K. P. Harriera worker changed the oil by draining it right on the ground.
Know of a short line that did some work in their engine house - putting in an inspection pit, etc. The building is located in the middle of what was, at one time, one of the largest yards in the east. They were down 12 feet and were still in dirty dirt...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
K. P. Harrier The bridge support locations are for three tracks, the northernmost one the siding, Main 1 (presently the Main), and an unbridged future Main 2.
The bridge support locations are for three tracks, the northernmost one the siding, Main 1 (presently the Main), and an unbridged future Main 2.
K.P., this picture, and your text, are a big surprise to me. I thought the Brighton siding was going to be eliminated (i.e., it would become a second main track). Instead, it sounds as though the ultimate goal is to have two main tracks, with the Brighton siding on the "north" (non-airport) side of the right-of-way.
The day of the Metrolink-versus-truck accident back in 2003 (?), there was temporary worry if one of our family members was the truck driver involved in that wreck (as we all used to live out there). It turned out to be someone else, of course, but it hit home.
It is great to see this at-grade crossing removed.
P.S.: neat story on growing up in the IE!
San Gabriel Trench update - exasperation!
I visited the Walnut Grove crossing late yesterday and found it open to road traffic. Unfortunately, the only work done since last visit was to pave over the new track panel in the road! The trench track is still not complete and cut in. No more curbs have been poured. The southbound crossing arm has not been relocated. Adjacent portions of Walnut Grove have to be paved up to curb level. Is this a major schedule slip? The whole project is supposed to be complete by year end ....
Links to my Google Maps ---> Sunset Route overview, SoCal metro, Yuma sub, Gila sub, SR east of Tucson, BNSF Northern Transcon and Southern Transcon *** Why you should support Ukraine! ***
Replies
ccltrains (3-28):
With those internal signal head center red position and green and yellow on each side of those target signal mechanisms, the question that comes to my mind is where is the lunar position?
Example of old target heads west of Wellton, AZ on the Sunset Route shot September 30, 2016:
Example of NEW color light four-lamp head (lower right):
mvs (3-29):
That Metrolink Flyover in Burbank, CA that does NOT yet have the third-track’s bridge in place, K.P. wonders if that WOODEN, temporary fencing is pending the third bridge, or will studier steel fencing be installed.
MikeF90 (4-1):
Did you take any photos of Walnut Grove Ave. being open and the new track therein?
Hey, Mike, while you were posting your thoughts on the San Gabriel Trench and the ‘exasperating’ experience the day before, I was out running around Cajon Pass (the Highway 138 relocation) and San Bernardino (revamping of the Metrolink track layout), and should have something to post soon, including about the mysterious ‘illogical’ switches on the east side of the depot. Also, it does NOT appear that the BNSF mainline track layout will be altered and it was discerned why BNSF freights whizzing by platform patrons won’t be a problem – cool and obvious reason! Watch for that posting.
Take care all.
K.P.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.
SG Trench 'status'
Per the ACE 4/17 agenda "Weather has forced other UPRR forces and materials to be diverted to repair various other infrastructure and has ultimately delayed the completion of our work."
This explains the lack of progress and the mostly wasted closure period. The track panel installed in Walnut Grove Ave is covered by asphalt:
When work will resume here is unknown at this time.
So how much of the Sunset Route has been double tracked so far?
Will any of the single track areas remain?
Status of Things as of Friday, April 14, 2017
It is believed there is NO two-tracking anywhere on the western part of the Sunset Route, and likely the same on the eastern part, around Houston, TX. The Positive Train Control mandate has taken its toll on the two-tracking. And, K.P. has heard of NO information that any activity is take place in the Diversion in Pomona, CA.
There is, however, rebuilding of Departure Yard area trackage at West Colton Yard, CA
That above new replacement track currently is ballast-less, apparently the old ballast moved to the west side of Pepper Ave.
K.P. doesn’t recall noticing it before, but the electrical box on the upper left of the just above photo says in bold letters, “HOUSE 1.”
About New Grade Separations and Their Significance
Grade separations (and their necessary easements) of the last few years suggest that the railroads (UP, BNSF, and others) have learned possibly the hard way to avoid future conflict by simply requiring bridging over (or underpasses under) their entire right-of-way, i.e., four or five (or more) tracks and not just one- or two-tracks. The below photo is of the new overpass over the BNSF Transcon in Corona / Riverside, CA.
