 |
Re: Concrete Posts on SP Subsidiary Problem--Historians?
Author: James Bradley, Jr.
Date: 09-23-2015 - 16:56
To my knowledge...SP never used concrete mileposts or culvert markers. SP used wooden posts and signs for almost everything, although the sign plates themselves were later made of metal instead of wood.
The only time I'm aware of that SP stamped anything in concrete was for tunnel entrances and bridge abutments. Occasionally, you will find a date stamped directly into a culver, but not on a separate post.
If the concrete milepost is in its original location, and it is an original milepost from the railroad (and not a replica), the line was most likely a subsidiary of SP or a line from a former railroad that the SP purchased.
Where is the line that you saw the concrete milepost? A location would help identify the history of that specific line. Just because the line was SP in the 1980's doesn't mean that it was always SP. Just to give an example...the UP Tracy Sub (former SP Mococo line) near my home was actually built by an entirely different railroad, then later absorbed into the SP.
The only time I'm aware of that SP stamped anything in concrete was for tunnel entrances and bridge abutments. Occasionally, you will find a date stamped directly into a culver, but not on a separate post.
If the concrete milepost is in its original location, and it is an original milepost from the railroad (and not a replica), the line was most likely a subsidiary of SP or a line from a former railroad that the SP purchased.
Where is the line that you saw the concrete milepost? A location would help identify the history of that specific line. Just because the line was SP in the 1980's doesn't mean that it was always SP. Just to give an example...the UP Tracy Sub (former SP Mococo line) near my home was actually built by an entirely different railroad, then later absorbed into the SP.
