A few additional comments:
CN's coal trains in the area are normally at least 152 cars (8000+ feet), although shorter trains are occasionally run. Currently only Teck's Cardinal River mine at Luscar, AB (of recent runaway train fame) ships coal on CN to Vancouver, and this is a minor amount of their total production, most of it goes to Prince Rupert. The other mines CN serves have either closed or switched entirely to Prince Rupert. CP also interchanges some coal trains to CN at Kamloops, and some of those go to Prince Rupert.
I believe the 150ish car coal train size is due to the track layout at one of the Vancouver ports, but am not sure. Same goes for the potash trains. CN runs much longer coal trains (170 to 220 cars) from the two Alberta Coal Branch mines to Prince Rupert, and the Saskatchewan-Saint John, NB potash trains regularly exceed 200 cars.
The traffic handled by the Prince George-Vancouver mixed freights is what formerly ran on BC Rail before the CN takeover.
Among other things CN uses the Kamloops yard to pre-block traffic for the various Vancouver terminals, including entire trains that will be interchanged to CP at Coquitlam.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Rocky Mountaineer's shop and maintenance yard are also located in Kamloops, on the east side of CN's yard.
Well somebody's done their homework.
All of them listed are vital strategic areas necessary to the economic well being of North America.
At one time Horseshoe Curve would have made that list, wonder where it ranks today.
I would say Cajon and the Fraser Valley are super important.
MiningmanWell somebody's done their homework. All of them listed are vital strategic areas necessary to the economic well being of North America. At one time Horseshoe Curve would have made that list, wonder where it ranks today. I would say Cajon and the Fraser Valley are super important.
Watching the Horseshoe Curve webcam - there are a whole bunch of trains!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmCkBPm7ICk&feature=youtu.be
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
How does directional running with two railroads deal with issues like if a CN train derails on a CP track?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
ADRIAN BALLAM (2-24): Speaking of the Devil
You started a most thought provoking thread, and makes the forum ponder what North America has.
In reference to Cajon Pass, I was there yesterday, and saw assumedly a UP coal train, which fits the speaking of the devil category. Its tail end strangely had a BNSF-UP combo DPU.
As far as the southern Transcon, unless the insignificant Amtrak is included, the Transcon only has one railroad, BNSF, and NOT two as your rule suggested. A second railroad does operate between Daggett and Riverside (of Cajon Pass, CA), but NOT the whole southern Transcon.
As for the Central Corridor in Nebraska, 110 trains seems a fair estimate, but 150 have been known to pass through I’m not sure manifest and Intermodal numbers are correct, as from my observations those non-coal trains don’t seem to make a dent in the count.
Great thread! Thanks for starting!
K.P.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.
Murphy Siding How does directional running with two railroads deal with issues like if a CN train derails on a CP track? Both CN (westbound) and CP (eastbound) between Vancouver and Ashcroft are still signaled in both directions. From time to time when one or the other directional running tracks are out of service, movements are diverted to the open directional running tracks and are run in both directions. If both go down as occurred with the CN Lytton bridge fire several years ago, well.....there can be a complete shutdown. I don't know how the liability issues are worked out....I assume through investigation or through the directional running agreement. Charlie Chilliwack, BC
Both CN (westbound) and CP (eastbound) between Vancouver and Ashcroft are still signaled in both directions. From time to time when one or the other directional running tracks are out of service, movements are diverted to the open directional running tracks and are run in both directions. If both go down as occurred with the CN Lytton bridge fire several years ago, well.....there can be a complete shutdown. I don't know how the liability issues are worked out....I assume through investigation or through the directional running agreement.
Charlie
Chilliwack, BC
Great insight. Coal trains are not common through Cajon Pass and you one as per your information and photo.
It doesn't have to be two railroads. I am just going by corridors and it can be only one railroad. BNSF runs upwards of 80 trains daily on parts of the Transcon (such as through Abo Canyon in New Mexico) but despite their train counts exceeding the Fraser/Thompson River Canyons, the tonnage doesn't compare since most of that is intermodal.
