I model UP and actually am building my layout (finally) and would like to know what other railway equipment I could have along UP locos and rolling stock and still be prototypically plausible.Nowadays,UP is huge and I suppose that they own most if not all of the trackage they use but my guess is that it wasn't such back then.If so,who did UP share their territory with let's say in a specific area like California as it probably was different depending on area.I'm not bound by prototypical precision and will have SP and CP along whatever the answer will be but I'm curious.Thanks.
Actually there was less shared track in the old days. The era makes a big difference. The primary shared track would have been from Denver to Pueblo on the ATSF,Yermo to Los Angeles over the SP and between Portland and Seattle.
Also the further back you go the less run through operations there were so the less likely you would see other roads power operating in a UP train.
Freight cars were commonly mixed from the late 1800's on.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
If by CP you mean Canadian Pacific, be aware that before NAFTA came along CP was a Canadian-only railroad. It's lines in the US were operated by affiliated companies like the Soo Line. You wouldn't see CN or CP trains operating in the US before the 1990's except in limited situations like passenger trains (pre-Amtrak/VIA) that might use a subsidiary company or trackage rights to reach a US city. For example, CN engines and passenger cars could run from Ft.Francis, ONT down to Duluth MN on subsidiary DW&P but the equipment had to be back in Canada within a short amount of time...something like 24 or 48 hours.
To turn your question around, for most of it's history UP didn't reach any farther east than Omaha or far western Iowa, so they worked out agreements with first C&NW and then (from 1955 on) the Milwaukee Road to run UP trains from Omaha to Chicago over their roads. Early UP streamliners were done in conjunction with CNW and the engines carried heralds for both railroads.
I don't have my book on Chicago stations at hand, but UP would have shared the depot it used in Chicago with several other railroads...I assume they used the CNW station before 1955. There probably were several other large cities where UP trains shared a Union Depot with other railroads.
wjstix To turn your question around, for most of it's history UP didn't reach any farther east than Omaha or far western Iowa, so they worked out agreements with first C&NW and then (from 1955 on) the Milwaukee Road to run UP trains from Omaha to Chicago over their roads. Early UP streamliners were done in conjunction with CNW and the engines carried heralds for both railroads.
Just to be clear, the UP didn't run trains to Chicago prior to the CNW merger and the UP didn't operate over the Milwaukee or CNW. The UP interchanged the trains to the CNW or MILW and they operated them as thier trains to Chicago. So really the UP didn't share the track to or the depot at Chicago.
wjstixI don't have my book on Chicago stations at hand, but UP would have shared the depot it used in Chicago with several other railroads...I assume they used the CNW station before 1955. There probably were several other large cities where UP trains shared a Union Depot with other railroads.
Well the trains / cars were UP (City of San Francisco etc.) but were pulled either by CNW engines or by jointly owned UP-CNW engines. Yes technically they were CNW or later Milwaukee trains, much as the two-tone green cars of the North Coast Limited made up a Burlington Route train between St.Paul and Chicago, even thought the cars said "NORTHERN PACIFIC" and the train was generally referred to as an NP train - as opposed to trains that only ran on the Burlington, like the Twin Cities Zephyr.
Your point is well taken that there was a lot of passenger equipment sharing on through trains. I have seen pictures of PRR trains with Frisco-MP-UP and SP cars in them (actually more non-PRR than PRR). Baggage/Express cars also tended to run on other roads. I would be willing to be that a PRR B60 baggage car has been to every state in the lower 48.
Usually Dave Husman is right on the money, so he must have been having an off day when he wrote: "The primary shared track would have been from Denver to Pueblo on the ATSF,Yermo to Los Angeles over the SP and between Portland and Seattle." The Santa Fe shared its Denver-Pueblo line with the C&S (Burlington Route), and also ran on the parallel D&RGW to form a double-track corridor shared by three railroads. However, none of the three was the UP. (Today this corridor is shared by BNSF Ry. and UP.) The only railroad at Yermo, Calif., is the UP, but just south (railroad west) of there is Daggett, where UP trains got onto AT&SF rails for trackage rights operation through Barstow, over Cajon Pass to San Bernardino, and through Colton to Riverside Junction. (The UP still exercises its trackage rights on what is now BNSF between Daggett and Riverside Junction.) From Riverside into LA the UP was back on its own track through East LA and as far as Mission Tower. There it entered Los Angeles Union Passenger Terminal tracks, shared with the Santa Fe and the SP.So long,Andy
Andy Sperandeo MODEL RAILROADER Magazine
I'm always amazed at how much knowledge can be found on this forum and even more amazed at how so kindly this forum members respond to our query.Thanks everyone.
Well...I have an SP Lark consist assembled and I'm currently assembling a UP Portland Rose train that I will run on my layout anyway.Although it's not likely that these two trains have encountered eachother,it will happen on my layout just the same.However,I was curious to know and I admit that I somehow expected it.
On the first post,I spoke of CP but this one is right on as I also have big 90's and AC4400's of both UP and CP and I already learned that this is common practice to have both in the same consists right now but didn't know that this wasn't so in the steam era.The layout will be steam oriented (scenery and else) but I won't toss my diesels away,they just won't stop at the coal tower.
I was wondering about Salt Lake City. I know the SP, UP, WP and D&RGW were all there but I don't know if they were in the same area as the UP..
It's not California, but the Rock Island used UP tracks between Kansas City and Topeka in Kansas. The RI also used UP tracks between Limon, Colorado and Denver.
Jeff
WPAllen I was wondering about Salt Lake City. I know the SP, UP, WP and D&RGW were all there but I don't know if they were in the same area as the UP..
Actually, SP didn't enter Salt Lake City, but terminated at Ogden, some miles to the north, where it interchanged with either the UP or D&RGW, both railroads terminating at Ogden. Both WP and D&RGW interchanged at Salt Lake City, and UP ran southerly through Salt Lake City as part of its route to Southern California (the old San Pedro, Los Angeles and Salt Lake route). The 'transcontinental' passenger trains that UP shared with SP (City of San Francisco, Overland Limited, Gold Coast, etc.) bypassed Salt Lake City, as the Utah Capitol was somewhat south of the original transcontinental "Overland" route.
"Name" passenger trains using Salt Lake City would have been UP's "City of Los Angeles", "Challenger", and the WP/Rio Grande "California Zephyr" and "Royal Gorge."
Roper Yard in Salt Lake City was the main yard for freight interchange between WP and D&RGW.
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!