Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
QUOTE: Originally posted by wgnrr When I go railfanning on the UP's Adam's line, I would rather see UP engines than BNSF. BNSF doesn't have a 3985, a 844 or a DDA40X, or a E9 set or a big yellow passenger car set, or ex-CNW cabooses on the back of their locals, and a lot of old wooden ex-CNW depots, and....
RJ
"Something hidden, Go and find it. Go and look behind the ranges, Something lost behind the ranges. Lost and waiting for you. Go." The Explorers - Rudyard Kipling
http://sweetwater-photography.com/
Originally posted by BNSFrailfan. [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, December 8, 2005 7:39 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed UPRR owned a CONSIDERABLE amount of CNWRR stock. [:)] Originally posted by BNSFrailfan. [ I know that. But that doesn't anwer my Question. Allan. Reply Edit PNWRMNM Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 2,593 posts Posted by PNWRMNM on Thursday, December 8, 2005 7:59 AM BNSF Yes, the Rock Island was the first line between Council Bluffs and Chicago. By the early 1880's you had the RI, CNW, and CBQ (using modern names). They formed the Iowa Pool, the one successful pool of the era. Then things got messy. If you are interested in this there is a book titled The Iowa Pool that you can probably get on inter-library loan. Subject is also dealt with in biography of Jay Gould who as President of UP tried to break the pool. By some time early in the 20th Century the CNW had become the favored route, as shown by its route being mostly, if not entirely double track. The junction at Fremont also favored the CNW by keeping freight interchange out of the congested Omaha and Council Bluffs terminals. I am not familiar with details of CNW's attainment of favored connection status. Perhaps someone can steer you to some sources. By 1980 or so CNW dominated the Chicago-Omaha route and when UP went shopping the obvious buy was CNW, even though they had to take the rest of the railroad to get what they wanted, which was Omaha-Chicago and the Poder River basin coal line. Mac Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, December 8, 2005 8:30 AM Sure it does since the UPRR was on the BOD of the CNWRR. [:p] Originally posted by BNSFrailfan. Originally posted by spbed [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply ndbprr Member sinceSeptember 2002 7,486 posts Posted by ndbprr on Thursday, December 8, 2005 8:44 AM My local (Chicago) understanding of UP-CNW was Chicago access. Up had bought Mopac for access but it is an around the barn routing from Pueblo Colorado and into Chicago up the old CE&I along the Indiana Ilinois border. In retrospect this may have been a necessary first step so the STB would look favorably on a more direct route as not influencing competition but the CNW is a high speed route acrross much of Illinois having been completely rebuilt in the 80's and it is double tracked giving UP more direct access to connections in Chicago Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, December 8, 2005 12:15 PM does UP still have that option on IAIS..? Reply Edit oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, December 8, 2005 1:34 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by sierrarr A little off subjejet, but why did the government nix the SP/ATSF merger? It was too much of a parallel merger and not enough end to end. For example, it would have renedered all of NM and AZ with only one major RR. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply ndbprr Member sinceSeptember 2002 7,486 posts Posted by ndbprr on Thursday, December 8, 2005 1:39 PM does UP still have that option on IAIS..? IAIS is the old Rock Island main and t runs less than a mile from my house. I have only seen two trains on it with UP power both in the last month. The CNW was a far better choice, has a first class yard in the Chicago area (Proviso) and connects with UP at a more advantageous location in my opinion 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
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed UPRR owned a CONSIDERABLE amount of CNWRR stock. [:)] Originally posted by BNSFrailfan. [ I know that. But that doesn't anwer my Question. Allan. Reply Edit PNWRMNM Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 2,593 posts Posted by PNWRMNM on Thursday, December 8, 2005 7:59 AM BNSF Yes, the Rock Island was the first line between Council Bluffs and Chicago. By the early 1880's you had the RI, CNW, and CBQ (using modern names). They formed the Iowa Pool, the one successful pool of the era. Then things got messy. If you are interested in this there is a book titled The Iowa Pool that you can probably get on inter-library loan. Subject is also dealt with in biography of Jay Gould who as President of UP tried to break the pool. By some time early in the 20th Century the CNW had become the favored route, as shown by its route being mostly, if not entirely double track. The junction at Fremont also favored the CNW by keeping freight interchange out of the congested Omaha and Council Bluffs terminals. I am not familiar with details of CNW's attainment of favored connection status. Perhaps someone can steer you to some sources. By 1980 or so CNW dominated the Chicago-Omaha route and when UP went shopping the obvious buy was CNW, even though they had to take the rest of the railroad to get what they wanted, which was Omaha-Chicago and the Poder River basin coal line. Mac Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, December 8, 2005 8:30 AM Sure it does since the UPRR