This Just In...

[rswinnerton]

Either that, or CSX is confused about the direction of superelevation...  

With CSX, nothing would suprise me.... I've seen worse with them.

[diezmon]

try posting to my new favorite site RPnet.. they'll tell you whether it's level or not 

 

[Sokramiketes]

Great, now that we've heard from Mr. Know It All, we can all move on with our lives.  Get a life.
Look at the picture in my sig.  The bridge is level as it should be... which way do the trees lean there, Robbo?

And don't forget to delete your post, some botanist might use that precious information for financial gain...

Lee

Trees look fairly plumb in your sig pic???  Should the bridge be level from that angle?  Looks like it's not a direct-on shot.  Horizontal things can change angle, but vertical lines should always be straight up and down.  Simple rules of perspective... as an architect that should have been formal training.

We can bash CSX all you want, but I guarantee the superelevation on that curve wasn't designed to let the train lean to the outside and make it more likely to fall off the track.

Take another look at Chris's fix of the same photo and tell me it doesn't look natural.

[Sokramiketes]

And seriously, the building in this shot is the leaning tower of Piza???

Though, maybe one leg is 6" shorter than the other, because you're leaning to your left in your sig photo.

[wm3798]

Perhaps it was cold and the glove I was wearing affected the damn camera angle.

The bridge is level.  The camera is sitting on a post at virtual eye level to the bridge, which was very close to parallel to the lens. I also rotated and cropped the photo to compensate for a slight tilt of the camera, aligning the bottom of the bridge with the bottom of the frame.The ribs on the bridge are vertical, and the friggin trees have a slight lean to the left.  Print it out and put a ruler on it if its that all-consuming.  On a steeply sloping terrain, the root system of the tree is not horizontal, nor is it perpendicular to the trunk. The weight of the tree, erosion, and the slope counter the trees' urge to reach straight up to the sun.  These slopes are not gentle.  If you look at a topo map around Ohiopyle and Meyersdale, you'll see drops of 1-200', and some greater, in the vicinity of the track.
Now, class is dismissed.
I can't wait till you post your next picture...  Sheesh!
Lee

[DKS]

a$$hat... trees don't grow in relation to the angle of the ground.  Especially ALL of them...

Oh, dear, then you'd better get out here and tell all these trees to straighten up.

[img width= height=]http://lh5.google.com/dks2855/R2K-ifwJTXI/AAAAAAAABsc/Sky4YvXcAdA/s400/IMG_1026.JPG[/img]

In addition to all the other stuff Prof. Lee noted above, another reason trees will tend to lean on a slope, especially if the slope faces south, is because they receive more light to the side facing the downslope. They produce more limbs on this side and, over time, the imbalanced growth causes them to lean.

Also... the bridge in Lee's sig photo is approximately one pixel higher on the left than the right. When the image is corrected for this, the trees actually lean more.

[diezmon]

And seriously, the building in this shot is the leaning tower of Piza???

maybe it is.  Look at the POLES.. they're plumb.. 

[3rdrail]

Here at the beach, we have scrub oaks that grow at a 45 degree angle away from the prevailing wind off the Gulf - you'll find this anywhere the winds are prevailingly in one direction.

As to the slanting building and "plumb" poles, those poles should have a "rake" to the left as heavy wires appear to only head off to the right. Around here, the power lines parallel to the Gulf all also lean away from the Gulf, thanks to about a half dozen hurricanes over the years. OTOH, there's only one old beach house that leans like the building in the photo.

[Sokramiketes]

a$$hat... trees don't grow in relation to the angle of the ground.  Especially ALL of them...

Oh, dear, then you'd better get out here and tell all these trees to straighten up.

[img width= height=]http://lh5.google.com/dks2855/R2K-ifwJTXI/AAAAAAAABsc/Sky4YvXcAdA/s400/IMG_1026.JPG[/img]

In addition to all the other stuff Prof. Lee noted above, another reason trees will tend to lean on a slope, especially if the slope faces south, is because they receive more light to the side facing the downslope. They produce more limbs on this side and, over time, the imbalanced growth causes them to lean.

Also... the bridge in Lee's sig photo is approximately one pixel higher on the left than the right. When the image is corrected for this, the trees actually lean more.

David, seriously... the photo that Robbman is talking about has multiple hillsides.  If we follow this rule of thumb, then the trees on the left hill should lean to the right, the trees in back should be leaning toward the viewer, and the trees on the right hill side should be leaning left.  I'm not going to argue that trees lean due to the hillside, but Robbman clearly said that "all trees" which makes sense when there's multiple different hill sides in the photograph.

Look at Chris's picture!  It's basically fixed, though he made the locomotive level, and due to the superelevated curve, should be leaning slightly to the left.   Regardless, it's much improved.  The trees make sense, the super elevation is the clincher, and the original photo is plain wrong no matter how you argue tree growth.  Deal with it, Robbman wins again.

And now I'm waiting for the David K. Smith patented, engineered, blog entry defined, explanation on why tree growth caused the building foundation to fail in the first photo.

Man, one comment about how a photo could be easily straightened in photoshop and it turns into a lemming party on trying to prove Robbman wrong.  I have yet to see someone take him on and win... and I hate him more than all of you combined, so there.   ;D

[wm3798]

But while Mr. Diesel Detail was nitpicking trees, he completely overlooked the fact that the font on the two number boards don't match!
It took me an hour to photo shop that in just to mess with his head!

Yes, the Meyersdale picture is crooked.  No doubt about that.  I had just leapt from the car as the train reached the previous grade crossing.  For the record, I put all of these up at my hotel room that night, and was placing them more as current events than as art.  Think of it as the heat of battle.

And also for the record, Robbman was DEAD WRONG about trees.  I'll take that score, thank you.  Here endeth the pissing contest.

Lee

[diezmon]

Lee, I hope you don't mind but I took it upon myself to fix that first picture for you.

 ;D ;D ;D 

[wm3798]

That's just the touch I was looking for.
Oh and while we're at it, you better start piling on this guy, too.  Same location, same direction, higher angle and I'll be damned if it doesn't look like those cars are leaning to the outside of the curve...
http://www.railpictures.net/images/images2/k/Keystone.jpg.39745.jpg

Lee

[DKS]

And now I'm waiting for the David K. Smith patented, engineered, blog entry defined, explanation on why tree growth caused the building foundation to fail in the first photo.

Don't know what you're smokin', but all I was doing was addressing one remark by Mr. Robbman about trees that seemed to be a bit off the mark. I leave it to your superior understanding of things as to what was wrong with any of the photos in discussion.

[FrankCampagna]

Aaah, it's a great hobby, isn't it : . I liked the photo, Lee. I like any train photo. Thanks. BTW, I've been telling the trees in my back yard to straighten up, but "I talk to the trees, but they don't listen to me......." Frank

[Robbman]

But while Mr. Diesel Detail was nitpicking trees, he completely overlooked the fact that the font on the two number boards don't match!
And also for the record, Robbman was DEAD WRONG about trees.  I'll take that score, thank you.  Here endeth the pissing contest.
Lee

Maybe in your little fantasy world...