UP Places Additional Traffic Restrictions

[corwinda]

QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill

We're enjoying doing our best, but 12,000-word, 24-page articles and full-color maps are probably beyond our abilities to condense to a forum. Back issues are often available for $0.25 at swap meets.

Or check your local library.

[Junctionfan]

I understand Mr. Hemphill and thankyou for the information. You see since I don't have to much knowledge of U.P and you have written a book on U.P, I was hoping you could varify some of my points. I admitt it that I am no expert; I just come up with opinions based on information I can get to and come up with rational and logical conclusions to the best of my ability; that is why it is important to me that I can get information from people who know about this well enough such as yourself so I may come up with an informed opinion.

[Junctionfan]

I don't have the Trains magazine at those times for various reasons so that is why I have been trying to get information correct or not from this forum so I can get a good idea on what is going on. When I can afford it I will get the subscibe for them but right now I have to buy them one at a time. I would hope you could help me out with some information so I could make a more informed opinion.

[kevarc]

Don't know about room to increase the number of tracks, but since that is mostly open territory, I do't think their would be much of a problem.

But understand this - adding track is not cheap. I would hazard a SWAG of close to a million a mile. The capitol for this has to come from somewhere, and the cost of capitol is not cheap either.

You just cannot go add tracks as you see fit. The engineering has to be done, materials gathered, etc. So for a project of this scope, you are looking at a sizable leadtime. And remember, this is not the only project going on, so it has to be prioritized with other capitol needs.

One thing I have noticed here and on other foamer boards - you tend to forget that these are business, not toys. They are not here to make use happy, but to (try) and make their stockholders happy.

UP/BNSF - the old UP and ATSF operated on the same tracks from Barstow to SB. they slpit on both ends to thier own track. The old SP - IIRC they are mostly seperated crossings.

[Junctionfan]

Thanks for the information and the corrections. How much traffic is on the ex SP line between El Paso and just before the Phoenix split off? Does that stretch in particular warrent triple tracking? Do they have the room to triple track it if so?

Also I see at San Bernardino California that BNSF meet up with UP enroute to Los Angelas. Do thease line cross at diamonds, do they run paralel or do over pass another?

[kevarc]

All three are single track -
Houston line - ex-SP Sunset
Dallas Line - Ex MP -
KC line - Ex-RI/SP
The SP, outside of certain routes in California was ALL single track.

The line to Pheonix is a secondary line

"use BNSF to go to Los Angeles" - the UP trackage rights on the BNSF are from a long time ago, when UP first reached LA.

"I know for a fact that around that area between El Paso and just before California, there is alot of active mines about." - There are not as many as their used to be and these are hard rock mines that compared to the amount of material mined to that shipped is very small. 99+% of the mined material is waste rock.

"use BNSF to go to Los Angelas but that won't work if BNSF is getting close to capacity" - It is at near capacity. Though it has been pretty much double tracked, Abo Canyon is still single track, at least for a year or so till the double track program is completed.

"In New Mexico I also see a Mexico bound line that likely adds to traffic." - most of this traffic goes east and then north

"I was looking on UP's website and looked into their employing requirements and was wondering what they meant by them not wanting anyone who had taken a buyout or other compensated severance packages from UP or one of the railroads UP has bought." - This is due to legal technicalities. They already took a buyout, i.e. early retirement for most and are ineligable to be rehired.

[Junctionfan]

I took a look at the UP website and have found some interesting things. There is a line that runs from Dallas to almost El Paso. There is a line that runs from Houston to near El Paso. Thease two line than merge before entering El Paso. There is a line that runs from Kansas City direction towards El Paso. The line than heads toward Long Beach, Los Angelas California. Please tell me there are no single track sections. No wonder UP is having capacity problems. It sounds like they are going to have to triple track part of the line called the Sunset Route I believe it is called which is the Houston to Los Angelas route that is converged on by the others. In New Mexico I also see a Mexico bound line that likely adds to traffic. I know for a fact that around that area between El Paso and just before California, there is alot of active mines about. I know that the power plants Irvington and Apache near Tucson require coal. UP could run trains into Phonix and use BNSF to go to Los Angelas but that won't work if BNSF is getting close to capacity and why should BNSF help their competition? Between El Paso and Los Angelas is likely going to have to be made double track all the way. UP may also want to add additional sidings between El Paso and where the juctions off toward Phoenix and Yuma. I don't know what kind of traffic see on that line but I can imagine it is quite heavy.

