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 rob_l</i> <br /><br />To/from the PNW on the BNSF and UP east-west transcons, we now have Z trains, stack trains, heavy lumber trains and very heavy grain trains. This is a difficult mix. Capacity is tight because of it. And adding capacity is expensive because of it. <br /> <br />I believe there is a total volume level at which it would be cheaper to handle the Z train and stack train traffic on one line and the grain and lumber traffic on a separate line rather than to put them on the same line. <br /> <br />If the Milw line had not been trashed, this now would be possible and practical. (And we already have the coal segregated on a third line, the ex-NP.)[/quote] <br /> <br />Hence, perhaps, BNSF's dogged persistence at maintaining Stampede Pass even though for the present few trains use it? Clearances through Stampede allow only loose car and unit grain/coal traffic, though. (Which brings us back to the "Why didn't BN keep Snoqualmie Pass?" discussion. The operating department would probably prefer the better grade and routing of Snoqualmie because of the added flexibility and ability for routing all kinds traffic through it, including intermodal and autos, if conditions demanded.) <br /> <br />Why segregate coal to the ex-NP, though, by which I assume you mean Stampede, in the Northwest, rather than using Stampede for other non-intermodal traffic? I think I'm missing your point. <br /> <br />Could not Stampede continue to handle eastbound MTY grainers and coal, as well as baretables, and MTY westbound manifests (primarily lumber cars destined for interchange with CN/BC Rail, some chemical traffic, and lead ore) as it does now, and theoretically then route westbound manifest loads and auto trains, as well as eastbound auto MTYs, over Snoqualmie? <br /> <br />Then that begs the question: Will BNSF ever increase tunnel clearances through Stampede Pass (Stampede Tunnel and Tunnel 4) to accommodate intermodal and reinstitute the two main tracks between Easton and Lester, or beyond? And would doing so negate any significant capacity advantage that Snoqualmie Pass/MILW might provide? <br />
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