Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
The Milwaukee Road
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: <i>Originally posted by dldance</i> <br /><br />Why did the Milwaukee choose to go to Butte? In the early 1900's when routing decisions were being made, Butte Montana was the richest inland city in North America. 30% of the copper mined in the US came out of Buttes mines and at that point the mines were shipping about 300 million pounds of copper a year. The copper was produced for free as the ore produced sufficient silver, lead, zinc, and gold to pay for the mining and smelting. In 1910, 16,000 carloads a month were being shipped into Butte. The mines employeed more than 12,000 men and required about 65 million board feet of timber and 4 million pounds of explosives every year -- all of which moved by rail. At it's peak, Butte was served by 38 passenger trains a day. Yes, the locating engineers followed the lay of the land as best they could -- but they also followed the money! <br /> <br />dd <br /> <br />Statistics reference, Union Pacific: Montana Division, by Thornton Waite, 1998. <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />Two things: Not all those carloads were moved by the Milwaukee. The Great Northern, Union Pacific, and Northern Pacific were also in Butte competing for those 16,000 carloads, and the Milwaukee was the last man in. Assuming an even split, that's only 4,000 carloads a month for Milwaukee, not enough to justify skewing the mainline "off course" so to speak, with the obtruse profile convulusions and operating difficulties. Since the competitors accessed Butte via branch lines and secondary mainlines, wouldn't have made more sense for Milwaukee to do the same? <br /> <br />Secondly, the ostensible purpose of the Pacific Coast Extension was to access the Pacific Northwest ports for the volumous trade traffic, not to access mines that would eventually play out. If you're going to build a transcon and you're the third man in a two man race, you better build it with easier grades, less curvature, and shorter mileage than your competitors, else you're left with the scraps that fall off the table. If you can accompli***he task of making your route superior to your competitors while accessing new markets along the route, great, but don't ruin the transcon for the sake of accessing an off course market that already has three other lines competing for the limited carloads.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
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