A question that meets my curiosity;..I was looking on UP's website and looked into their employing requirements and was wondering what they meant by them not wanting anyone who had taken a buyout or other compensated severance packages from UP or one of the railroads UP has bought.

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

I'm assuming the capacity problems lie between Texas and California. On a different point, railroads would have to address capacity problems if they didn't remove lines only to have to put them back in which they have had to do which more costly than leaving them be. They are also too quick to abandon and sell of lines that they must realise they will not may need in the future. This I would suspect is major problem. I don't know why they won't sponser ex CN or CP workers from Canada for a green card so they can get the skilled workers they are looking for without having to train them over the much. On UP's website it says must be American.

Please pardon the grammar.

[Anonymous]

I wonder if the capacity crisis has something to do with the season of the year? Seems to me that I've read or heard somewhere that UP pulled steam locomotives off the scrap line in the late 50's to handle a big freight bump in the fall. They were moving grain, from what I remember.

I remember seeing trains stacked up at ten mile intervals on the Sunset Route between Phoenix and Los Angeles. That "meltdown" started off with a FUBAR'd yard in Houston. There was plenty of room on the main line to "hold" freight trains- but no room anywhere in a yard for them to go to. I saw solid wall to wall- or yard limit to yard limit- freight cars standing still in San Bernadino. There was no place for them to go- and BNSF happily stepped in to run in the slack.

I would suspect that UP is doing everything it can to upgrade capacity without putting rails on the ground. The cheapest solution is to hire new people to add more crews. You can always "lay them off" after the rush is over. That only adds to the bottlenecks at yards, though- and I'm guessing that it's really unpleasant to be a train master or a yard dispatcher on UP right now... especially on a conference call to Omaha.

I don't know if UP has a locomotive shortage. I have seen a lot of UP locomotives running around Norfolk Southern and CSX lines, though. Has UP started any kind of a recall on "their" locomotives? The push is on to get people to man (or woman) the trains they have- not to expand to new trains.

In terms of moving freight, it would seem that UP would be busy expanding their yard system to increase yard capacity. Are they doing that? Expanding yard capacity by actually building on existing facilities would imply a long range committment of funds, with an expectation of return- empty rails don't make money. It doesn't make sense to build a new yard (or improve an old one) to handle a seasonal push.

It would seem also that this would be the perfect time for UP to raise freight rates- to pu***he market for all it will bear. How much will American shippers pay to get their freight moved? An article in TRAINS said that UP was asking UPS to put their freight on trucks for a short time until traffic got moving faster. That sounds like UP is under the impression that the problem is temporary. If it was permanant, I'd believe that UP would be happily upping rates for "premium" freight service. They would do it if they were sure BNSF could not take the business away from them, too.

Frankly, I can't think of a better time for a railroad union to strike, either. Got problems running freight with your existing crews? Imagine what kind of a mess you have if all your crews just up and left. Is UP doing any kind of incentive dealing with the BLE or UTU?

Which all leads up to the question: How is BNSF doing? Are they "at capacity"? I don't think they are turning business away.

Erik

Erik

[jeffhergert]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF SD70MAC

The question is.....
why is the UP failing so bad?
Is this country loosing it's faith in the RR's?
The UP is NOT even trying to make things better for them selves or this country.
The trucking co.'s are growing all because the RR's are failing.
It makes me sick that they can't even run their own Railroad the right way.
Main lines are all pluged up. rail yards are cloged.
well never know.

