Trains.com

Snoqualmie

11657 views
37 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, February 17, 2014 6:25 PM

PNWRMNM

Murray,

I believe that BNSF is busy in Washington. I am not aware of any capacity constraint that has adversely affected service to a serious extent.

You have made claims without any evidence to support them. Since you are making the claims it is up to you to provide some evidence that the claim is true. Without evidence you look like chicken little.

Mac

 

BNSF's tunnels are not a capacity constraint?

The trip south and then up the gorge is not a capacity constraint?

WADR, you're the first person I've talked to that does not admit a PNW capacity problem.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 2,593 posts
Posted by PNWRMNM on Monday, February 17, 2014 6:35 PM

Murray,

You have offered nothing by way of fact nor shown any failure to provide service. Given that, why should anyone take seriously the notion of reopening Snoqualmie Pass, which is the absolutely least cost effective way to increase east - west capacity across the state of Washington?

Mac

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, February 17, 2014 6:49 PM

PNWRMNM

Murray,

You have offered nothing by way of fact nor shown any failure to provide service. Given that, why should anyone take seriously the notion of reopening Snoqualmie Pass, which is the absolutely least cost effective way to increase east - west capacity across the state of Washington?

Mac

 

Mac...I mentioned Snoqualmie as a suggestion, based on my observations and from what I hear from people I know in the industry.

You keep continually pressing me for substantive sources.

How about you providing some sources to justify your claims that there is not a capacity issue on BNSF in the PNSF.

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Monday, February 17, 2014 7:00 PM

I have no sources, but I seem to recall that prior to the recession PNW was under severe capacity issues. Stampede was at capacity. I have this recollection that the Governor of Wa at the time even suggested pushing to put rail back down over Snoqualmie.

Certainly, I would not be wise to use the economic downturn and resultant drop in shipments as proof of a lack of capacity issues. 

Cascade Tunnel is an issue. The question is whether Snoqualmie is a solution. The answer is "probably not unless someone else wants to pay."

  • Member since
    March 2015
  • 171 posts
Posted by kenny dorham on Monday, February 17, 2014 7:05 PM

I will just add, as the OP, that my original question was in relation to a time a few decades back, when this Tunnel/ROW in question, was first acquired from Milwaukee I thought that might have been the time to do it.

Just as relevant to discuss it as a current scenario as well...whether it would or would not be a good idea. But as I say, I was wondering if it had been considered "back then".?

carry on

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, February 17, 2014 7:17 PM

YoHo1975

I have no sources, but I seem to recall that prior to the recession PNW was under severe capacity issues. Stampede was at capacity. I have this recollection that the Governor of Wa at the time even suggested pushing to put rail back down over Snoqualmie.

Certainly, I would not be wise to use the economic downturn and resultant drop in shipments as proof of a lack of capacity issues. 

Cascade Tunnel is an issue. The question is whether Snoqualmie is a solution. The answer is "probably not unless someone else wants to pay."

This is pretty much what I was looking to discuss.

I'm not looking for the MILW to be raised from the dead, so to speak, but if the situation of the BNSF tunnels and the traffic issues along the gorge are such that it is creating an impact, what other solutions (to include Snoqualmie might be "possible?"

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 2,593 posts
Posted by PNWRMNM on Monday, February 17, 2014 7:30 PM

All,

For summary of recent, last 5 years or so, things BNSF has done to improve cross state capacity in Washington see my posts of 2-11 and 2-14 this thread.

The iron triangle is a BIG BIG deal in terms of reducing meets and train delay, thus increasing capacity.

To the best of my knowledge BNSF has spare capacity over the mountains/gorge. Double tracking Pasco-Spokane will finally fix most of the stupid stupid move by the oilmen of tearing up SP&S between those points.

Mac

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Monday, February 17, 2014 8:11 PM

The SP&S between Pasco and Spokane had a lot of very large bridges and deep cuts. With traffic down, I suspect BN didn't think that the harder to maintain route was worth it.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

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