0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Yes, The MILW used river gravel for ballast. The two explanations I've read are :They were cheap, and didn't want to pay for the good stuff. Wouldn't surprise me a bit, since the also used uncreosoted poles for the electrification. Then added "stub" poles to hold the originals up, when they rotted off at the ground.The second reason was that "crushed rock is sharp, and wears the ties out faster". Since one of the main purposes of ballast is to hold the tie in place, deliberately using ballast that won't do that seems unlikely. But, maybe, it's another sign of being cheap. They figured rough track was worth it to not have to buy new ties as often!Off topic, but an article years ago, in the early 70s, by an EMD traveling engineer sent to the Pacific Extension to help set up some new SD40-2s, had his comments on the track and wires. He wasn't impressed by the track, but noted that the wire wasn't zig-zagged like European railroads do, to spread the wear on the pantograph. After a few cab rides in his new diesels, trailing the electrics, he understood why. The Europeans have good track, so if the wire stayed centered, it would wear a groove in the contact shoe. The Milwaukee's track was so bad that the rocking of the loco kept the pantograph itself moving, so the wire couldn't stay in one place. Plus, the poles were crooked enough that the wire often wasn't centered anyway! He was very relieved to go back to Illinois without experiencing at least one derailment.