Trump to OK railroad to Alaska

[CMStPnP]

Overmod

The chief thing that has changed in the last 20 years or so is the development of precision-guided munitions.  Repeated strikes even with low-level cruise missiles would make defense in depth of any mountain railway a crapshoot; with the innovation of long-loiter UAVs it becomes an interesting subject of just what even conventional air superiority might mean to a debilitating strike against traffic as well as bridges, tunnels, or areas where strikes might cause landslip or avalanche either above or below grade.  While a MIRV or MARV strike is unlikely to me, it is likely there are many locations on the proposed railway where very large land movement, probably associated with radiological contamination, could render the railroad as a practical through route interdicted fir an extended time and perhaps permanently; I would suspect that appropriate nuclear ordnance could be delivered by cruise to similar effect.

I can't see them launching an ICBM against Alaska or Western Canada.   There is no targets there high value enough.    So onto the Cruise Missiles which are short range and you need to get really close to launch them with an Aircraft Carrier if your using Aircraft or a Sub.    Surface ship would never get that close unless we lost most of the Pacific Fleet.    

However, unrelated this military discussion is.   It again underscores a main point of the thread that Alaska is not developed enough to represent anything other that a landing zone for paratroopers from Russia or China or for Special Forces sabotage missions.    So it ends up being the same argument why a rail line is not built.   Develop Alaska and you'll see DoD argue for a rail line connection for it's defense.   

 

[CMStPnP]

Overmod

  That might be less assured in cold and deep-snow conditions, in areas not amenable to heavy lift, where significant grading or heavy fill might be required even for slow speed.

If it was just RJ Corman I might agree but your going to see a pairing of DoD and private capabilities here if it was a vital rail line and it was wartime.

[Overmod]

CMStPnP

Develop Alaska and you'll see DoD argue for a rail line connection for it's defense.

Likely as much for support as formal defense; the two would go hand-in-hand.  The associated question for both A2A and G7G is how coordinated their 'development' projects or relationships/partners will be.  Is Brightline an applicable model?

[charlie hebdo]

OM: Amazing how irrelevant much of the discussion becomes in spite of your valiant efforts to put it back on the logic track.  I give up. 

[CMStPnP]

Overmod

Likely as much for support as formal defense; the two would go hand-in-hand.  The associated question for both A2A and G7G is how coordinated their 'development' projects or relationships/partners will be.  Is Brightline an applicable model? A

I don't know.   I think it is too early for someone like Brightline because Alaska lacks the population density.    I think you would first need to have a similar development effort like we had in the West long ago.    Incent private roadway builders and some private railway lines to build to the Western interior of the state, plat the land into townships and sell to immigrants or new settlers.   What would the developments be centered around is another question.    I don't think the land is overly suitable for farming but perhaps you can start manufacturing products in Alaska that Alaska currently imports and turn that around so then the product is exported.    I would go with manufacturing first because that builds wealth and the economy faster then service.     So maybe different settlements built around manufacturing capabilities or plants of some sort.    They could ship by rail as well, inbound raw materials, outbound finished product and probably export to the Northern part of the Pacific Rim.    Build some new ports in the West with rail lines leading to them.    Look at the success Canada has had with Prince Rupert, BC.    My first visit there it was a tiny town and the rail line leading to it was all single track with few passing sidings.    Now look at the huge container port there and the line leading to it is a lot busier than it was in the past.

Also, it doesn't have to be 100% a United States effort, bring in Japan to invest.   Maybe they can build some auto assembly plants or parts plants up there.   I actually believe all the Pacific Rim countries would want to see Alaska developed vs maintain it's status quo as America's version of Siberia.     It would open a world of new opportunities for all of them.

[Fred M Cain]

Flintlock76

 

 

rrnut282

I was under the impression that the Gateway Project was going forward, just with a larger chunk of funding from the local states.  

 

 

It is.  

A railroad to Alaska's been kicked around ever since WW2.  Why it's going to be built (maybe) now I don't know.

 

 

 As I have mentioned on at least two other threads, it's the Alaska to Alberta (A2A) Railway.  They have a nice website and I contacted them by e-mail.

They are serious.  Will they pull it off?  Who knows?  Several people have voiced their rather negative opinions about this but I'm not sure anyone knows for sure.

What will they carry?  It's on their website.  Would it be successful?  I have no idea.

But, I don't think that the Trumpster was providing any monetary assistance.  He just authorized it. That means that it only has a clear block from the ARR end of track near "North Pole" to the Alaska/Yukon Territory line.  I don't know for sure if the Canadian government has done likewise or not.

I believe, if I'm not mistaken that the ARR has already graded some of the right of way east of North Pole

Regards,

FMC

[Overmod]

Fred M Cain

As I have mentioned on at least two other threads, it's the Alaska to Alberta (A2A) Railway.  They have a nice website and I contacted them by e-mail.

Fred, you do know there's another one, backed by First Nations participation -- G7G.  (I think their URL was posted in one of the recent threads.)

I don't think that the Trumpster was providing any monetary assistance.  He just authorized it.

This perhaps shows the pernicious effects of usual-suspects politics as clearly as anything: the only thing about 'Trump' that mattered was his signing something that did not oppose or stop it.  After that who cared if it had been Obama or Bush or Harris that did so?

I believe, if I'm not mistaken that the ARR has already graded some of the right of way east of North Pole

The problem being that there is no guarantee the actual railroad would follow that route.  It's like people looking at starting up construction on the Dease Lake line again, all innocent of any idea that better routes won't go anywhere near there or have very different grading or alignment with modern equipment possibilities...