The tracks (and right-of-way) in that situation are severely angled, hence, the side bracing supports, which supports seem to be on both railroad AND private property (note the fencing and support locations).
Thus, new overpasses and underpasses are springing up that encompass the entire cross right-of-way.
-------------
The Magnolia Ave. overpass will be elaborated on in a few days in the “Updates on Multi-Tracking the Two BNSF Transcons” thread, currently hiding on Page 14 of the General Discussion forum.
A brief Second Section follows.
Second Section
Slover (or Cement) Mountain in Colton, CA springs up in this thread every once and a while. For those interested, on K.P.’s visit to Pepper Ave. Friday, April 14, 2017, it was noticed the ‘powder’ by the Rancho Ave. overpass was quite prominent (right).
When actually going over that Rancho Ave. overpass (above photo background), the ‘powder’ seemed unusually high … a new twist to the twists and turns of Cement Mountain.
ATSFGuy So how much of the Sunset Route has been double tracked so far? Will any of the single track areas remain?
Can't answer your first question but related to the second I'd guess current single-track sections will remain as they are until conditions warrant two-tracking of them. As you know, PTC is an expensive mandate that must be financed solely by the railroads. No federal funds designated for that and the railroads must fend for themselves and pay the incured costs out of revenue. Economic conditions also enter the equation in that traffic volume has slackened off thus producing less revenue to divert to projects that would enhance service and expedite the movement of freight. Hopefully, things will get better soon and the railroads can resume their planned upgrading.
Just my two cents worth.
Norm
As to the amouint of the Sunset Route double tracked between LA and El Paso, see page 4 of the PDF at this link for a diagram of the UP system. The majority is double-tracked.
https://www.up.com/cs/groups/public/@uprr/@investor/documents/investordocuments/pdf_up_invest_2015_factbook.pdf
RE Sunset route double tracking
Based on prior postings I have been highlighting on my SPV maps the sections that are double tracked. Looking between the double tracked sections here is my idea of what remains to be double tracked. These are in mile posts where avilble.
California
MP 621.4-636.6 & 723.7-Araz
Arizona
MP 736-743, Blaisdell-753, Mohawk- Old Stanwix & old Sentinal-876
Texas
Double tracked from NM-Texas border to 828 (Belen)
If anyone has any updates please post them.
ccltrainsIf anyone has any updates please post them.
No change from last year IIRC. The map links in my sig have more details. Per my last 'mileage remaining' post, about 128 of 759 miles (Colton crossing to El Paso) - 83 % - are single track.
Mike
Forgot to mention that all of New Mexico is double tracked but this is obvious from the UP map. Did not comment of the lines west of San Bernardino as this is such a hodge podge of lines it is almost impossible to figure out.
IIRC, K.P. theorized that, if PTC was installed on existing single-track sections, they would be a lot less likely to be double-tracked any time soon, since it would involve a lot of re-work on the new PTC infrastructure. Sounds reasonable. Also, from what I've seen regarding UP's capex program for 2017, additional double-tracking is not mentioned.
In an earlier post some months ago, K.P. reported seeing some (really, minimal) right-of-way grading near Thermal or Mecca. It would be interesting to see what, if anything, resulted from that.
The only good news is that traffic, in general, is trending upward. Specifically on the Sunset Route, who knows?
Pete
One of the most fascinating observances of trains for me is their lengths. The trains on the Sunset Route are bizarre because you would think that with 83% of it being two tracks this would finally enable them to run 10,000 foot trains between Texas and California. However, they don't. Trains are very conservative on this line, apparently due to the single trackage of the routes east and north of El Paso, based on information I received from Fred W. Frailey last year. I find that reason odd because UP does not need to run every train as 10,000 feet (perhaps every 1 out of 5 trains).
However, Sunset Route is only 9 miles longer than CN's Western Corridor between Edmonton and Vancouver and it sees more tonnage than UP's Sunset Route with 58% being double-tracked (this includes the directional running between Basque and Mission, BC with CP Rail). The trains on the route average around 9,500 to 10,000 feet and some trains are as long 15,000 feet or 250 cars. I know that grades are much less significant on the Western Corridor than Sunset Route, but I don't think 10,000 feet is impossible for UP's mainline. I did find a Youtube video of UP running 151 car intermodal that originated in Chicago and terminated in Long Beach, but that length is quite rare for that line. They usually top out at 145 cars.
Strange since the longest train ever run on UP was that 296 car monster between Dallas and Los Angeles in January 2010, yet it was never tried again and as said, train rarely break 140 cars.
