especially if the disk is buried only a few inches.

 

If you get hold of a metal detector with some ferrous-nonferrous discriminating capability. practice with an aluminum pop can and and anything iron of similar size. See how far above the objects you can detect them and tell the difference between them. My detector doesn't have particularly good discrimination but I wouldn't travel without it.

 

In some parts of the country being on a rail ROW is more of a problem than in others. But no matter where, if a train crew reports someone digging near the rail it could create more excitement than you want. Don't push your luck.

[+bicknell]

If we take 3-3/4 POLES times 132 feet and divide by 12 1/2 RAILS we get 39.6 feet per rail. So the 39 foot rail could have been the standard there and it was really 3.69 pole spacings eyeballed at 3-3/4.

 

I like this math. I'll also point out, it's 12 1/2 rails from the mile post, and 2 rails from the square concrete box. So, get the distance with your GPS from the mile post to the concrete box, divide by 10.5. That's a rail.

 

It's likely the poles are still there, so you should be able to identify E 18. They probably go in a sequence if you can't get up close to the one closest to the mark.

 

I too would be extremely leary of digging on a railroad. Crews will probably not call you in for walking, but in the post 9/11 world digging will probably get you radioed in. If there's a railroad cop near by he's going to stop and ask a bunch of questions...

[evenfall]

Red,

 

I know that area, This is the mainline between Seattle and Everett. BNSF has pulled all the 39 ft rail years ago, it is all welded rail now, so you will have to go with 39 foot estimates and pace it off. Be careful of the mile posts. They replace them from time to time and do not put them back in the same place. I have seen them used in many descriptions and I rarely find them in the right or described place. Yu will be in the 2100 foot range, south of Picnic Point road. You will be trespassing on BNSF right of way, and they will not be friendly if they catch you.

 

As for the poles... BNSF Abandoned the telegraph years ago, It is a Huge Motorola Radio system with tone repeaters now, Standard AAR radio frequency allocations, in the 161 Mhz VHF range, You can listen in to all of it if you program all the AAR channels on a scanner and scan them. Everything else is going fiber optic. The old Telegraph poles are rotting off and falling down. There are occasional land slides in that area so it is hard to say what is still in tact for old poles.

 

If you go and can find it, take a GPS waypoint and see if you can figure a way to update the description. Your hunt may be the key to this stations future.

 

Good luck!

 

Rob

Edited June 20, 2005 by evenfall

[mloser]

A bit more on this from a guy who has recovered about 50 marks along railways (some pretty dang active, but I keep my eyes open both for trains and railroad police).

 

First, as you discovered, "rails" are pretty useless from a number of perspectives. First, your railroad, like most operating railroads, has welded rail. Bicknell is correct in his description of rail lengths--33 and 39 feet are very common lengths, so you can use those lengths as calculation points, but can't count on anything. (A little side fact: Welded rail, oddly enough, instead of being rolled as one hugely long rail and used that way, is actually cut into shorter lengths (39 feet rings a bell, but I won't guarantee that) and then welded to make lengths to the railroad's requirements. I am sure there are reasons why they just don't roll 200 foot lengths, but I am not at all aware of them.)

 

Second, you will quite likely find the poles in place. Almost all of the railroad roadbeds I have searched along have had the poles in place. One or two have had them removed and a couple have had them cut down to "stumps", but still visible.

 

Third, you may or may not find the milepost. When I have found a reference to a milepost I have usually found it, but mentions of "fractional" mileposts have never turned anything up. Quite often the milepost will be renumbered, but the original post will remain. Historically these were large cast iron or concrete posts set beside the tracks. They were used both as mile markers and as a way to tell train speed when steam engines didn't have speedometers, so they were very important and treated as such.

 

Fourth, since the concrete box remains you can pace off the distance without serious measurement, as long as the poles remain. Just walk a guessed distance from the box until you are across the tracks from a pole. Don't worry about the number on the pole. While my first guess is that pole E 18 is a commercial power pole and NOT a railroad pole (I don't recall seeing any numbers on railroad poles), a check of aerial photos of the area show no real reason for a commercial power pole in that location, so maybe the GN Railroad DID number theirs.