I am not sure what you mean on the assumption of manifest and intermodal numbers on the Central Corridor. If you are referring to the lengths, I know that manifests heading in and out of North Platte do have a frequent tendency to exceed 10,000 feet (such as MNPWC or MWCNP). Intermodals aren't as frequently that long. There is one that from Global III near Rochelle, IL to Los Angeles everyday that seems to exceed 10,000 feet on its daily run but that is it. Most are much shorter and the average is well below what CN's intermodal train lengths are.
I remember back in July or August 2006, there was a double derailment among the railroads as well. A westbound CP coal train derailed at the CN bridge at Lytton shutting down the line. This caused westbounds to use to CP until Cisco where they could divert up to CN on a short connector line which noticeably lacked rehibilation. Only days later, a CN grain train derailed there (onto CP's line in fact), causing both lines to shut down altogether until these messes were cleared. Traffic was then rerouted through the US (I assume through Stevens Pass or the Columbia Gorge). The connector line has since been repaired to accomodate heavier locomotives.
It also happened the following year at Basque when a CP Auto/Intermodal train derailed from its line on CN's tracks (since both parallel) causing a major disruption. This has happened and is certainly never good.
On Horseshoe Curve, according to my hot spots issue from Trains, there are 50 to 60 trains. While the train counts are comparable in frequency, I doubt they compare in length and therefore this would fall short in terms of tonnage of what goes through the Fraser/Thompson Canyon's.
This is the bridge at Lytton during the repair.
Ten years later, sporting some legacy rolling stock, and evidence of the use by both Class One railroads of the routes on either side of the south Thompson. The Fraser river enters from the north just outside of the left of the image, another 150 meter downstream. From there it's called the Fraser.
One minor correction. It is simply the Thompson River (not south) that flows into the Fraser at Lytton. The South Thompson and North Thompson Rivers combine about 100 miles upstream at Kamloops. CN had followed the North Thompson, and CP the South Thompson north and east of there.
CP was first, so had choice of side and stayed on the easier south side of the Thomson/Fraser route until Cisco. Some 25 years later the tight canyons meant CN had to mostly build on the north side. It was forced to cross to the south bank for short distances in a number of locations, such as this one at Lytton, to create a feasible alignment. At Cisco the two railways switched sides.
CN at that time was actually the Canadian Northern Railway. It became part of the Canadian National system not long after completion.
John
Nice additional information. I said 7,600 feet as most coal trains are 152 cars and the cars are 50 feet I believe, which would lead to that number.
In a future discussion, I will discussing a proposal that was made years ago but sadly hasn't materialized about the possibility of an intermodal terminal in Kamloops. It would be ideal, giving sawmills, among industries, a new way of entering the Trans-Pacific market through containers, not to mention taking trucks off the roads and creating jobs in the region.
I do enjoy picking nits.
A aluminum coal car is 53 feet long, and locomotives are approximately 75 feet apiece. Add a bit extra to allow for slack and one of CP's coal trains (4 units and 152 cars) measures nearly 8,400 feet.
The older steel cars are 58 feet long. CN no longer uses them in coal service, many have been sold or placed in storage and the remainder are used to haul petroleum coke to Prince Rupert. I am not sure if CP still hauls coal in steel cars, but do know they sold a bunch to Sultran several years ago.
As you say a Kamloops intermodal terminal could serve a similar purpose as CN's Prince George terminal, which primarily sees empty westbound sea-cans reloaded with Asia-bound forest products.
Aw shucks, John...I know better, too. Thanks for correcting me. Plain old The Thompson River it is from Kamloops south.
-Crandell
SD70Dude ... The older steel cars are 58 feet long. CN no longer uses them in coal service, many have been sold or placed in storage and the remainder are used to haul petroleum coke to Prince Rupert. ..
...
The older steel cars are 58 feet long. CN no longer uses them in coal service, many have been sold or placed in storage and the remainder are used to haul petroleum coke to Prince Rupert. ..
Are the cars used to haul pet coke gondolas or hoppers? Do they cover them?
MidlandMike Are the cars used to haul pet coke gondolas or hoppers? Do they cover them?
No covers, and I have only seen gondolas in coke service to Prince Rupert.
Some coke is shipped from the northwest U.S. to Alberta, this is mostly moved in hoppers. But they all have rotary drawbars so they could be unloaded either way.
The coal trains are a mix of aluminum gondolas and hoppers (the bottom doors are never used but CN or one of the mines got a real good deal leasing a bunch so here they are).
