Cajon Pass Triple-Tracking Updates (Plus Barstow-Daggett)

[K. P. Harrier]

Bruce Kelly in his written observations in an above post was very astute.  It was so deep it took me awhile to get the sense of it.  However, when I mentally drew two straight lines from Los Angeles to Chicago, and called the top Track #1 (formerly North) and the bottom Track #2 (formerly South), his direction explanations came to life!

[Bruce Kelly]

Thanks, K.P. I knew it was going to be a mouthful to digest. Looking at the map, I knew some folks would get totally lost by my description of north and south, especially in areas like Sullivan's Curve where everything turns upside down. But you made the right move by remembering that BNSF's "west" is toward L.A. and its "east" is toward Chicago. Now, we could really confuse people by bringing up that old business of how the SP viewed San Francisco as "west," which meant that SP trains climbing Cajon were considered westbound while Santa Fe and UP trains climbing Cajon were eastbound. Without checking my Altamont Press California timetable, I couldn't tell you how UP designates directions now on the former SP line.

[chad thomas]

North - South

[K. P. Harrier]

Check out that retaining wall!  Photo taken between CP Cajon and the new CP Walker on the way to Summit.

 

[Modelcar]

.....If the camera was positioned due vertical / Horizonal in the above photo, it sure appears to show {at the new retaining wall}, and the track nearer to the camera, a rather steep grade of both tracks.

Anyone know just what the grade at that location is....?

[blue streak 1]

RE: signal placement. Human factors have not been properly addressed. As a long time ALPA (Air line pilots association) member RR people would not believe how much safety is preached and persued. Our budget is much higher per member than the RR unions. The most important item ALPA promoted and help institut is the aviation safety reporting system ) administered by NASA so as to be independent of any agency or company. All aviation personel can report safety issues and more importantly our own goofs without the goofs being reported back to our employers. This reporting system has allowed many safety items to be corrected and the rate and number of human error accidents has gone down. Right now the one being most worked on is runway incursions. (same as trains running together or almost). A safety reporting system would bring attention to this signal placement. Also the other threads in forums about restrictiing signals. BTW --  there are much more unsafe airports than SAN san diego that does not get publised. But safety reporting does make it aware to us pilots.

[blhanel]

.....If the camera was positioned due vertical / Horizonal in the above photo, it sure appears to show {at the new retaining wall}, and the track nearer to the camera, a rather steep grade of both tracks.

Anyone know just what the grade at that location is....?

IIRC, Quentin, Chad told me when I visited Hill 582 very close to there that BNSF's Track 1, along which the new track is being laid, has a ruling grade of 2.2%.

[chad thomas]

Brian is right Q, 2.2% is the ruleing grade on the old #1 (new #1 & #2)

The old #2 (to become #3 above CP Cajon) has a 3% ruleing.

[Modelcar]

.....Thanks Brian and Chad.  That is steep for a heavy train.

[chad thomas]

Heavy trains like the coil steel trains and the heavy manifests are kept off the 3% track. It can make for a real headache for the DS when one of these things needs to buck the flow of hot intermodials climbing the hill. This is where the new track will really come in handy. It also gives a little more flexabilty for UP trains from Yermo takeing the Silverwood connector as these need to cross over opposing eastbound traffic.

[K. P. Harrier]

Looking railroad west of Cajon, at new bridge for third track, which is to the left of present foreground tracks.  In the background, the new track alignment is on the right!  Was that a big mistake?  Should be interesting to see what the connected tracks will look like.

 

[Warren Smith]

.....If the camera was positioned due vertical / Horizonal in the above photo, it sure appears to show {at the new retaining wall}, and the track nearer to the camera, a rather steep grade of both tracks.

Anyone know just what the grade at that location is....?

Quentin:

Looking at the plans, the grade at this retaining wall is 2.16%.  The reason for this stretch is that the fill slope would fall outside the existing right-of-way limits.  The access road will be along the bottom of the wall.

Warren

[Warren Smith]

Looking railroad west of Cajon, at new bridge for third track, which is to the left of present foreground tracks.  In the background, the new track alignment is on the right!  Was that a big mistake?  Should be interesting to see what the connected tracks will look like.

 

K.P.:

There will be a 900 foot long realignment of the existing tracks in the tangent (straight) section between the bridge and the curve in the distance.  The new mainline will be installed on the U.P. side of the other two coming up from Keenbrook, and the transition here will place the new rails on the Cajon Creek side (left side of the photo), where it will cross the new bridge and on up to Cajon Station. The mainline numbering will be 1, 2 and 3 from the U.P. side toward the creek.