was on the BOD of the CNWRR. [:p] Originally posted by BNSFrailfan. Originally posted by spbed [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply ndbprr Member sinceSeptember 2002 7,486 posts Posted by ndbprr on Thursday, December 8, 2005 8:44 AM My local (Chicago) understanding of UP-CNW was Chicago access. Up had bought Mopac for access but it is an around the barn routing from Pueblo Colorado and into Chicago up the old CE&I along the Indiana Ilinois border. In retrospect this may have been a necessary first step so the STB would look favorably on a more direct route as not influencing competition but the CNW is a high speed route acrross much of Illinois having been completely rebuilt in the 80's and it is double tracked giving UP more direct access to connections in Chicago Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, December 8, 2005 12:15 PM does UP still have that option on IAIS..? Reply Edit oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, December 8, 2005 1:34 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by sierrarr A little off subjejet, but why did the government nix the SP/ATSF merger? It was too much of a parallel merger and not enough end to end. For example, it would have renedered all of NM and AZ with only one major RR. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply ndbprr Member sinceSeptember 2002 7,486 posts Posted by ndbprr on Thursday, December 8, 2005 1:39 PM does UP still have that option on IAIS..? IAIS is the old Rock Island main and t runs less than a mile from my house. I have only seen two trains on it with UP power both in the last month. The CNW was a far better choice, has a first class yard in the Chicago area (Proviso) and connects with UP at a more advantageous location in my opinion 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
Originally posted by BNSFrailfan. [
Originally posted by BNSFrailfan. Originally posted by spbed [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply ndbprr Member sinceSeptember 2002 7,486 posts Posted by ndbprr on Thursday, December 8, 2005 8:44 AM My local (Chicago) understanding of UP-CNW was Chicago access. Up had bought Mopac for access but it is an around the barn routing from Pueblo Colorado and into Chicago up the old CE&I along the Indiana Ilinois border. In retrospect this may have been a necessary first step so the STB would look favorably on a more direct route as not influencing competition but the CNW is a high speed route acrross much of Illinois having been completely rebuilt in the 80's and it is double tracked giving UP more direct access to connections in Chicago Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, December 8, 2005 12:15 PM does UP still have that option on IAIS..? Reply Edit oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, December 8, 2005 1:34 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by sierrarr A little off subjejet, but why did the government nix the SP/ATSF merger? It was too much of a parallel merger and not enough end to end. For example, it would have renedered all of NM and AZ with only one major RR. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply ndbprr Member sinceSeptember 2002 7,486 posts Posted by ndbprr on Thursday, December 8, 2005 1:39 PM does UP still have that option on IAIS..? IAIS is the old Rock Island main and t runs less than a mile from my house. I have only seen two trains on it with UP power both in the last month. The CNW was a far better choice, has a first class yard in the Chicago area (Proviso) and connects with UP at a more advantageous location in my opinion 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
Originally posted by spbed [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply ndbprr Member sinceSeptember 2002 7,486 posts Posted by ndbprr on Thursday, December 8, 2005 8:44 AM My local (Chicago) understanding of UP-CNW was Chicago access. Up had bought Mopac for access but it is an around the barn routing from Pueblo Colorado and into Chicago up the old CE&I along the Indiana Ilinois border. In retrospect this may have been a necessary first step so the STB would look favorably on a more direct route as not influencing competition but the CNW is a high speed route acrross much of Illinois having been completely rebuilt in the 80's and it is double tracked giving UP more direct access to connections in Chicago Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, December 8, 2005 12:15 PM does UP still have that option on IAIS..? Reply Edit oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, December 8, 2005 1:34 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by sierrarr A little off subjejet, but why did the government nix the SP/ATSF merger? It was too much of a parallel merger and not enough end to end. For example, it would have renedered all of NM and AZ with only one major RR. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply ndbprr Member sinceSeptember 2002 7,486 posts Posted by ndbprr on Thursday, December 8, 2005 1:39 PM does UP still have that option on IAIS..? IAIS is the old Rock Island main and t runs less than a mile from my house. I have only seen two trains on it with UP power both in the last month. The CNW was a far better choice, has a first class yard in the Chicago area (Proviso) and connects with UP at a more advantageous location in my opinion 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
QUOTE: Originally posted by sierrarr A little off subjejet, but why did the government nix the SP/ATSF merger?
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.