I am not sure what you are referring to. Could you please clarify? Also, how does CSXT factor into this discussion?
Prsons here talk about the blocked siding that trains can block all three road crossings . Tell them that if CSX would extend the siding either north or south blocked crossings would dimish but not end for those times CSX parks 2 trains on siding.
I believe there are over 40 trains a day, of which 30 are scheduled (manifest and intermodal) and the rest are bulk commodities, including grain, potash, sand, and sulphur. Coal runs on the line west of Edson, which increases the number by 2-4 daily. That being said, numbers are quite high right now due to CN's major service issues and them having to play catch up with their customers. There are running a lot of grain trains to the west coast to accomodate farmers' needs.
Is the average train density 32 trains per day as mentioned in the article or was that an estimate of one of the concerned citizens?
Having been to Ames, IA where UP rolls 50 or so trains through town at grade on double track, it has not been disruptive.
I saw that article and don't blame the townspeople for being concerned. It goes through a pretty populated residential area and next to one the of the crossings, is a daycare. However, it is CN's property and the trains do travel through there at a fast rate of speed. It says in the article that trains stop on the crossings. That doesn't strike me as an area where that occurs.
Does that happen often in the area?
CN speaks to Stony Plain, town is still unhappy:
http://www.sprucegroveexaminer.com/2018/03/31/stony-plain-questions-cn-on-rail-twinning
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
What's interesting is this 12 mile section of single-track is the longest section of single track currently on the Edson Sub. Now it will be no more due to this double-track project. Also with connecting the double-track segments at Carvel and Spruce Grove, there will be over 40 miles of non-stop double-track and nearly half of the Edson Sub will be double-tracked after the completion of this project.
Also, from the article, CN is planning to add another siding between Vancouver and Edmonton. I assume that is on the Edson Sub as well and that would then put the line at more than 50% double-tracked. Great.
In the case in question the "old" double track would have been laid in the 1980s, and ripped up in the early 2000s (thanks Hunter). So it would have already conformed to modern standards.
Unfortunately none of the ripped up sections are being rebuilt, all the current double tracking plans are for sections that have always been single track.
In the US, the standard distance between double tracks is now more than the old minimum distance between older double tracks. Relaying a second track usually means the old grade is not usable. Is that also the situation in Canada?
How to participate in an interesting mind game. Take the tracks and equipment taken out of service and the savings acquired including track, switches, maintenance, salvage etc. Then the costs of restoring those same locations. wonder how that looks on the balance sheets ?
ADRIAN BALLAM Ahhh...so it is going to be this leg of the Edson Subdivision. I had feeling the entire amount of 12 miles would be allocated to the subdivision of the Vancouver-Edmonton corridor. A bit surprised that they are now going to double-track through the residential area, since at one crossing, there is a daycare centre. Thanks for the reference.
Ahhh...so it is going to be this leg of the Edson Subdivision. I had feeling the entire amount of 12 miles would be allocated to the subdivision of the Vancouver-Edmonton corridor. A bit surprised that they are now going to double-track through the residential area, since at one crossing, there is a daycare centre. Thanks for the reference.
There is enough space for a second track on the existing ROW through Stony Plain without disturbing any houses. Additionally, the area between 48 and 50 Streets is where the old grain elevator used to be and its spur is still there, currently it is used to store track maintenance equipment. This can be seen on Google Earth.
I strongly suspect (but cannot confirm yet) that the second track will be added on the south side of the current main, at both Carvel and Spruce Grove the turnout diverges to the south.
The residential area is not a concern; it is not blocking the ROW and the railroad was there first, not the houses. If CN were to double track only from Carvel to Stony Plain there would still be a single track choke point, making the project of little to no benefit.
The general public seems to believe that double track will mean double the number of trains. This is not the case, the same number of trains will be run, only more efficiently.
"Twinning" is an example of Mudchicken's highway bubbas attempting to speak railroad-ese.
CN uses the term "double track".
"Twinning" is a term I would not normally use for railroads. For me, this relates to highways, such as "twinning a bridge" (adding another lane).
Normally double-tracking is the what we use for trains.
Is 'twinning the railway' actually a Canadian expression for double-tracking?
I don't recall ever seeing it before, and she uses it many times in the article.
Thank you. Do you happen to have a reference to this expansion? It certainly makes sense.
Double-tracking announced, locals lose their minds:
http://www.sprucegroveexaminer.com/2018/02/10/cn-rail-to-twin-railway-from-stony-plain-to-carvel
I can confirm that Spruce Grove to Carvel is also on the list:
http://www.stonyplain.com/Town-Hall/Departments/Corporate-Communications/News-Releases/CN-Rail-Line-Twinning_s1_p2453.htm
Completing the Cana - Bangor section is one of the Winnipeg - Edmonton projects for this year.
10000 feet and no dynamics? Today is going to be a good day ...
ADRIAN BALLAM The two pipelines go totally different directions. Keystone goes directly south to the US while Energy East goes to the Atlantic Coast of Canada. How does the Keystone decision have an impact of oil moving by rail to the Atlantic Coast? Also, I just read that CN is planning to move crude oil this summer after they have completed a number of capacity projects: http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2018/01/24-canadian-national-to-invest-record-amount-to-handle-current-anticipated-traffic-growth?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=News0_TRN_180129_000000_Final&utm_content=&spMailingID=32824061&spUserID=MTE2ODA0MTUwMTc2S0&spJobID=1203645665&spReportId=MTIwMzY0NTY2NQS2. I know there is opposition to the oil and pipelines in Quebec, but I have feeling that it is not to the extent of a majority of citizens. I found an article that supports your statement, but the problem with this poll is it asked 1,401 people: http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/poll-shows-few-quebecers-support-energy-east-pipeline. There are 7.2 million people in the province. These types of polls are usually way off what the general public thinks as they fall into the same category as polls in guessing the outcome of elections. I don't believe New Brunswick would be against the pipeline either.