That's the fun part of this project - BNSF's MOW crews coordinating all the crossovers, signals and CPs.  Grading and bridge/tunnel work is 'relatively' easy

Warren

[Modelcar]

.....Thanks Warren....2.16%, not unheard of for sure, but should work the power pretty strong dragging a heavy train to it's summit.

Understand the retaining wall purpose.  Over on the east side of Wheeling, WV, on the interstate {I 70}, bypass, which was completed some years ago...they used a massive retaining wall with large blocks of octagon shaped concrete wall pieces and I understand held in place via heavy cables that are secured back under the "fill" {maybe clear across and connected to the blocks on the opposite side of the fill}, of the grade to provide an almost verticle wall to lesson the amount of fill that was needed.  Seems to be staying in place as intented as I've watched it over the years as we'd pass just north of it having used the route straight thru {on I 70}, and thru the Wheeling tunnel.

[Warren Smith]

.....Thanks Warren....2.16%, not unheard of for sure, but should work the power pretty strong dragging a heavy train to it's summit.

Understand the retaining wall purpose.  Over on the east side of Wheeling, WV, on the interstate {I 70}, bypass, which was completed some years ago...they used a massive retaining wall with large blocks of octagon shaped concrete wall pieces and I understand held in place via heavy cables that are secured back under the "fill" {maybe clear across and connected to the blocks on the opposite side of the fill}, of the grade to provide an almost verticle wall to lesson the amount of fill that was needed.  Seems to be staying in place as intented as I've watched it over the years as we'd pass just north of it having used the route straight thru {on I 70}, and thru the Wheeling tunnel.

Quentin:

Yes, those are called MSE walls (mechanically stabilized embankments). They are used along properties (usually existing commerical sites) where the cost of purchasing a slope easement would exceed the additional cost of construction.

The grades on mainline 1 (and soon to be re-numbered 2) through the Alray tunnels (soon to be former) exceed 3% ...

Warren

[Modelcar]

....Wow.....3% plus seems plenty steep for main line operation but in that case, I suppose it was that or not "get there".

 

[Anonymous]

I witnessed those MSE walls go up in Pennsylvania some years ago and I believe they were the first of thier kind for that work. Last time I pass various locations where they were used before 9-11 they were still in place.

I was looking at the three bridges in the photo.. dont they need to shave away the left side a bit more and level out and make room for that third track instead of trying to realign the other two tracks?

[K. P. Harrier]

Between Walker and Cajon, looking railroad "west" from Highway 138 overcrossing. Grading for new main track seems complete.  Signal now operational.

 

 

From Highway 138 looking railroad "east."  New bridge seems complete.

 

 

[Bruce Kelly]

Nice pictures, K.P. They really help explain how the new track placement flip flops from one side of the existing Main 1 to the other, and why the published map was so wrong. As I said earlier, local conditions required them to lay the new track on the north side of the existing Main 1 in some places, and on the south side in other places. The trick is deciding how and where to realign all of the tracks when it's done, and your picture of the curved bridges just west of Cajon shows the answer. In the late 1990s, when BNSF was doubletracking major parts of the "Funnel" between Spokane and Sandpoint, there were some stretches where they had to lay the new main on the north side of the existing single-track main, and others where they had to lay it on the south side. The job of realigning the endoints of the two main lines was done at a long curve. For those who I've already confused, try this. Draw a railroad in pencil, with a few curves thrown in. Next, find a curve near the middle of your route and draw a parallel line heading "west" from that curve along the "north" side. Then draw a parallel line heading "east" from that same curve along the "south" side. You'll then see how easy it is to erase the curve and draw new parallel curves to bring both tracks together, seamlessly. This simple technique was not done in many places I've seen back East where Conrail and its predecessors added or removed paralleling main tracks on tangents rather than on curves, resulting in kinks and dog-legs that could easily have been avoided. At West Hauser, Idaho, the two main tracks make such a dog-leg because future plans call for a third main to be laid from there west toward Spokane.

[Modelcar]

....I'm trying, but somehow I might still be in the dark....Are you fellows saying something to the effect....a new main is constructed on one side of an existing main but then the new construction has to move from one side to the other because of space constriction.....and to correct, the builders then cut existing main and connect it {slightly reconfigured}, over to the new main to continue, and so on... And all of the above done on a large sweeping curve so it all can be reconfigured by using a slightly different curvature radius figure....