ADRIAN BALLAM (4-20):
Hi, Adrian! Welcome to the forum.
Mr. Frailey pretty much steered you correctly, as “the routes east and north of El Paso [TX]” are single-track, and each of those three lines have sidings of different general lengths as their characteristics. Then there is also the Los Angeles-Salt Lake City line that has plus or minus 9000 sidings every third siding, such coming about during the Drew Lewis era in the 1980’s. That line reportedly in some areas has restrictions on lengthening the sidings become of some endangered creatures.
Aside from the LA&SL, just lengthening the sidings seems the simple answer. But, right now the railroads have their hands full with the Positive Train Control matter. And, it is not clear if UP will delay further two-tracking and lengthening sidings for some years after PTC as a recovery measure.
One aspect of a line is its imprint. The Golden State Routes, for example, has plus or minus 9000-foot sidings, but the sidings are much farther apart than say the LA&SL, or the Sunset Route single-track east of El Paso. Personally, it would seem lengthening sidings to three miles may avoid the ever lengthening train lengths situation. But, the railroads hardly can be expected to do anything with the PTC matter hanging over their heads. It will be interesting to see in five or ten years from now what is happening with train lengths.
An interesting phenomenon is being observed right now, detector announcements are increasing in car axil counts. Somewhere in the stream of time there is going to be a conflict between ever increasing train lengths and what car-wheel counts sidings can hold. In that case, the railroad may solve is problem with sort of (“sort of”) a magic wand and the sidings will suddenly get longer.
To All … The South Milliken Ave. New Overpass
K.P. was able to walk up on the new overpass over both Mission Blvd. and the LA&SL in Ontario, CA. Nothing like it has ever been seen by this contributor, including the overpass fencing! Expect some photos to be posted next week.
Take care all,
Prowling Around Friday, April 21, 2017
Part I (of I-IV)
A Report on the New South …
… Milliken Ave. Grade Separation
Ontario, CA
After an assignment in Ontario (CA), K.P. was able to check out the South Milliken Ave. overpass over the LA&SL (UP) and the straddling Mission Blvd. From the east side, two southward views:
An eastbound view from atop the new overpass:
Above, in the background, from left to right, Mains 1 and 2, and two tracks often used for auto-rack cars. The bridge is the often jammed I-15 Freeway.
Continued in Part II
Part II (of I-IV)
Another eastbound view:
Westbound views:
Above two photos, from left to right, Mains 2 and 1, where Main 1 (right track) alignment jogs to the right for just a short bit, that is where the Metrolink Ontario stop is at. Boarding and alighting is only available from Main 1.
Many Sunset Route trains to or from Arizona and parts east use this alternate Sunset Route. This trackage was two-tracked about 25 years ago before the UP-SP merger was even thought of.
Continued in Part III
Part III (of I-IV)
How the roadways to the east work, with the center ramps:
Above, on the upper left, are stoplights (unseen). K.P. found those traffic lights irritating, but very necessary in light of the merging traffic situation there.
Looking north (east side of Milliken Ave.) and the large squared fence:
Looking westbound at the ramps across the street: Note the concrete center divider between the onramp and the off ramp.
K.P. hopes to return to this overpass for a more detailed look at the unusual ramping sometime in the future.
Continued in Part IV
Part IV (of I-IV)
A Review of the SP Single-Track …
… Section by Etiwanda Ave.
Ontario-Fontana, CA
By the actual Sunset Route now, we are at the border between Fontana and Ontario (CA), at Etiwanda Ave. The camera location is on Loop Ave. that is right next to Etiwanda Ave. Looking west:
East:
Just above, the old Kaiser Yard is the trackage on the left. Note the track on the right, the likely alignment of the second Main when it is laid.
A more telephoto view looking west:
Finally, from the same spot as above, a westward extreme blow-up of the trackage in the distance by the Milliken Ave. Flyover.
This trackage still being single-track may be why so many Sunset Route trains take the alternate Sunset Route via Riverside and pass the new South Milliken Ave. overpass that was highlighted in Parts I-III.
This will conclude the series.
K. P. HarrierThis will conclude the series.
K.P.,
Thank you for the wonderful sets of photos in this thread, as well as the San Bernardino thread.
It looks like there is only one track operational on the two-track "up and over" bridging Milliken Avenue (Alhambra Sub)?