Coal trains are pretty infrequent on CN in the Fraser/Thompson River Canyon. Most of CN's coal is allocated for shipment to Prince Rupert. Intesting specific assessment on the coal cars being 53 feet, which would push towards 8,000 trains of 152 cars.
Since you seem so knowledgeable on trains as well, is the coal that is shipment from Edmonton to Prince Rupert a byproduct of oil? There are no mines, so it seems likely.
ADRIAN BALLAM Since you seem so knowledgeable on trains as well, is the coal that is shipment from Edmonton to Prince Rupert a byproduct of oil? There are no mines, so it seems likely.
Petroleum coke, not coal, but yes it is a heavy oil byproduct. Basically the coke is what's left over when an upgrader converts tar sands' bitumen into regular crude oil. Petroleum coke is considered too dirty to burn here so we sell it to China and they burn it instead.
The coke originates from several locations, most notably Fort McMurray and Lloydminister. It is normally handled like any carload freight and only rarely moves as a unit train.
My knowledge comes from working as a Conductor and Locomotive Engineer for CN in various locations across Alberta.
Grandma used to use petcoke to heat her house. Dad's brother-in-law worked for Standard Oil in Whiting and would obtain a load for her each fall for that purpose.
Before they changed over to biomass, a local co-gen plant burned a lot of petcoke, but I have no idea where it came from. They had a pretty efficient scrubber on the stack.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
tree68Before they changed over to biomass, a local co-gen plant burned a lot of petcoke, but I have no idea where it came from. They had a pretty efficient scrubber on the stack.
Worked several stations that had pot belly stoves for winter heating. Nominally they were coal fired, however, in seveal locations there were movements of coke past the stations - a little coke added to the fires increased the heat output - of course it also shortened the grate life account of the increased heat level.
KP said, "As far as the southern Transcon, unless the insignificant Amtrak is included, the Transcon only has one railroad, BNSF, and NOT two as your rule suggested. A second railroad does operate between Daggett and Riverside (of Cajon Pass, CA), but NOT the whole southern Transcon."
And a second railroad (UP) has trackage rights on between Chicago and Hutchinson, KS for their hottest trains.
While there might be a lot of unit trains through the Fraser River canyon, if you're attempting to determine which route would have the most tonnage, this might not be the best choice. Remember, for each loaded unit train, there is an empties train which weighs a fraction thereof. So, if you have a 110-car grain train, that's 15,730 tons (at 143 tons each), but the corresponding empties train is only 3410 tons which would make the average weight between the two trains 9,570 tons. Not quite as impressive.
I would think that a railroad such as the ex-ATSF Chicago-California main line, or the UP across Wyoming and Nebraska would handle more tonnage because there are more intermodal and merchandise trains and on average, considering trains in each direction, they handle more loaded cars. I can't speak for the UP route, but you're shortchanging the ex-ATSF "Southern Transcontinental" which, depending on the season, can host numerous grain (mostly feed for Central California) and Ethanol trains as well as coiled steel and even crude oil. And with regard to the Columbia River route, remember that most of the BNSF trains are loaded (and heavier) because many of the empties are routed via Stampede or Stevens Pass so the average tonnage of a loaded unit train through this area is higher since there often is no empty counterpart train.
Many variables when considering such a topic....
Mark Meyer
Actually, CN runs grain trains that exceed 10,000 feet that ARE loaded from the prairies to Vancouver. I have seen these trains many times and they have been doing this for years. Last week in fact I saw a CN grain train of 177 cars with 2x1 (MID-DPU) consist. The first 108 cars were these LDC grain cars, which I believe are the same size as BNSF's oxide hoppers and the rest were the CN grains of Government of Canada, CN, and ICG hoppers. So if we used your example that each grain car was 143 tons for each of the 177 cars, that would place the train at 25,311 tons. If the entire train goes back to prairies empty, that would put the average of the two trains at 12,600 tons, which exceeds your average analysis.
In addition, CN and CP run numerous potash trains which are 170 cars (8,500 feet) and CP runs many coal trains which are uniformly 152 cars (between 7,500 and 8,500 feet). These are really heavy trains which would make up for the lesser frequent intermodal trains. CP's grain trains have also gotten longer, though not to the same extent as CN's, but longer than BNSF and UP. Intermodal is a lighter commodity than all of these while they are quite dominant on BNSF's transcon, their average length and weight do not compare to most of the intermodal trains run in the Fraser Canyon on CN. My profile picture on this website is of CN intermodal in Jasper in September 2016 was 258 cars (1x1x1) destined for Vancouver.