[charlie hebdo]

"A solution looking for a nonexistent problem"

[Fred M Cain]

Well, sorry to say, the proposed A2A (Alaska to Alberta) rail link now appears as though it's officially dead.  But the idea still lives on and refuses to die.

Here is a more recent proposal from a little more that a year ago:

Open mining opportunities with a railroad (adn.com)

This is clearly nothing more than an opinion piece but the guy does bring up some interesting points.

[Overmod]

.

[Overmod]

charlie hebdo

"A solution looking for a nonexistent problem"

It's only a 'solution' if it actually solves something effectively.  We can discuss the financial return after we actually determine how to build and run the thing practically.

I'm surprised I can still read about half the comments in this thread.  It's only incidentally about the 'politics' of issuing a permit for the United States portions of the proposed line.

Perhaps we need a new thread exclusively about the prospective financing, construction, and operation of A2A or an alternative.  Or resurrect a different necro thread that contains that discussion.  Let this one die a deserved death.

[caldreamer]

You must be paraphrasing Leona Helmsley who said that just before she went to jail.

[54light15]

Speaking of Leona Helmsley, I stayed in a Helmsley hotel on 42nd street years ago. On the minibar were boxes of crackers and other snacks. A sign said that if you pick up a box and don't replace it in 15 seconds you will be charged. How much was that box of Carr's crackers? 20 bucks. 

[blue streak 1]

charlie hebdo

"A solution looking for a nonexistent problem"

 

 

Two years ago agreed with you.  Now not so much.  With  Russia saber rattling.  China is even more of a worry.   What if sea lanes to Alaska get unsafe by any way?  Might be important to have a land bridge to Alaska to carry heavy loads.  Alcan highway might have  problems in bad weather.

[Fred M Cain]

A few thoughts here.  First of all, it was suggested that a new thread be started that deals specifically and solely with the concept of connecting Alaska to the rest of the North American rail system.  I might just do that *IF* there’s enough interest in the subject.

 

Based on everything I’ve been able to find, there is genuine interest in having such a line built.  Alaskans, many Canadians and native North Americans would probably support such a plan.

 

The problem is the attitude of our governments, both American and Canadian.  Our governments seem to have no issues finding the funds to build new highways with or to expand existing highways but railways?  WHOA ~ ! Hold on a minute ~ !

 

They’re kinda like, “So, you want to build a rail link to Alaska?  That’s a great idea ~ !  Go ahead and do it, but just don’t expect any help from us”.

 

I suppose if they wanted to upgrade the Alcan Highway to “Interstate-like” standards, they’d be glad to help with that, but……

 

As for Donald Trump, he authorized the A2A Railway on American soil but there was no funding offered which was typical.

 

If the private sector were to build it in its entirety, the debt racked up from construction, permitting and litigation would be astronomical.  Then, the only way to pay that debt off would be through freight rates.  That would make potential shippers balk and use rubber, water and air.

 

The solution, as I see it, is to first reach a consensus on this.  Then, the states and provinces involved would build the line with some federal assistance.  The State, province and Yukon Territory would then own the line and charge user rates that would be attractive enough to give shippers an incentive to use the line. Or, they could lease the line to the CNR or some other entity.   This might actually have some precedent.  Isn’t there a line in the South that was owned by the state but leased to NS?

 

A summer-only land cruise passenger train could also be a possibility as some have suggested.

 

Will it ever happen?  Maybe but probably not in my lifetime.

[CMStPnP]

Fred M Cain

I might just do that *IF* there’s enough interest in the subject.

C'mon its the TRAINS forum, all you have to do is post a fact that you know is absolutely true and like 10 people will disagree with you and try to drag you into an alternate reality.     So start a new thread please without the name Trump in it so it has longevity.

[York1]

Fred M Cain

Alaskans, many Canadians and native North Americans would probably support such a plan.

That's an interesting thought.  Do you really believe Native North Americans would agree to new railroad tracks being laid across their land?

[Overmod]

Fred M Cain

Will it ever happen?

Not as long as government money can be spent on 'opportunities' with more appeal to decision makers.

Very few people care about a railroad connecting up across Canada on heroic earthworks, just to get to some of the areas in Alaska that might benefit from the... well, it certainly wouldn't be guaranteed, or cost-effective, or particularly high-traffic freight.  It's only a practical bridge competing with existing routes if it goes to 'something' across the Bering Strait to a country we're economically boycotting, that's likely dependent on one of its neighbors we're having 'trouble' with building the (equally dramatic) counterpart up from the Trans-Siberian to their side.

This as nearshoring, shifts in world production, and increased investment in East Coast ports make even the rationale for a Bering Strait trunk line begin to look pale.  We currently think a practical 'speedy' service is 12 days from Halifax to Monterrey.  That begins to look like a (cheaper) ship-borne schedule to someplace like Tehuantepec where it gets on a proper container-bridge line.  (Which won't be built under Belt and Road for internal Mexican political reasons - quel dommage as it's been recognized as valuable since the 1850s -- THAT is something to prioritize long before you manage A2A).

I suspect most 'First Nations' would allow A2A -- if they were asked politely, and as I said if they had real financial returns without assuming much of the risk.  You will recall that while Trump generated the permit to reach the Canadian border, I don't recall any action taken by Canada to permit anything north of there.  That's the current place to lobby if you want anything like this to move forward in any practical sense... and I don't see it becoming the sort of national priority that CP was.

[Steven Otte]

Starting a new thread to explore this topic sounds like a splendid idea.