Adrian--A little followup on your comments on CN vs UP trains. The CN route through Yellowhead Pass near Edmonton was originally surveyed by Sandford Fleming for the CP. The Canadian government worried about the encroachment of US railroads blackballed the Yellowhead pass route and forced the southern route through Kicking Horse pass. Yellowhead Pass elevation is 3,711 ft and the grade is reported as "gradual". Kicking horse pass after building the spiral tunnels is 2.2% with an elevation of 5,338 ft. Helpers are required here. On to Beaumont pass. It is a 2% grade topping out at 2,591 ft. Although Beaumont is the lowest of the three passes discussed here helpers are required to help the trains to crawl up the hill.
On to train length. I believe that UP could run longer trains over the sunset route to El Paso without any problem. The three lines from El Paso have short sidings and this would require breaking up the trains at El Paso. This would take time and be more costly hence the shorter trains that will fit into the sidings east of town. The gorilla in the living room of the Sunset Route is at Yuma where a second costly bridge would be required for second tracking.
I have to admit it is curious as to why UP has not been gradually lengthening sidings on the routes east of El Paso.
Or perhaps they have been and it is just not widely known?
With competition from the expanded Panama Canal for container traffic, one would think the need to compete out of LA/Long Beach would compel them to run longer container trains to the east.
ccltrainsThe gorilla in the living room of the Sunset Route is at Yuma where a second costly bridge would be required for second tracking.
Costly as that bridge may be, it, or a bypass may work to the eventual advantage of the UP.
That bridge single track block is a negligible concern for the forseeable future. It is less than 1/2 mile long with a three mile block just RR east on 2MT. If traffic picks up, UP has plenty of other single track remaining on the Gila Sub and other possible bottlenecks to upgrade first.
Thank you for your insight. The way you, Frailey, and K.P. Barrier below described this situation almost feels like planning of the double-track for the Sunset Route was done with little effectiveness in that UP didn't really look at those other lines east of El Paso that connect to the heavy corridor portion. Although the tonnage on the Sunset Route that is greatest between El Paso and Los Angeles, the lines running east are equally as important. I think it is time for UP to take a closer look at increasing the siding lengths along the other mainlines going to New Orleans, Dallas, and Salt Lake City to allow for longer trains.
Incidentally, I love looking a timetables of subdivisions and I am wondering if anybody knew of place where I can see the sidings of UP's subdivisons (such as Lordsburg Sub or Yuma Sub as examples). I can easily get this information for CN and CP through their Trackside Guide but finding this for American railroads seems challenging.
Thank you for your insight. Even though I understand your reasoning, it still seems weird to me not to increase the lengths of some trains to 10,000 feet on ocassion. Although I have noticed on videos recently that UP may be slightly longer container trains on their Golden State Route so I will be assessing that.
Pete-M3 (4-18):
What the status is of the remaining track to be two-tracked in Arizona is unknown to K.P. (i.e., has old target signals started to be converted to color lights?) and currently he has NO plans to go out that way to find out. Except for a few short spaces, the present target signals on the remaining single-track portions have sufficiently modern Southern Pacific style CP boxes that are compatible with Positive Train Control!
CP SP813 AZTEC, March 31, 2016
So, it would merely be a matter of erecting color light signals. Thus, a hundred miles or so could rather quickly be upgraded to color light signals. The question is are they converting those signals now or will UP attack that area by erecting new signals on that stretch right before the 2019 deadline.
mvs (4-28):
Yes, the north Milliken Ave. SP flyover in Ontario (CA) has only one track laid presently, the southern alignment (left) in the below more blown-up, looking west.
You know, mvs, the NEW box for CP AL525 GUASTI is still at the Colton Signal Dept. in Colton, after what six years now?
August 5, 2015
It probably was related to, NOT the Vineyard Ave. underpass construction as K.P. previously had thought, but the northern Milliken Ave. Flyover!
The OLD, PRESENT box at CP AL525 GUASTI was never changed out with the conversion to color light signals.
Never shown August 3, 2012 photo
There has for some time been speculation in this thread that the future Main 1 would be laid north of the present Main, and that the Guasti siding would remain as is. But, K.P. had a rude awakening in looking at the aerial of the SP line over the Haven Ave. underpass (to the west). That bridging is only for TWO-tracks!