 

My method would be: research the location using topo maps and aerial photos. The topo map shows the mark a bit northwest of the indicated coords, not rare in scaled marks. Given that info, I would go to the location, use my GPSr to get to the indicatioed coords, then cross the tracks and head north a bit, keeping an eye out for the box and any poles across the tracks. I would be looking for a larger-than-average granite block in the seawall. I am not familiar with seawalls. The location of the mark as being 2 feet below track level means it might be covered by ballast, dirt, sand, or anything, so it may be hard to find. I would measure 10.2 feet from the rail, taking into account that the rails maybe have been moved at some point, so I would not put 100 percent stock in that measurement, but simply use it as a guide to walk along the seawall with my eyes open. If my walkaround method didn't work I might try to measure from the pole, but I am not telling YOU to do that. It is one of two "actual" measurements, however and the place where the two measurements coincide would give you a limited search area.

 

By the way, is there ANY chance this granite block got shifted from wave action? If you find the mark and it is anything but LEVEL, it most likely has been moved in some way and its accuracy would be suspect.

 

I have added a log to the mark with a aerial photo showing where I think the station may be at SY0069 Aerial Photo

 

Matt

[+bicknell]

First, as you discovered, "rails" are pretty useless from a number of perspectives. First, your railroad, like most operating railroads, has welded rail. Bicknell is correct in his description of rail lengths--33 and 39 feet are very common lengths, so you can use those lengths as calculation points, but can't count on anything. (A little side fact: Welded rail, oddly enough, instead of being rolled as one hugely long rail and used that way, is actually cut into shorter lengths (39 feet rings a bell, but I won't guarantee that) and then welded to make lengths to the railroad's requirements. I am sure there are reasons why they just don't roll 200 foot lengths, but I am not at all aware of them.)

Welded rail is typically produced by the mill in either 39' foot lengths, or 85 foot lengths (to go in 86' box cars, or on 89' flat cars). It's then shipped to the railroad. The railroad typically then welds them in a shop into 200-1000' lengths, depending on the railroad and need. In this process they are put on special trains, like this. Depending on the conditions the rail is then bolted at the joints for expansion, or welded into even longer segments if the climate allows on site.

 

As for the other measurements, a couple of thoughts: Multi-track lines were moved wider apart over time. Loads have gotten larger. Lines that were originally 3-4 tracks are now usually two, with them wider apart. Dual track lines have been widened. Track generally gets higher over time as well, as it's replaced they build up the road bed, and often as bridges have been upgraded over time they got taller on the same abutments causing the surrounding track to be raised as well.

 

Also, for what it's worth, railroads typically really work tuesday-saturday at full schedule, with a variety of "business week" stuff on monday. Sunday on most roads is first shift only except for Amtrak and specials, unless you're on an extremely busy line.

[+Red_Cedars]

Thanks to all who have replied.

 

I think I'm going to give this mark one last chance. The poles are gone so any info based on them will be mostly useless. The only reliable reference from the description is the concrete box with a metal top. I found that and plan to measure off from it. I figure my search area will be from 70 to 90 feet south of the box, 10 feet west of the rails in the granite boulders that make up the rail bed. I plan to go back some time later this week and will post my findings.

 

Thanks again!

 

R_C

[+Red_Cedars]

Just went to the Geocaching site for SY0069 and saw that mloser has posted an arial photo. THANKS!!! I quite agree with your notations, based on the additional info from the forums. In fact, you can just make out the area with the "concrete box with a metal top" appropriately located as well. It sure would be difficult to identify from the arial photo, but knowing what and where it is, its quite obvious in the photo.

 

Cool. One more tool. I'm hoping to get out there tomorrow.

 

R_C

[+Red_Cedars]

Well, its a good thing today was such a nice day for benchmark hunting. That was the high point of my renewed search. However, with more information, I'm much more confident in logging this one officially as "not found".

 

I've posted details and pictures at the Geocaching site for SY0069.