With regards to mixed freights, CN's usually exceed 10,000 feet. I have seen many videos of BNSF's mixed freights on the Transcon and they often are not even close to that in length, which sort of baffles me since the whole line is double-tracked.
The Overland Route between Granger, WY and North Platte is debatable based on your reason, so you have a point there. However, based on the train lengths, commodities, and frequency (in the case of the Gorge), I do believe the Fraser/Thompson Canyons beat the Gorge and the BNSF Transcon.
Adrian said, "Actually, CN runs grain trains that exceed 10,000 feet that ARE loaded from the prairies to Vancouver."
No one said anything to the contrary that I can see. Nor did I say the 9500-train was the average train size. It was simply to point out that if you're talking about the number of trains on the one hand total tonnage on the other, then empties trains offset the loaded trains.
BNSF is running several stack trains out of Southern California at 10,000 and 12,000 feet. This has been going on for several years. They can be 10,000 tons. Other stack trains are not as big - about 8,000 to 9,000 tons, but the sheer volume - 20 per day each way many days - makes the tonnage add up. And this doesn't count priority intermodal traffic (Z trains, mostly), which are relatively light but can be 10 trains in each direction. And, it's very important to remember that while all traffic can ebb and flow, grain traffic can be very seasonal, though it's more balanced than it used to be. Still, the flow of stack trains tends to be much more regular in volume than grain trains based on a year-round operation.
As far as mechandise traffic. Sure, CN might run some at 10,000 feet, but they don't run as many. California's population approaching 40 million assures there are more such trains on BNSF and UP than there would be on CN and CP. Depending on the transportation service plan in place at the time, a place like Winslow, AZ can see westward merchandise trains in one day originating at Belen, Clovis, Amarillo, Slaton/Lubbock, Tulsa, Fort Worth, Temple, Houston, Kansas City, and Galesburg in multiple sections along with eastward counterparts. (Makeup trains to bypass hump yards occur regularly from places like Omaha, Sioux City, Springfield, or Memphis.) Again, the sheer volume would easily overcome longer trains on CN or CP. In other words, especially with regard to general merchandise, the fact that California has a greater population than all of Canada alone explains why routes to/from it would have greater amount of such traffic, not to mention its proximity to other major population centers in the Southern U.S. Or, think of it is this way: With regard to general merchandise or intra-continental TOFC or container traffic, it matters not how long the train is; all that matters is the amount of it, and there's a whole lot more that wants to go to or from California than Vancouver, BC.
And, I'll still vote for BNSF and UP along the Columbia River over CP and CN along the Fraser/Thompson as far as tonnage. Trains might not all be as large as on CN or maybe CP, but there is more. There is some coal traffic (for Centralia, WA and Roberts Bank, BC), several crude trains daily (to a variety of ports, like Port Westward, Tacoma, Arco, and Cherry Point), as well as many grain trains (over 20 per day is not unsual, and as stated earlier, just about all the unit train traffic on BNSF is loaded - BNSF has delivered as many as 17 unit grain trains in one 24 hour period to west coast ports in the Pacific Northwest). BNSF also will run loaded stack trains from Tacoma (and sometimes Seattle) via the Columbia River Gorge when the Scenic subdivision is full; and of course ALL UP traffic goes this way. And, much like California, when it comes merchandise traffic which can tend to be non-export, the population base in Western Washington and Western Oregon eclipses that of Vancouver, BC several times over. So much more of it, that it makes the "longer train" point moot.
The average number of trains on BNSF alone along the Columbia River is rarely less than 40 and can be as high as 50. Add in 20-25 on the UP side, and that most of the BNSF trains are loaded, there's easily more tonnage along the Columbia than the Fraser, including grain trains off CN at Vancouver and CP at Sweet Grass, Montana going to California!
I agree with the UP numbers through the Columbia Gorge, but not the BNSF. 40 is possible. 50 seems unlikely due to capacity issues. If 50 trains have run on the BNSF Falbridge Sub in a day, that would cause complete gridlock and I can't see it. The sidings are too infrequent to allow that type of train movement. Have you actually ever watched trains in the Fraser/Thompson River Canyon (either in person or by video)?
Adrian said, "I agree with the UP numbers through the Columbia Gorge, but not the BNSF. 40 is possible. 50 seems unlikely due to capacity issues. If 50 trains have run on the BNSF Falbridge Sub in a day, that would cause complete gridlock and I can't see it. "
But I have seen it. Not only personally, but also as my experience as the North Region Locomotive Manager for BNSF from 2005 to 2017. Sending many of the eastward (lighter) trains via Stampede and Stevens passes reduces a lot of opposing traffic. One day there was 54 trains between Vancouver and Wishram. Also, additional meet/pass infrastructure has been added not only at Vancouver but between there and Wishram (one siding just went into service last Fall). What is your personnal operating experience on BNSF?
And, yes, I have been in the Fraser River Canyon and watched videos. The only thing we know for sure from these is that anecdotal observations mean zilch.
"And, yes, I have been in the Fraser River Canyon and watched videos. The only thing we know for sure from these is that anecdotal observations mean zilch."
Why would write that? I feel that is really harsh to say "anecdotal observations mean zilch" and I just wanted have a friendly discussion on this. I debated with you on trains volumes based on the little information we have from the Internet and Trains Magazine. Most of my numbers do come from Trains Magazine, train books (Hot Spots Guide and Canadian Trackside Guide), Railroad Fact Books, and my statistics from my book, which I have used over the past 18 years.
Also, I have not had personal operating experience with BNSF, but I am aware of the operations in Washington in which loaded trains of grain, coal, and oil utilize the Columbia Gorge rather Stevens or Stampede. I am very surprised you saw 54 trains in one day between Vancouver and Wishram (which I do believe and do stand corrected). That must have been a crunch in capacity. Good to know they are adding sidings on that route. How long is the siding? Also, have they added any more sidings between Wishram and Pasco?
I'm sorry you think that the statement about anecdotal observations is "harsh." Not meant to be - it's just the truth. Especially in this discussion, which is about total TONNAGE. You can guess about the tonnage of a train based on the number of cars you see in a video, and then guess about the number of trains run during a period of time, and then multiply the two, but that doesn't give you a historical perspective. It might not even give you an accurate picture on the way things are run.
I recall reading in one of these discussion groups that during the winter of 2013-2014 when things were really bad in the Northwest, that someone made the observation that BNSF must be trying to get its velocity up because he noticed 5 locomotives (instead of the normal 4) on coal trains to Roberts Bank. The reality was that during the severe weather, there were so many failures that one of the locomotives he saw was failed, and just along for the ride until it could be moved to a shop, and that due to the weather delays, ALL trains were minimally powered. But such was this anecdotal observation.
Another time, we were advised by CN that two grain trains they were delivering to us (for California) in Vancouver would be running as one train from Edmonton. The train really did operate at 27,000 tons, but we split it at Vancouver before heading south. Another time we were to get the same type of train, but in using trace car numbers, I noticed that the two cars had departed Kamloops at different times. It turned out that there was a situation with the bigger train, and had to be split up before arrival at Kamloops, and was never put back together. The point is simply that one can observe a 200-car train and a 100-car train, but that doesn't begin to describe all the parameters of a day-to-day operation. In other words, the premise of claiming one route (or routes through one area) to handle the most tonnage could only be determined by data supplied by the railroad. The number of variables are almost infinite.
The newest siding is 9800 feet:
https://www.railwayage.com/news/a-rail-landmark-for-the-melonas-men/
No new sidings between Wishram and Pasco at this time.
You appear to be surprised by the 54 number, but really, there again it all depends on the traffic mix. When they are mostly going one way, it's much easier to see. And it's all river grade. I was more impressed when I found out one day in March of 2017 that BNSF had put 54 trains through Flathead Tunnel in Montana in one 24-hour period. While it is a fast railroad for trains adequately powered, there is a 1 percent climb both ways approaching the tunnel which can bog down the flow for the heaviest trains. But one dispatcher moved 24 trains (including Amtrak) in his 8-hour shift alone, so the remaining 30 in 16 hours were a piece of cake.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.