Tell me please, how to run the UP the right way. What would you do.
Jeff

[Anonymous]

/

[Junctionfan]

Can BNSF and NS take up the slack of UP and CSX or are they also getting into capacity issues themselves?

[Anonymous]

The question is.....
why is the UP failing so bad?
Is this country loosing it's faith in the RR's?
The UP is NOT even trying to make things better for them selves or this country.
The trucking co.'s are growing all because the RR's are failing.
It makes me sick that they can't even run their own Railroad the right way.
Main lines are all pluged up. rail yards are cloged.
well never know.

[nslakediv]

I have first hand knowledge of the driver shortage, which has been made far worse with new hours of service rules, but drivers were in short order 5 years ago also, funny how you never hear any media info on this subject. Trucks are also at capacity on highways. It still rings true, "if you bought it a truck brought it."

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Although we are aware of the capacity problems with railroading, we need to be periodically reminded that the entire transportation system in the United States is starting to run out of spare capacity. Trucking is having similar problems although it's for different reasons (they don't have enough drivers, among other things). Airlines are also in the same boat (see the imposition of restrictions at Chicago O'Hare). All of the solutions for all of the modes are long-term and it will be several years before additional capacity becomes available, if at all.

[nslakediv]

I receive 53' containers via Schneider/UP shipping out of the Seattle Wa. area, they hit the ground in Chicago, and then come east 250 miles or so into the buckeye state. They guarenteed 7 day delivery, in the past 4 weeks the delivery time has almost doubled to 12 days, when I call for answers all I get is an apoligy, and we will do better next time sir, if there is a next time.

[AntonioFP45]

What about the issue of UP's single track mainlines? Wouldn't the expensive investment of "re-double tracking" help ease its current, borderline meltdown problem?

Plus, years back there was a proposal in which a railroad would be taxed for the right of way land itself rather than the actual tracks themselves. Don't know if this was at the federal level or state level. In addition to maintenance, many roads single tracked to cut down on tax bills or so this was the claim back in the 80s.

Even with today's computer dispatching and GPS tracking, the efficiency of single-track Class 1 railroading seems to be eroding very quickly!

[Junctionfan]

I'm assuming the capacity problems lie between Texas and California. On a different point, railroads would have to address capacity problems if they didn't remove lines only to have to put them back in which they have had to do which more costly than leaving them be. They are also too quick to abandon and sell of lines that they must realise they will not may need in the future. This I would suspect is major problem. I don't know why they won't sponser ex CN or CP workers from Canada for a green card so they can get the skilled workers they are looking for without having to train them over the much. On UP's website it says must be American.

[MadLatvian]

As a followup: I work in the food distribution industry and quite a bit (50%) of our inbound freight comes via domestic container. Used to be almost totally 53' PACER or APL via UP to the PNW but recently it has been almost all 53' HUBU/HUNU cans vis BNSF. UP's rates were always a bit cheaper so this has to be a result of the impending? meltdown of the UP system?

[Junctionfan]

I hoping that there will be a positive and swift resolve to this dilema that UP has. I must say though in a different thread Limitedclear has a very good point about CN not being the only one that derails their trains. Not to be a basher of UP but their trains would get to their destinations quicker if they didn't derail them so often. I don't know why. At least with CN, they don't operate alot of trains in comparison to UP so they don't effect too much traffic but if someone like UP derails that operates an enormous amount of trains in comparison, you are talking about major back ups and inconvience to customers. Not to mention CN and CP have a lot of lines that they hardly use and often share the lines when they have a derailment. Not saying CN shouldn't try find the operation as UP. I doubt that UP has a lot of lines in use that is not a major traffic artery.

[Anonymous]

Im waiting for the bottle to CRACK.......If you know what I mean?
I tell you all this much.......It's looking like a very,very ugly end of the year shipping season!

[Junctionfan]

UP has a legitamate problem with capacity. CN doesn't.

[Anonymous]

JF-

I see you have found that there are Class 1s other than CN with problems...