The two pipelines go totally different directions. Keystone goes directly south to the US while Energy East goes to the Atlantic Coast of Canada. How does the Keystone decision have an impact of oil moving by rail to the Atlantic Coast? Also, I just read that CN is planning to move crude oil this summer after they have completed a number of capacity projects: http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2018/01/24-canadian-national-to-invest-record-amount-to-handle-current-anticipated-traffic-growth?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=News0_TRN_180129_000000_Final&utm_content=&spMailingID=32824061&spUserID=MTE2ODA0MTUwMTc2S0&spJobID=1203645665&spReportId=MTIwMzY0NTY2NQS2.
I know there is opposition to the oil and pipelines in Quebec, but I have feeling that it is not to the extent of a majority of citizens. I found an article that supports your statement, but the problem with this poll is it asked 1,401 people: http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/poll-shows-few-quebecers-support-energy-east-pipeline. There are 7.2 million people in the province. These types of polls are usually way off what the general public thinks as they fall into the same category as polls in guessing the outcome of elections. I don't believe New Brunswick would be against the pipeline either.
TransCanada proposed the Energy East project when Keystone XL started to bog down. When Keystone's prospects opened up again, Energy East was cancelled. What is your question? TransCanada is in the business of transporting oil and gas. Many of the other Keystone segments were already constructed, and the XL segment was a key shortcut. Texas refineries use heavy oil. I don't know that eastern Canada refineries are set up to take that much at present. Additionally, new shale oil & gas fields in Alberta, may make the gas pipeline that the Energy East project, was to convert to oil, more valuable as a gas line.
I will give you that. Those are interesting points. I have a feeling that the siding and 12 miles of double-track will be added to the Edson Subvision, not Albreda or Clearwater. I think perhaps you are right then in what you had said above, but I don't believe these 12 miles will be allocated here at this time. I wish there was some PDF file online outling the project.
ADRIAN BALLAM I do not see the viability or point in reinstating the double-track east of the Snaring River. It seems rather silly to put it back in after just a few hundred of being single from Henry House. I think that they should ignore that section for double-tracking (and they probably will).
I do not see the viability or point in reinstating the double-track east of the Snaring River. It seems rather silly to put it back in after just a few hundred of being single from Henry House. I think that they should ignore that section for double-tracking (and they probably will).
Au contraire, the single track section Hunter created is more like 10 miles, not a few hundred yards. That area is continually congested as westbound with crews short on hours try to get into Jasper, and eastbounds try to get around them, and gain access to the single track east of Park Gate.
Between Park Gate and Dalehurst (the next section of double track, near the Obed summit) there are 3 sidings: Swan Landing, Entrance and Hinton. Entrance is only 6500' long so very few trains fit there, and Swan Landing is always congested with switching work, as numerous mainline trains pick up and set off traffic to/from the Grande Cache sub (ex-Alberta Resources Railway to Grande Prairie). This leaves the 12,000' Hinton siding as the only reliable place to make meets along a 40 mile stretch of single track.
The removal of double track between Henry House and Devona limits the number of eastbounds that can be let out of Jasper at a time, which can cause trains to be held in the yard or on the double track west of town, causing even more congestion there.
Adding more double track between Park Gate and Hinton would be helpful too, but would be limited to a couple smaller segments (essentially long sidings) without some very high expenditures, as there are two major bridges (Athabasca River and Prairie Creek) and the curved Brule tunnel to contend with.
Dalehurst to Hinton would be easy though, and there is already 6400' of grade ready along there where the Pedley siding used to be.
ADRIAN BALLAM That's not the only area where CN has the potential to take great new amounts of business: With the hold of the Energy East Pipeline, CN becomes the viable (though not so efficient) method of transporting oil from Alberta's Industrial Heartland to refineries it accesses in Quebec City and Saint John. The initiation of the Canada European Trade Agreement could create an increase in shipments all over the system towards their ports on the Atlantic Coast and St. Lawrence Seaway ...
That's not the only area where CN has the potential to take great new amounts of business:
The TransCanada's Energy East Pipeline project was cancelled as the Keystone XL Pipeline got US presidential approval, so it's still not going by rail. Also, from what I read in the Canadian press, eastern Canadians (especially Quebec) are opposed to tar sand oil no mater what the method of transport.
ADRIAN BALLAM. There is just so much growth opportunity for CN, it's amazing.
There is just so much growth opportunity for CN, it's amazing.
Only when the destruction comitted by EHH has been mitigated ?
CN is in great position to take on rail traffic to support the growing fracking operations in the Duvernay, Montney and Horn River formations. There will be a lot of loads going in and loads coming out as those areas get developed for energy production.
caldreamer I do NOT believe that the park has any say as to whether the second track can be put back in. It is the railroads right of way, owned by them. If they want to put the second track in they can do so without the parks permission.
I do NOT believe that the park has any say as to whether the second track can be put back in. It is the railroads right of way, owned by them. If they want to put the second track in they can do so without the parks permission.
That may be technically true, but the reality is that CN has to exist within the Park environment. I'm sure Parks Canada would have many ways to severely inconvenience CN if the railway went ahead unilaterally. For instance at present CN has a number of access roads, useful for maintenance vehicles, relieving crews and other such activities, that cross Parks land and could be closed off. At the moment there is a truce; resuming hostilities might backfire.
CN may still be required to get a construction permit from Parks Canada. Hopefully there is not that much red tape that a new environmental assessment is demanded. A construction permit should just be rubber stamped if it is merely relaying track that was previously there.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.