We got word today that starting Sept 12th BNSF will begin offering intermodal service between the PNW [Seattle,Portland] and Texas [Dallas, Houston].
Nice to see services expanding instead of contracting!
I figure they'll run via Spokane - Casper - Pueblo - Amarillo
What once was is now again...return of the old ATSF 594/495 paired set.
On a related note:
Hanjin bankrupt
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm On a related note: Hanjin bankrupt
Now I have an excuse to go check some more! Perfect!
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
MarknLisa We got word today that starting Sept 12th BNSF will begin offering intermodal service between the PNW [Seattle,Portland] and Texas [Dallas, Houston]. Nice to see services expanding instead of contracting! I figure they'll run via Spokane - Casper - Pueblo - Amarillo
BNSF's present intermodal map shows all your routing covered by existing IM service, except Denver-Amarillo. I wonder if both routes south of Pueblo are cleared for double-stack?
http://www.bnsf.com/customers/pdf/maps/small-intermodal-map.pdf
MidlandMike MarknLisa We got word today that starting Sept 12th BNSF will begin offering intermodal service between the PNW [Seattle,Portland] and Texas [Dallas, Houston]. Nice to see services expanding instead of contracting! I figure they'll run via Spokane - Casper - Pueblo - Amarillo BNSF's present intermodal map shows all your routing covered by existing IM service, except Denver-Amarillo. I wonder if both routes south of Pueblo are cleared for double-stack? http://www.bnsf.com/customers/pdf/maps/small-intermodal-map.pdf
We currenlty have to route via Chicago. This will save a lot of time and be more cost competitve.
According to the map accompanying BNSF's news release, these trains won't run through Casper. Instead, they're shown running via Sheridan-Gillette-Bridger Jct. Last thing BNSF wants to do is schedule its hot new traffic across a TWC route featuring 40mph running, plus even slower running through curvaceous places like Wind River Canyon (near Thermopolis), which is routinely hit by rock/dirt/mud slides. Of course, that won't stop MRL from running them via its TWC 10th Sub between Paradise and DeSmet, MT.
Plenty of capacity through the Powder River Basin now. Might as well use it!
Bruce Kelly According to the map accompanying BNSF's news release, these trains won't run through Casper. Instead, they're shown running via Sheridan-Gillette-Bridger Jct. Last thing BNSF wants to do is schedule its hot new traffic across a TWC route featuring 40mph running, plus even slower running through curvaceous places like Wind River Canyon (near Thermopolis), which is routinely hit by rock/dirt/mud slides. Of course, that won't stop MRL from running them via its TWC 10th Sub between Paradise and DeSmet, MT.
That map answers my earlier question, as to whether Denver-Amarillo had double stack clearance.
I rode MRL in 1999 on the Montana Rockies Tour train. I remember a working semaphore in the segment east of Paradise. Did they scrap signaling entirely, rather than upgrade?
The semaphore you saw east of Paradise in 1999 would have been on the 4th Sub, which runs via St. Regis and Superior. MRL map here:
http://montanarail.com/station_list.php
The remaining semaphores and ABS/TWC running between Paradise and Superior have since been replaced by color-light signals and CTC.
The 10th Sub from Paradise to De Smet via Dixon, however, is dark/TWC, plus it involves the 2.2% climb over Evaro Hill. If I recall the history correctly off the top of my head, BN removed the signals from that particular line some years before MRL came into being. It was said that BN planned to use those signals to upgrade its dark/TWC route through Great Falls, but that never materialized, at least not in full.
schlimmOn a related note: Hanjin bankrupt
https://www.yahoo.com/news/south-korea-moves-minimize-disruption-shippers-woes-035955320--finance.html?ref=gs
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.