[Bruce Kelly]

Yes. Take a close look at the photo of the bridges west of Cajon. West of the creek, new track will be laid on the NORTH side. East of the creek, new track will be laid on the SOUTH side. All three tracks will then be shifted one-track-over to connnect them end-to-end.

[K. P. Harrier]

Back up in the Barstow area ...

The pictures are not of good quality, but they are sufficient to make the point ...

Before the big curve west of West Daggett, the lone mast signal appears to be on the right.

But straight on, the signal actually is on the left.

 

Judge for yourself whether the forum contributor a page or two back had it right or not.  Could an exhausted crew in a zombie state misinterpret the signal's location at night and which track it governs, and when accelerating to 55+ M.P.H., suddenly recognize the truth when it is too late -- and see a stopped train right in front of them on their track just past the signal bridge?

 

[Modelcar]

....Thanks Bruce....I'm working on it.

[K. P. Harrier]

Safety Alert!

 

Interstate 15 and California State Route 138 intersect in the heart of Cajon Pass.  From I-15, S. R. 138 goes west, over and under the rail lines, by the famous Mormon Rocks, and continues 50 or so miles to Palmdale.  All THAT stretch of roadway is nationally recognized as one of the deadliest highways in all America!  There are head-on collisions all the time.  An innocent friend had to take severe evasive action several years ago to avoid such an accident, and rolled their minivan.

So, whether Cajon Pass is home turf to you, or you may be visiting from out of state to see for yourself BNSF's triple-tracking project, drive defensively, and watch out for the many S. R. 138 crazies.  Stay alive, and among us.

[kenneo]

Back up in the Barstow area ...

The pictures are not of good quality, but they are sufficient to make the point ...

Before the big curve west of West Daggett, the lone mast signal appears to be on the right.

But straight on, the signal actually is on the left.

 

Judge for yourself whether the forum contributor a page or two back had it right or not.  Could an exhausted crew in a zombie state misinterpret the signal's location at night and which track it governs, and when accelerating to 55+ M.P.H., suddenly recognize the truth when it is too late -- and see a stopped train right in front of them on their track just past the signal bridge?

 

If it can be misinterpreted, it will be.  And it won't be a pretty sight.  Personal opinion is this is a real trap -- a very dangerous one.

[Bruce Kelly]

And in case nobody has mentioned it yet, the track numbering will NOT be Mains 3, 1, 2 from north to south as shown in the magazine. It will be 1, 2, 3 north to south.

[garyla]

Not to get too far ahead of ourselves here, but are there any fresh rumors that the third-tracking will next be extended beyond Summit to somewhere in Hesperia?

 

[K. P. Harrier]

The following pictures were NOT taken by myself, but acquired through sources:

The new Walker crossovers as viewed from the west end.

The new intermediate signals between Walker and Silverwood.

Four notes about the TOP photo:

(1) With the installation of this new Walker crossovers location, the signals in the background were initially two new poled signals, but a cantilevered bridge soon replaced them.

(2) The control point alignment is on an almost east-west axis.

(3) The new second track from Cajon to Walker has not been laid yet.

(4) As shown in this view, the alignment of the new track will be on the left.  However, within a half mile behind the photographer the alignment switches and will be on the right.

Two notes about the LOWER photo:

(1) Most new signal arrangements on Cajon Pass are of the cantilevered type.  This signal structure is nonconforming.   The bridge for this newly TWO-tracked section is designed for THREE tracks.  Is it possible a long transfer track will be installed here so southbound UP trains from Palmdale and Hiland will be able to move onto the westbound BNSF and vice-versa?

(2) This signal bridge appears to be the same one that was recently taken down at the west end of Daggett (not West Daggett).  Note the black paint where the signal units are at, a characteristic of premerger AT&SF signal bridges erected 15 years ago.  If it is in fact that bridge, the old target units were replaced by new tri-lights.

[Bruce Kelly]

garyla: A few years ago, BNSF laid what amounts to a long siding along the north side of Main 1 from Summit east a few miles to CP Martinez. At least that's the name I recall; been a couple years since I was last there. Not to be confused with the long Martinez Spur, essentially a piece of the old ATSF main line that was left in place when Santa Fe did its big Summit line change back in the 1970s. BNSF's 3rd main track will tie in with that long siding at Summit.

[garyla]

Thanks for the heads-up, Bruce. 

That ought to be enough extra trackage to help get another long eastbound train up over the peak elevation before merging onto the one eastbound main line.