 

Thanks again to everyone for their help and advise. I had a really good time looking for this mark and learned a bit in the process. I guess that's what this is really all about anyway. If you can put an earnest effort into finding a mark, even a "did not find" is a positive experiance.

 

R_C

[mloser]

You "done good" as my dad always used to say (he knew it was bad English but it was a family joke). You did your research, measured and looked carefully.

 

You are quite possibly right about the seawall. Why anyone would set a benchmark on a boulder used to hold back the sea is beyond me. They would have been better off setting it in a concrete post to the inside of the tracks.

 

I would feel comfortable with a Not Found on this after the work you did. The mark MAY still be there, but if it is finding it would be very difficult and probably not worth the effort, since it could be in a 20 foot length along the tracks and under a lot of ballast/rocks.

 

I would say if you wanted to submit to the NGS you could safely do so after the work you put in, but may want to mention what you found--the rails are welded, there are no poles left, the seawall is covered by ballast. I would say "Mark searched for but not located. May be covered by ballast. Evidence at the area suggest the seawall has been changed or rebuilt. Rails are welded so lengths cannot be determined. Poles removed."

 

Put yourself in a surveyor's position. Do you want a simple "Not found", which could be due to a number of circumstances, not least of which is the recoverer's incompetence, or a description of the location and why the mark was not found? The more you say the easier a future hunter can determine if a re-hunt is worth the effort.

 

I just noticed something... there is a pole behind the concrete box. If that is part of a line of poles it may result in you finding E 18 (don't expect it to be numbered anymore though).

[Bill93]

Looks like you've done about everything I would, except maybe a little closer look for poles/stumps. My armchair interpretation is that, as Bicknell mentioned the track is further west than it used to be, and the disk most likely survives under what is now more than 2 feet of gravel. Your picture of the "likely location" looks very much like it fits that theory.

[+Red_Cedars]

I just noticed something... there is a pole behind the concrete box. If that is part of a line of poles it may result in you finding E 18 (don't expect it to be numbered anymore though).

Poles.

 

Yeah. But that's the only one down the slope by the tracks. I checked it on my first visit, but found no identifying markings. There is, oddly, what appears to be a meter housing mounted to it. There are poles (servicing the houses) lining the road above, but they're not numbered anything like "E18".

 

I was considering looking for pole/stumps as you suggest, Bill, but the dense vegitation in the area would have made for a miserable afternoon. This IS supposed to be a FUN hobby, after all. And I'd already convinced myself that I wasn't going to find the mark, regardless.

 

R_C

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

Save that one for KOOL weather.

[Z15]

There were some marks I could not find last year due to tall grass, ferns, brush etc. The only way to find them would have been to trip over them. But in early spring this year before the grass even turned green, I took a drive down this road and every mark that I could not locate (due to vague decription) was easy to spot from the truck. All the vegatation was dead and compressed down from 2-5 ft of snow on it all winter and the conc posts were sticking above the crap, even a inch or two was more visible. I spent up to a hour last year on 1 mark trying to pin down the location from the old desc. only to find out I was about 1000 ft off due to curve corrections in the road making it shorter in length which I would have never know had I not found the mark with ease this spring.

 

Save the tough ones for early spring, can be a lot easier to find.

[+Red_Cedars]

I would say if you wanted to submit to the NGS you could safely do so after the work you put in, but may want to mention what you found--the rails are welded, there are no poles left, the seawall is covered by ballast. I would say "Mark searched for but not located. May be covered by ballast. Evidence at the area suggest the seawall has been changed or rebuilt. Rails are welded so lengths cannot be determined. Poles removed."

 

Put yourself in a surveyor's position. Do you want a simple "Not found", which could be due to a number of circumstances, not least of which is the recoverer's incompetence, or a description of the location and why the mark was not found? The more you say the easier a future hunter can determine if a re-hunt is worth the effort.

Harumph.

 

I should have read here before I logged it at NGS. I'd already logged a simple "Not Found" for this. Should I add a follow up log with more detail? I like the way you have it worded and it makes perfect sense for that to be added to the datasheet.

 

R_C