Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
The Great Northern Railroad
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: <i>Originally posted by Murphy Siding</i> <br /> What is the I-15 corridor? Sounds more like an interstate hiway to me. <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />CP/CN Edmonton to Calgary <br />CP Calgary to Coutts (Sweetgrass MT) <br />BNSF Sweetgrass to Helena (embargoed between Great Falls and Helena) <br />MRL (nee - BN) Helena to Garrison <br />BNSF (nee Montana Western) Garrison to Silver Bow <br />UP Silver Bow to Pocatello, and on to Los Angeles <br /> <br />You might note that many rail corridors are designated (by government transportation officials and the pop media) using parallel Interstate Highway numerations. The BNSF and UP lines from the PNW to So Cal are known as the I-5 corridor, there may be others with such designations, but I can't think of them off hand (I think I read of an I-35 rail corridor in the Texas rail plan). Such designations are useful in describing NAFTA rail corridors, expecially when you have different rail entities that make up the corridor (otherwise you'd just use the rail company designation) while you also have a corresponding single Interstate designation to work with. <br /> <br />Unfortunately, there is no single rail entity between the border at Sweetgrass and Los Angeles, so UP sends their Alberta traffic via the rickety ex-Spokane International line via Eastport ID, then down the already congested I-5 rail corridor, while BNSF runs their Alberta traffic from Sweetgrass to Shelby, then west to Wishram WA and south down the ex-Oregon Trunk line (BNSF's I-5 rail corridor) to California. The I-15 rail corridor makes more sense from a comprehensive transportation perspective, but since UP owns the majority of the track in that corridor BNSF isn't going to send anything that way, thus we get a perpetual inefficient fuel wasting, capital wasting "keep 'em on the home rails" attitude, a national embarrassment for the U.S. <br /> <br />Yet another reason to rationalize the U.S. rail system to make it more efficient and eliminate the economic fratricide. How to do this? Any number of ways. You could have BNSF and UP merge, have some or all of the U.S. rail infrastructure nationalized, have some or all of the U.S. rail system broken up into separate infrastructure and tranporter entities, or you could have the U.S. rail network re-regulated in some fashion to force the disparate entities to play ball with each other.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy