Originally posted by farmer03 [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 6:57 AM Sounds like the UPRR is planning for a large increase in traffic. [:p][:o)] Originally posted by jeffhergert Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 24,885 posts Posted by tree68 on Thursday, March 24, 2005 7:07 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Sounds like the UPRR is planning for a large increase in traffic. [:p][:o)] Originally posted by jeffhergert Or trying to catch up. 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... Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 7:45 AM That certainly is a possibility also [:o)] Originally posted by tree68 Originally posted by spbed Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 9:18 AM I mean my God Iowa already is a High Speed Railroad. So it sound like to me,is that the Kate Shelly is the only thing that is realy slowing them down right now. Right? This new Bridge? Will it be a Single or a Double Track type? BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, March 24, 2005 9:51 AM From the proposal we saw & responded to in March '04, it would be double track, initially only with one track on it. UPRR has been spending megabucks replacing bridges on the ex-CNW main due to decades of deferred maintenance. The main track has multiple bridges that are not E-80 (not really even E-65) rated anymore and are at the end of their useful life. The 286K/315K issue is critical (and to some of you naysayers, YES 286K is VERY real) and UP has really gotten after it. I just wi***hat they had not already decided on who was going to do the project before they asked for proposals just to appease the beancounters.[V] Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:47 AM Somebody up above posted it was going to be triple track. Thanks for the info & clarifaction. [;)] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:34 PM I don't think that the UP will Triple Track the entire Iowa Line because there is only enough Train Traffic just for Two Tracks,And besides,A third Track would cost the UP more for Property Taxes as it is,And right now the UP is Paying out of their rear for high Taxes as it is. See......The states want the Railroads realy badly and yet the states just screw over the Railroads with high Taxes! "NO"..........Now that is "WRONG"! That is not being very fair at all,You know how much the Union Pacific Pays out in Property taxes every year? Alot! And yet the states want even more from the Railroads. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:39 PM Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:28 PM sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! Reply Edit mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:31 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Before the court case, it was New York. Now it's ? Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply jeffhergert Member sinceMarch 2003 From: Central Iowa 6,834 posts Posted by jeffhergert on Thursday, March 24, 2005 5:07 PM Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:43 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffhergert Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Thank you! Im just shocked that the UP is even considering this in the first place. wow! BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:47 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by farmer03 sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! No don't worry about it. I was the one who over stepped my grounds again. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:37 AM What I heard is that UPRR is going to put back the 2nd track where ever the CNW had removed it to make the Overland route all double track again. The pix I saw showed a bridge that now only had 1 track & the caption said will "soon" again be doubled tracked. [:o)] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:42 AM They may already own the land & are already paying taxes on it. I would also suspect that Iowa land taxes are small potatoes say compared with Los Angeles or Oak/SF or Dallas or Chicago. To give you a idea my former home in NJ on a plot of 100X100 now cost almost 7Gs in taxes [:o)][:p] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 10:12 AM Just saw a quite long UPRR work train pass the Rochelle cam appeared loaded with concrete ties going Ebound[:D] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:12 PM Jeff (jeffhergert) was out at Vale and did not see any grading for 3rd track. Reply Edit tomnoy3 Member sinceMay 2002 223 posts Posted by tomnoy3 on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:24 PM farmer03, Im guessing that the engines that you saw belong to Locomotive Leasing Partners (LLPX). They used to be owned by EMD but last year GATX bought it. Theres a couple LLPX units up where I live in Mankato that are still in UP paint but only bear the reporting marks and numbers of LLPX, so thats probably what you saw. -Tom Reply CShaveRR Member sinceJune 2001 From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois 13,681 posts Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, April 4, 2005 12:22 AM I suspect that once UP gets its act together it will require a third track as far west as Nelson, Illinois, and a second track down the Peoria Sub to the proposed connection with the BNSF (Edelstein?). The third track between Geneva and Elburn is related to the expanding Metra service, and there are plans "down the road" to put a third track in the "gap" between this new stretch and the old one at West Chicago. But I'm not holding my breath over the elimination of stopped trains on this line, even with a third track, until conditions at certain yards improve, as well as connections with certain railroads in Chicago. Carl Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!) CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM) Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:06 AM The YELLOW PERIL is spending $1.3 Billion (Billion with a B folks) on maintenance this year, unfortunately they do not do a good job on separating track from signal from mechanical $$$$ in the news release. http://www.progressiverailroading.com/freightnews/article.asp?id=6549 Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:20 AM This months Trains magazine says the UPRR just signed a 150M contract with CSXT in Grand Island to supply them with concrete crossties. [:p][:)] Love that yellow peril monicker! [:o)][:D][:p] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Monday, April 4, 2005 1:26 PM If they triple track, does that mean UP will have to replace the signals with signal bridges/ gantry? Andrew Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 2:37 PM Do you know what UPRR did when they tripled track Gibbon to No Platte? I guess thay would use the same procedure. Also the 3rd track is just speculation the UPRR has not announced such a venture up to now. [:o)][8D][:D] Originally posted by Junctionfan Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 4, 2005 5:03 PM Let's just all sit back and wait see what happens first. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit 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
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
Originally posted by jeffhergert Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 24,885 posts Posted by tree68 on Thursday, March 24, 2005 7:07 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Sounds like the UPRR is planning for a large increase in traffic. [:p][:o)] Originally posted by jeffhergert Or trying to catch up. 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... Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 7:45 AM That certainly is a possibility also [:o)] Originally posted by tree68 Originally posted by spbed Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 9:18 AM I mean my God Iowa already is a High Speed Railroad. So it sound like to me,is that the Kate Shelly is the only thing that is realy slowing them down right now. Right? This new Bridge? Will it be a Single or a Double Track type? BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, March 24, 2005 9:51 AM From the proposal we saw & responded to in March '04, it would be double track, initially only with one track on it. UPRR has been spending megabucks replacing bridges on the ex-CNW main due to decades of deferred maintenance. The main track has multiple bridges that are not E-80 (not really even E-65) rated anymore and are at the end of their useful life. The 286K/315K issue is critical (and to some of you naysayers, YES 286K is VERY real) and UP has really gotten after it. I just wi***hat they had not already decided on who was going to do the project before they asked for proposals just to appease the beancounters.[V] Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:47 AM Somebody up above posted it was going to be triple track. Thanks for the info & clarifaction. [;)] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:34 PM I don't think that the UP will Triple Track the entire Iowa Line because there is only enough Train Traffic just for Two Tracks,And besides,A third Track would cost the UP more for Property Taxes as it is,And right now the UP is Paying out of their rear for high Taxes as it is. See......The states want the Railroads realy badly and yet the states just screw over the Railroads with high Taxes! "NO"..........Now that is "WRONG"! That is not being very fair at all,You know how much the Union Pacific Pays out in Property taxes every year? Alot! And yet the states want even more from the Railroads. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:39 PM Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:28 PM sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! Reply Edit mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:31 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Before the court case, it was New York. Now it's ? Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply jeffhergert Member sinceMarch 2003 From: Central Iowa 6,834 posts Posted by jeffhergert on Thursday, March 24, 2005 5:07 PM Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:43 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffhergert Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Thank you! Im just shocked that the UP is even considering this in the first place. wow! BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:47 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by farmer03 sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! No don't worry about it. I was the one who over stepped my grounds again. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:37 AM What I heard is that UPRR is going to put back the 2nd track where ever the CNW had removed it to make the Overland route all double track again. The pix I saw showed a bridge that now only had 1 track & the caption said will "soon" again be doubled tracked. [:o)] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:42 AM They may already own the land & are already paying taxes on it. I would also suspect that Iowa land taxes are small potatoes say compared with Los Angeles or Oak/SF or Dallas or Chicago. To give you a idea my former home in NJ on a plot of 100X100 now cost almost 7Gs in taxes [:o)][:p] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 10:12 AM Just saw a quite long UPRR work train pass the Rochelle cam appeared loaded with concrete ties going Ebound[:D] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:12 PM Jeff (jeffhergert) was out at Vale and did not see any grading for 3rd track. Reply Edit tomnoy3 Member sinceMay 2002 223 posts Posted by tomnoy3 on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:24 PM farmer03, Im guessing that the engines that you saw belong to Locomotive Leasing Partners (LLPX). They used to be owned by EMD but last year GATX bought it. Theres a couple LLPX units up where I live in Mankato that are still in UP paint but only bear the reporting marks and numbers of LLPX, so thats probably what you saw. -Tom Reply CShaveRR Member sinceJune 2001 From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois 13,681 posts Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, April 4, 2005 12:22 AM I suspect that once UP gets its act together it will require a third track as far west as Nelson, Illinois, and a second track down the Peoria Sub to the proposed connection with the BNSF (Edelstein?). The third track between Geneva and Elburn is related to the expanding Metra service, and there are plans "down the road" to put a third track in the "gap" between this new stretch and the old one at West Chicago. But I'm not holding my breath over the elimination of stopped trains on this line, even with a third track, until conditions at certain yards improve, as well as connections with certain railroads in Chicago. Carl Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!) CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM) Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:06 AM The YELLOW PERIL is spending $1.3 Billion (Billion with a B folks) on maintenance this year, unfortunately they do not do a good job on separating track from signal from mechanical $$$$ in the news release. http://www.progressiverailroading.com/freightnews/article.asp?id=6549 Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:20 AM This months Trains magazine says the UPRR just signed a 150M contract with CSXT in Grand Island to supply them with concrete crossties. [:p][:)] Love that yellow peril monicker! [:o)][:D][:p] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Monday, April 4, 2005 1:26 PM If they triple track, does that mean UP will have to replace the signals with signal bridges/ gantry? Andrew Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 2:37 PM Do you know what UPRR did when they tripled track Gibbon to No Platte? I guess thay would use the same procedure. Also the 3rd track is just speculation the UPRR has not announced such a venture up to now. [:o)][8D][:D] Originally posted by Junctionfan Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 4, 2005 5:03 PM Let's just all sit back and wait see what happens first. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit 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
QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Sounds like the UPRR is planning for a large increase in traffic. [:p][:o)] Originally posted by jeffhergert Or trying to catch up. 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... Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 7:45 AM That certainly is a possibility also [:o)] Originally posted by tree68 Originally posted by spbed Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 9:18 AM I mean my God Iowa already is a High Speed Railroad. So it sound like to me,is that the Kate Shelly is the only thing that is realy slowing them down right now. Right? This new Bridge? Will it be a Single or a Double Track type? BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, March 24, 2005 9:51 AM From the proposal we saw & responded to in March '04, it would be double track, initially only with one track on it. UPRR has been spending megabucks replacing bridges on the ex-CNW main due to decades of deferred maintenance. The main track has multiple bridges that are not E-80 (not really even E-65) rated anymore and are at the end of their useful life. The 286K/315K issue is critical (and to some of you naysayers, YES 286K is VERY real) and UP has really gotten after it. I just wi***hat they had not already decided on who was going to do the project before they asked for proposals just to appease the beancounters.[V] Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:47 AM Somebody up above posted it was going to be triple track. Thanks for the info & clarifaction. [;)] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:34 PM I don't think that the UP will Triple Track the entire Iowa Line because there is only enough Train Traffic just for Two Tracks,And besides,A third Track would cost the UP more for Property Taxes as it is,And right now the UP is Paying out of their rear for high Taxes as it is. See......The states want the Railroads realy badly and yet the states just screw over the Railroads with high Taxes! "NO"..........Now that is "WRONG"! That is not being very fair at all,You know how much the Union Pacific Pays out in Property taxes every year? Alot! And yet the states want even more from the Railroads. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:39 PM Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:28 PM sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! Reply Edit mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:31 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Before the court case, it was New York. Now it's ? Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply jeffhergert Member sinceMarch 2003 From: Central Iowa 6,834 posts Posted by jeffhergert on Thursday, March 24, 2005 5:07 PM Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:43 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffhergert Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Thank you! Im just shocked that the UP is even considering this in the first place. wow! BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:47 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by farmer03 sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! No don't worry about it. I was the one who over stepped my grounds again. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:37 AM What I heard is that UPRR is going to put back the 2nd track where ever the CNW had removed it to make the Overland route all double track again. The pix I saw showed a bridge that now only had 1 track & the caption said will "soon" again be doubled tracked. [:o)] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:42 AM They may already own the land & are already paying taxes on it. I would also suspect that Iowa land taxes are small potatoes say compared with Los Angeles or Oak/SF or Dallas or Chicago. To give you a idea my former home in NJ on a plot of 100X100 now cost almost 7Gs in taxes [:o)][:p] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 10:12 AM Just saw a quite long UPRR work train pass the Rochelle cam appeared loaded with concrete ties going Ebound[:D] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:12 PM Jeff (jeffhergert) was out at Vale and did not see any grading for 3rd track. Reply Edit tomnoy3 Member sinceMay 2002 223 posts Posted by tomnoy3 on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:24 PM farmer03, Im guessing that the engines that you saw belong to Locomotive Leasing Partners (LLPX). They used to be owned by EMD but last year GATX bought it. Theres a couple LLPX units up where I live in Mankato that are still in UP paint but only bear the reporting marks and numbers of LLPX, so thats probably what you saw. -Tom Reply CShaveRR Member sinceJune 2001 From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois 13,681 posts Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, April 4, 2005 12:22 AM I suspect that once UP gets its act together it will require a third track as far west as Nelson, Illinois, and a second track down the Peoria Sub to the proposed connection with the BNSF (Edelstein?). The third track between Geneva and Elburn is related to the expanding Metra service, and there are plans "down the road" to put a third track in the "gap" between this new stretch and the old one at West Chicago. But I'm not holding my breath over the elimination of stopped trains on this line, even with a third track, until conditions at certain yards improve, as well as connections with certain railroads in Chicago. Carl Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!) CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM) Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:06 AM The YELLOW PERIL is spending $1.3 Billion (Billion with a B folks) on maintenance this year, unfortunately they do not do a good job on separating track from signal from mechanical $$$$ in the news release. http://www.progressiverailroading.com/freightnews/article.asp?id=6549 Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:20 AM This months Trains magazine says the UPRR just signed a 150M contract with CSXT in Grand Island to supply them with concrete crossties. [:p][:)] Love that yellow peril monicker! [:o)][:D][:p] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Monday, April 4, 2005 1:26 PM If they triple track, does that mean UP will have to replace the signals with signal bridges/ gantry? Andrew Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 2:37 PM Do you know what UPRR did when they tripled track Gibbon to No Platte? I guess thay would use the same procedure. Also the 3rd track is just speculation the UPRR has not announced such a venture up to now. [:o)][8D][:D] Originally posted by Junctionfan Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 4, 2005 5:03 PM Let's just all sit back and wait see what happens first. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit 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
Originally posted by jeffhergert
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...
Originally posted by tree68 Originally posted by spbed Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 9:18 AM I mean my God Iowa already is a High Speed Railroad. So it sound like to me,is that the Kate Shelly is the only thing that is realy slowing them down right now. Right? This new Bridge? Will it be a Single or a Double Track type? BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, March 24, 2005 9:51 AM From the proposal we saw & responded to in March '04, it would be double track, initially only with one track on it. UPRR has been spending megabucks replacing bridges on the ex-CNW main due to decades of deferred maintenance. The main track has multiple bridges that are not E-80 (not really even E-65) rated anymore and are at the end of their useful life. The 286K/315K issue is critical (and to some of you naysayers, YES 286K is VERY real) and UP has really gotten after it. I just wi***hat they had not already decided on who was going to do the project before they asked for proposals just to appease the beancounters.[V] Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:47 AM Somebody up above posted it was going to be triple track. Thanks for the info & clarifaction. [;)] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:34 PM I don't think that the UP will Triple Track the entire Iowa Line because there is only enough Train Traffic just for Two Tracks,And besides,A third Track would cost the UP more for Property Taxes as it is,And right now the UP is Paying out of their rear for high Taxes as it is. See......The states want the Railroads realy badly and yet the states just screw over the Railroads with high Taxes! "NO"..........Now that is "WRONG"! That is not being very fair at all,You know how much the Union Pacific Pays out in Property taxes every year? Alot! And yet the states want even more from the Railroads. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:39 PM Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:28 PM sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! Reply Edit mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:31 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Before the court case, it was New York. Now it's ? Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply jeffhergert Member sinceMarch 2003 From: Central Iowa 6,834 posts Posted by jeffhergert on Thursday, March 24, 2005 5:07 PM Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:43 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffhergert Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Thank you! Im just shocked that the UP is even considering this in the first place. wow! BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:47 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by farmer03 sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! No don't worry about it. I was the one who over stepped my grounds again. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:37 AM What I heard is that UPRR is going to put back the 2nd track where ever the CNW had removed it to make the Overland route all double track again. The pix I saw showed a bridge that now only had 1 track & the caption said will "soon" again be doubled tracked. [:o)] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:42 AM They may already own the land & are already paying taxes on it. I would also suspect that Iowa land taxes are small potatoes say compared with Los Angeles or Oak/SF or Dallas or Chicago. To give you a idea my former home in NJ on a plot of 100X100 now cost almost 7Gs in taxes [:o)][:p] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 10:12 AM Just saw a quite long UPRR work train pass the Rochelle cam appeared loaded with concrete ties going Ebound[:D] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:12 PM Jeff (jeffhergert) was out at Vale and did not see any grading for 3rd track. Reply Edit tomnoy3 Member sinceMay 2002 223 posts Posted by tomnoy3 on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:24 PM farmer03, Im guessing that the engines that you saw belong to Locomotive Leasing Partners (LLPX). They used to be owned by EMD but last year GATX bought it. Theres a couple LLPX units up where I live in Mankato that are still in UP paint but only bear the reporting marks and numbers of LLPX, so thats probably what you saw. -Tom Reply CShaveRR Member sinceJune 2001 From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois 13,681 posts Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, April 4, 2005 12:22 AM I suspect that once UP gets its act together it will require a third track as far west as Nelson, Illinois, and a second track down the Peoria Sub to the proposed connection with the BNSF (Edelstein?). The third track between Geneva and Elburn is related to the expanding Metra service, and there are plans "down the road" to put a third track in the "gap" between this new stretch and the old one at West Chicago. But I'm not holding my breath over the elimination of stopped trains on this line, even with a third track, until conditions at certain yards improve, as well as connections with certain railroads in Chicago. Carl Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!) CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM) Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:06 AM The YELLOW PERIL is spending $1.3 Billion (Billion with a B folks) on maintenance this year, unfortunately they do not do a good job on separating track from signal from mechanical $$$$ in the news release. http://www.progressiverailroading.com/freightnews/article.asp?id=6549 Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:20 AM This months Trains magazine says the UPRR just signed a 150M contract with CSXT in Grand Island to supply them with concrete crossties. [:p][:)] Love that yellow peril monicker! [:o)][:D][:p] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Monday, April 4, 2005 1:26 PM If they triple track, does that mean UP will have to replace the signals with signal bridges/ gantry? Andrew Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 2:37 PM Do you know what UPRR did when they tripled track Gibbon to No Platte? I guess thay would use the same procedure. Also the 3rd track is just speculation the UPRR has not announced such a venture up to now. [:o)][8D][:D] Originally posted by Junctionfan Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 4, 2005 5:03 PM Let's just all sit back and wait see what happens first. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit 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
Originally posted by spbed Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 9:18 AM I mean my God Iowa already is a High Speed Railroad. So it sound like to me,is that the Kate Shelly is the only thing that is realy slowing them down right now. Right? This new Bridge? Will it be a Single or a Double Track type? BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, March 24, 2005 9:51 AM From the proposal we saw & responded to in March '04, it would be double track, initially only with one track on it. UPRR has been spending megabucks replacing bridges on the ex-CNW main due to decades of deferred maintenance. The main track has multiple bridges that are not E-80 (not really even E-65) rated anymore and are at the end of their useful life. The 286K/315K issue is critical (and to some of you naysayers, YES 286K is VERY real) and UP has really gotten after it. I just wi***hat they had not already decided on who was going to do the project before they asked for proposals just to appease the beancounters.[V] Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:47 AM Somebody up above posted it was going to be triple track. Thanks for the info & clarifaction. [;)] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:34 PM I don't think that the UP will Triple Track the entire Iowa Line because there is only enough Train Traffic just for Two Tracks,And besides,A third Track would cost the UP more for Property Taxes as it is,And right now the UP is Paying out of their rear for high Taxes as it is. See......The states want the Railroads realy badly and yet the states just screw over the Railroads with high Taxes! "NO"..........Now that is "WRONG"! That is not being very fair at all,You know how much the Union Pacific Pays out in Property taxes every year? Alot! And yet the states want even more from the Railroads. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:39 PM Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:28 PM sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! Reply Edit mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:31 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Before the court case, it was New York. Now it's ? Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply jeffhergert Member sinceMarch 2003 From: Central Iowa 6,834 posts Posted by jeffhergert on Thursday, March 24, 2005 5:07 PM Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:43 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffhergert Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Thank you! Im just shocked that the UP is even considering this in the first place. wow! BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:47 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by farmer03 sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! No don't worry about it. I was the one who over stepped my grounds again. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:37 AM What I heard is that UPRR is going to put back the 2nd track where ever the CNW had removed it to make the Overland route all double track again. The pix I saw showed a bridge that now only had 1 track & the caption said will "soon" again be doubled tracked. [:o)] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:42 AM They may already own the land & are already paying taxes on it. I would also suspect that Iowa land taxes are small potatoes say compared with Los Angeles or Oak/SF or Dallas or Chicago. To give you a idea my former home in NJ on a plot of 100X100 now cost almost 7Gs in taxes [:o)][:p] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 10:12 AM Just saw a quite long UPRR work train pass the Rochelle cam appeared loaded with concrete ties going Ebound[:D] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:12 PM Jeff (jeffhergert) was out at Vale and did not see any grading for 3rd track. Reply Edit tomnoy3 Member sinceMay 2002 223 posts Posted by tomnoy3 on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:24 PM farmer03, Im guessing that the engines that you saw belong to Locomotive Leasing Partners (LLPX). They used to be owned by EMD but last year GATX bought it. Theres a couple LLPX units up where I live in Mankato that are still in UP paint but only bear the reporting marks and numbers of LLPX, so thats probably what you saw. -Tom Reply CShaveRR Member sinceJune 2001 From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois 13,681 posts Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, April 4, 2005 12:22 AM I suspect that once UP gets its act together it will require a third track as far west as Nelson, Illinois, and a second track down the Peoria Sub to the proposed connection with the BNSF (Edelstein?). The third track between Geneva and Elburn is related to the expanding Metra service, and there are plans "down the road" to put a third track in the "gap" between this new stretch and the old one at West Chicago. But I'm not holding my breath over the elimination of stopped trains on this line, even with a third track, until conditions at certain yards improve, as well as connections with certain railroads in Chicago. Carl Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!) CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM) Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:06 AM The YELLOW PERIL is spending $1.3 Billion (Billion with a B folks) on maintenance this year, unfortunately they do not do a good job on separating track from signal from mechanical $$$$ in the news release. http://www.progressiverailroading.com/freightnews/article.asp?id=6549 Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:20 AM This months Trains magazine says the UPRR just signed a 150M contract with CSXT in Grand Island to supply them with concrete crossties. [:p][:)] Love that yellow peril monicker! [:o)][:D][:p] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Monday, April 4, 2005 1:26 PM If they triple track, does that mean UP will have to replace the signals with signal bridges/ gantry? Andrew Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 2:37 PM Do you know what UPRR did when they tripled track Gibbon to No Platte? I guess thay would use the same procedure. Also the 3rd track is just speculation the UPRR has not announced such a venture up to now. [:o)][8D][:D] Originally posted by Junctionfan Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 4, 2005 5:03 PM Let's just all sit back and wait see what happens first. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit 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
Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:34 PM I don't think that the UP will Triple Track the entire Iowa Line because there is only enough Train Traffic just for Two Tracks,And besides,A third Track would cost the UP more for Property Taxes as it is,And right now the UP is Paying out of their rear for high Taxes as it is. See......The states want the Railroads realy badly and yet the states just screw over the Railroads with high Taxes! "NO"..........Now that is "WRONG"! That is not being very fair at all,You know how much the Union Pacific Pays out in Property taxes every year? Alot! And yet the states want even more from the Railroads. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:39 PM Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:28 PM sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! Reply Edit mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:31 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan. Before the court case, it was New York. Now it's ? Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply jeffhergert Member sinceMarch 2003 From: Central Iowa 6,834 posts Posted by jeffhergert on Thursday, March 24, 2005 5:07 PM Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:43 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffhergert Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff Thank you! Im just shocked that the UP is even considering this in the first place. wow! BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:47 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by farmer03 sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times! No don't worry about it. I was the one who over stepped my grounds again. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:37 AM What I heard is that UPRR is going to put back the 2nd track where ever the CNW had removed it to make the Overland route all double track again. The pix I saw showed a bridge that now only had 1 track & the caption said will "soon" again be doubled tracked. [:o)] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:42 AM They may already own the land & are already paying taxes on it. I would also suspect that Iowa land taxes are small potatoes say compared with Los Angeles or Oak/SF or Dallas or Chicago. To give you a idea my former home in NJ on a plot of 100X100 now cost almost 7Gs in taxes [:o)][:p] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 10:12 AM Just saw a quite long UPRR work train pass the Rochelle cam appeared loaded with concrete ties going Ebound[:D] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:12 PM Jeff (jeffhergert) was out at Vale and did not see any grading for 3rd track. Reply Edit tomnoy3 Member sinceMay 2002 223 posts Posted by tomnoy3 on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:24 PM farmer03, Im guessing that the engines that you saw belong to Locomotive Leasing Partners (LLPX). They used to be owned by EMD but last year GATX bought it. Theres a couple LLPX units up where I live in Mankato that are still in UP paint but only bear the reporting marks and numbers of LLPX, so thats probably what you saw. -Tom Reply CShaveRR Member sinceJune 2001 From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois 13,681 posts Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, April 4, 2005 12:22 AM I suspect that once UP gets its act together it will require a third track as far west as Nelson, Illinois, and a second track down the Peoria Sub to the proposed connection with the BNSF (Edelstein?). The third track between Geneva and Elburn is related to the expanding Metra service, and there are plans "down the road" to put a third track in the "gap" between this new stretch and the old one at West Chicago. But I'm not holding my breath over the elimination of stopped trains on this line, even with a third track, until conditions at certain yards improve, as well as connections with certain railroads in Chicago. Carl Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!) CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM) Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:06 AM The YELLOW PERIL is spending $1.3 Billion (Billion with a B folks) on maintenance this year, unfortunately they do not do a good job on separating track from signal from mechanical $$$$ in the news release. http://www.progressiverailroading.com/freightnews/article.asp?id=6549 Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:20 AM This months Trains magazine says the UPRR just signed a 150M contract with CSXT in Grand Island to supply them with concrete crossties. [:p][:)] Love that yellow peril monicker! [:o)][:D][:p] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Monday, April 4, 2005 1:26 PM If they triple track, does that mean UP will have to replace the signals with signal bridges/ gantry? Andrew Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 2:37 PM Do you know what UPRR did when they tripled track Gibbon to No Platte? I guess thay would use the same procedure. Also the 3rd track is just speculation the UPRR has not announced such a venture up to now. [:o)][8D][:D] Originally posted by Junctionfan Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 4, 2005 5:03 PM Let's just all sit back and wait see what happens first. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit 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
QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Oh now that it's on my mind. In which State in the USA is the 4 Big Railroads Paying the most Highest Property Taxes? BNSFrailfan.
QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffhergert Actually there has been talk for several years of a 3rd main across Iowa. In years to come they expect 100 trains a day across Iowa. Right now, I think we're at about 60 or so a day. One project in the works is for a 3rd main between Vale, Iowa over the hill at Arcadia to a point just west of Maple River. Also future projects are for third tracks thru Boone, Marshalltown and Beverly(Cedar Rapids) terminal areas. Jeff
QUOTE: Originally posted by farmer03 sorry if i led anyone astray....i was just making a statement about how it appears to me that the UP COULD use a third main across IL, not that it was in the works. i drive by the dekalb, rochelle and points east areas and i see trains parked all the time. must be some busy times!
Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 6:42 AM They may already own the land & are already paying taxes on it. I would also suspect that Iowa land taxes are small potatoes say compared with Los Angeles or Oak/SF or Dallas or Chicago. To give you a idea my former home in NJ on a plot of 100X100 now cost almost 7Gs in taxes [:o)][:p] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 10:12 AM Just saw a quite long UPRR work train pass the Rochelle cam appeared loaded with concrete ties going Ebound[:D] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:12 PM Jeff (jeffhergert) was out at Vale and did not see any grading for 3rd track. Reply Edit tomnoy3 Member sinceMay 2002 223 posts Posted by tomnoy3 on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:24 PM farmer03, Im guessing that the engines that you saw belong to Locomotive Leasing Partners (LLPX). They used to be owned by EMD but last year GATX bought it. Theres a couple LLPX units up where I live in Mankato that are still in UP paint but only bear the reporting marks and numbers of LLPX, so thats probably what you saw. -Tom Reply CShaveRR Member sinceJune 2001 From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois 13,681 posts Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, April 4, 2005 12:22 AM I suspect that once UP gets its act together it will require a third track as far west as Nelson, Illinois, and a second track down the Peoria Sub to the proposed connection with the BNSF (Edelstein?). The third track between Geneva and Elburn is related to the expanding Metra service, and there are plans "down the road" to put a third track in the "gap" between this new stretch and the old one at West Chicago. But I'm not holding my breath over the elimination of stopped trains on this line, even with a third track, until conditions at certain yards improve, as well as connections with certain railroads in Chicago. Carl Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!) CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM) Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:06 AM The YELLOW PERIL is spending $1.3 Billion (Billion with a B folks) on maintenance this year, unfortunately they do not do a good job on separating track from signal from mechanical $$$$ in the news release. http://www.progressiverailroading.com/freightnews/article.asp?id=6549 Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:20 AM This months Trains magazine says the UPRR just signed a 150M contract with CSXT in Grand Island to supply them with concrete crossties. [:p][:)] Love that yellow peril monicker! [:o)][:D][:p] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Monday, April 4, 2005 1:26 PM If they triple track, does that mean UP will have to replace the signals with signal bridges/ gantry? Andrew Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 2:37 PM Do you know what UPRR did when they tripled track Gibbon to No Platte? I guess thay would use the same procedure. Also the 3rd track is just speculation the UPRR has not announced such a venture up to now. [:o)][8D][:D] Originally posted by Junctionfan Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 4, 2005 5:03 PM Let's just all sit back and wait see what happens first. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit 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
Originally posted by BNSF railfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, March 25, 2005 10:12 AM Just saw a quite long UPRR work train pass the Rochelle cam appeared loaded with concrete ties going Ebound[:D] Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:12 PM Jeff (jeffhergert) was out at Vale and did not see any grading for 3rd track. Reply Edit tomnoy3 Member sinceMay 2002 223 posts Posted by tomnoy3 on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:24 PM farmer03, Im guessing that the engines that you saw belong to Locomotive Leasing Partners (LLPX). They used to be owned by EMD but last year GATX bought it. Theres a couple LLPX units up where I live in Mankato that are still in UP paint but only bear the reporting marks and numbers of LLPX, so thats probably what you saw. -Tom Reply CShaveRR Member sinceJune 2001 From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois 13,681 posts Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, April 4, 2005 12:22 AM I suspect that once UP gets its act together it will require a third track as far west as Nelson, Illinois, and a second track down the Peoria Sub to the proposed connection with the BNSF (Edelstein?). The third track between Geneva and Elburn is related to the expanding Metra service, and there are plans "down the road" to put a third track in the "gap" between this new stretch and the old one at West Chicago. But I'm not holding my breath over the elimination of stopped trains on this line, even with a third track, until conditions at certain yards improve, as well as connections with certain railroads in Chicago. Carl Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!) CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM) Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:06 AM The YELLOW PERIL is spending $1.3 Billion (Billion with a B folks) on maintenance this year, unfortunately they do not do a good job on separating track from signal from mechanical $$$$ in the news release. http://www.progressiverailroading.com/freightnews/article.asp?id=6549 Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:20 AM This months Trains magazine says the UPRR just signed a 150M contract with CSXT in Grand Island to supply them with concrete crossties. [:p][:)] Love that yellow peril monicker! [:o)][:D][:p] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Monday, April 4, 2005 1:26 PM If they triple track, does that mean UP will have to replace the signals with signal bridges/ gantry? Andrew Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 2:37 PM Do you know what UPRR did when they tripled track Gibbon to No Platte? I guess thay would use the same procedure. Also the 3rd track is just speculation the UPRR has not announced such a venture up to now. [:o)][8D][:D] Originally posted by Junctionfan Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 4, 2005 5:03 PM Let's just all sit back and wait see what happens first. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit 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
Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:12 PM Jeff (jeffhergert) was out at Vale and did not see any grading for 3rd track. Reply Edit tomnoy3 Member sinceMay 2002 223 posts Posted by tomnoy3 on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:24 PM farmer03, Im guessing that the engines that you saw belong to Locomotive Leasing Partners (LLPX). They used to be owned by EMD but last year GATX bought it. Theres a couple LLPX units up where I live in Mankato that are still in UP paint but only bear the reporting marks and numbers of LLPX, so thats probably what you saw. -Tom Reply CShaveRR Member sinceJune 2001 From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois 13,681 posts Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, April 4, 2005 12:22 AM I suspect that once UP gets its act together it will require a third track as far west as Nelson, Illinois, and a second track down the Peoria Sub to the proposed connection with the BNSF (Edelstein?). The third track between Geneva and Elburn is related to the expanding Metra service, and there are plans "down the road" to put a third track in the "gap" between this new stretch and the old one at West Chicago. But I'm not holding my breath over the elimination of stopped trains on this line, even with a third track, until conditions at certain yards improve, as well as connections with certain railroads in Chicago. Carl Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!) CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM) Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,789 posts Posted by mudchicken on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:06 AM The YELLOW PERIL is spending $1.3 Billion (Billion with a B folks) on maintenance this year, unfortunately they do not do a good job on separating track from signal from mechanical $$$$ in the news release. http://www.progressiverailroading.com/freightnews/article.asp?id=6549 Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 10:20 AM This months Trains magazine says the UPRR just signed a 150M contract with CSXT in Grand Island to supply them with concrete crossties. [:p][:)] Love that yellow peril monicker! [:o)][:D][:p] Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Monday, April 4, 2005 1:26 PM If they triple track, does that mean UP will have to replace the signals with signal bridges/ gantry? Andrew Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 2:37 PM Do you know what UPRR did when they tripled track Gibbon to No Platte? I guess thay would use the same procedure. Also the 3rd track is just speculation the UPRR has not announced such a venture up to now. [:o)][8D][:D] Originally posted by Junctionfan Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 4, 2005 5:03 PM Let's just all sit back and wait see what happens first. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit 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
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
Originally posted by mudchicken Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Monday, April 4, 2005 1:26 PM If they triple track, does that mean UP will have to replace the signals with signal bridges/ gantry? Andrew Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 2:37 PM Do you know what UPRR did when they tripled track Gibbon to No Platte? I guess thay would use the same procedure. Also the 3rd track is just speculation the UPRR has not announced such a venture up to now. [:o)][8D][:D] Originally posted by Junctionfan Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 4, 2005 5:03 PM Let's just all sit back and wait see what happens first. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit 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
Originally posted by Junctionfan Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 4, 2005 5:03 PM Let's just all sit back and wait see what happens first. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit 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
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.