LC

[Junctionfan]

I was thinking about this the other night and was wondering if maybe the railroads should get rid of the 50 foot boxcars and replace them with 60 foot high cubes in batches; instead of industries using 40 foot tankers use 50 or 54 foot tankers, use 73 foot centerbeams for lumber instead of 60 foot bulkheads, use articulated autoracks instead of autoracks, use 89 foot flats instead of 60 footer, use 86 foot boxs for autoparts instead of 60 foots, use 71 foot mechanical refers instead of the 57 foot ones; things like that.

Trucking industries might benifit more if they used 53 foot containers on chassis that way UP could stack 2 trailers on 1 railcar instead of 1 trailer with permanent wheels on per railcar.

Instead of having multiple locals to serve a bunch of industries in the same area which require multiple crews and locomotives, if possible have a distrubution center that serves the area and you only need to switch once or twice a day with 1 or 2 locomotives therefore freeing up crews and locomotives for other uses. A distribution centre is cheaper than adding extra track for the industries. Intermodal should be considered a manifest option too. Why should only unit trains and ports handle intermodal? Why can't a mixed freight handle a couple of intermodal cars too and be taken to the distribution centre? Here is also an interesting thing to think about. For example; Oxford Paper may have say 4 customers in a givin area. They take 2 or 3 box cars each. Instead of shipping paper out using 8 or 12 50 foot boxcars, use 6 or 8 60 foot high cubes. The paper can be unloaded at the distrubution center and organized into desired quantities. Doing this you have reduced train size without eliminating your customer which has allowed you to add other customers that demand your service.

The government must invest into the rail industry. Obviously UP "can not deliver" because they are too big now and don't have the means to keep up with demand. If the government wants to improve the economy which will only bloom with UP's service, they need to anty up. If the economy blooms, the people will get or maintain there jobs. People with jobs don't need welfare right? It is the government's interest to consider that.

[CShaveRR]

An increase in capacity is definitely needed, but that's the most expensive (and hardest to justify to the bean counters) and least immediate option. Sometimes impossible to accomplish, too, given the constraints of what's nearby.

I'd love to see CREATE (the plan for streamlining Chicago) take off. They're saying that, given the money from the Government, this could be done by 2006. Yet, somehow, I don't think I'll ever see everything they want to do get done.

[StillGrande]

There is an article in the Dallas Morning News today about the rail congestion problem.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/082404dnbusshippers.311d7.html

Interesting statements on how UP is reducing railcars to increase speeds and maintain the same volume shipped. It also talks about smaller customers being dropped.

[Junctionfan]

I don't know how well that will improve their profit. Why don't they increase the capacity as it would appear that the investment would pay for it self. They really need to start an engine crew boot camp or something to hurry up in replacing the retiring crews as well as keep up with the demand. They seem to want to operate big or they would have bought the amount of power they have including over 500 SD90s, and 1000+ SD70MACs. They may find that some routes will require extra sidings and multiple track sidings but for now they really need the crews. Too bad they don't have consription rights.[:D] Of course any BNSF railfan would likely end up being a draft dodger.

[Randy Stahl]

Sounds like the STB needs to reassess the entire merger process. It's too bad the UP has no major competition to service the customers that the UP is dismissing.
Randy

[Anonymous]

From the pages of Purchasing Magazine Online:

http://www.manufacturing.net/pur/index.asp?layout=document&doc_id=135293&industry=Logistics&industryid=2150

Union Pacific broadens restrictions on shipment volumes

-- 8/24/2004

Rail carrier Union Pacific said it is broadening the restrictions on volumes it currently has in
place due to extreme increases in demand for its services. The company will implement an
allocation system for certain shipments through key terminals, as well as an overall reduction
in train starts that will likely impact each of the company’s six commodity groups. UP handled
more carloads in the second quarter than in any other quarter in its history and expects the
growth to continue through the peak shipping season, which has impacted the service levels
UP can offer its shippers.

-David Hannon, associate editor