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Guasti,+Ontario,+CA+91761/@34.0633347,-117.5751809,199m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x80c335078b76f861:0x4e47cf5e87009cff!8m2!3d34.0650112!4d-117.5864414
An aerial of the PRESENT SP CP AL525 GUASTI old box and CP area:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Guasti,+Ontario,+CA+91761/@34.0635747,-117.5715707,199m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x80c335078b76f861:0x4e47cf5e87009cff!8m2!3d34.0650112!4d-117.5864414
So, it appears the Guasti siding will become Main 2 and the Main will become Main 1. That leaves the NEW CP box begging for a reason for its existence! Will a single or universal crossover be put in on the west slope of the Milliken Ave. Flyover? THAT concept is highly unlikely, because of on the above aerial if the view is dragged to the left so more on the right comes into view, one will note a switch with an entrance signal on a track that comes in from the south.
The way K.P. now sees it, either the facility just to the west of the present CP AL525 GUASTI will stop receiving box cars or the placard on CP AL525 GUASTI will be changed to read CP AL524 GUASTI. But, who knows? And then there is that reported CP AL52X VINA VISTA somewhere EAST of the Milliken Ave. Flyover.
Has your curiosity been grabbed a hold of, mvs?
ccltrains (4-29):
In reference to the three UP routes EAST of El Paso they have rather long sidings, 9000 feet-like. A few shorter, some longer, but length doesn’t appear to be an issue. The Golden State Route to Kansas City, however, is handicapped by the siding spacing, some 15 to 20 miles apart. So, running the trains through Santa Teresa, NM unaltered to or from the three routes east of El Paso seems to be a non-issue.
What K.P. is confused about is the P.R. hype that promoted Santa Teresa’s construction was the phrase “block swop.” Several times I’ve been there and I never saw a block swop arrangement taking place or even look like one would. All I’ve ever seen there is fuel racks and an Intermodal facility in conjunction with the NAFTA business.
kgbw49 (4-29):
Sources showed me track data, and have done so from time to time in the last ten years. And the siding lengths don’t seem to change. So, as mentioned to ccltrains above, the siding lengths don’t seem to be an issue.
Norm48327 (4-29):
Reference the single-track Colorado River crossing in Yuma, AZ, the discerned future universal crossovers arrangement on each side of the river (for miles) suggests the Colorado River crossing will eventually be two-tracked.
In the last decade K.P. was convinced Casa Grande, AZ would be one of the last to be two-tracked, because of all the whopping amount of lead tracks and spur switches that would have to be replaced. UP, when progressing eastward with the two-tracking, just replaced everything. So, the Yuma Colorado River crossing may (“may”) be two-tracked earlier rather than later. Time will tell, though, on that.
MikeF90 (4-29):
That Yuma, AZ situation is peculiar, especially farther east of the train crew relief point, in that it is presently single-track. Trying to make crew relief there with a fleet of trains could tie up the whole area! If E. Hunter Harrison was in charge of UP I think he would breathe fire like a dragon about Yuma. Of course, he is not in change so I guess Yuma wouldn’t be burnt down …
Eventually, I see three-tracks on each side of the relief point, at Pacific Ave. On the other hand, maybe UP likes trains rushing through the deserts and then spending a few hours getting those trains re-crewed.
Take care, everyone,
Memories of a Fun Day! …
It was Sunday, December 15, 2013 and K.P. had traveled from Southern California to Tucson, AZ to rendezvous with forumists eolesen and cacole at a McDonalds just a block or two off the Sunset Route. K.P. had a fun time with those cool guys. While I had envisioned cacole as about 30 years old with small children, in meeting him he said he was 78! Wow! Eventually eolesen moved to Illinois, and cacole stayed put in Arizona. In a 2015 email cacole stated he was having kidney problems, and had to visit the VA hospital daily. He was never heard from again!
A serious search undertaking took place a few days ago to find cacole. It was uncovered Mr. Cole had passed away several months after that last email.
Below is a mortuary link about him:
http://www.hatfieldfh.com/obits/obituary.php?id=660592
Earlier, in an email from him he mentioned that he had traveled all the way west to Yuma, AZ to check on the Sunset Route two-tracking. What he said inspired K.P. to look at Yuma more carefully on the next trip there. The resulting photos are buried somewhere in this thread.
It was surprising some months back while at McDonalds that he handed me a business card. He was associated in some way with the Cochise & Western Model Railroad Club in Sierra Vista, AZ. Trying to reach them so far has been unsuccessful.
He was a cool guy, and all that met him were enriched.
I never met, but corresponded many times with cacole. Very knowledgeable and willing to share his information and experiences on Arizona railroads. A real gentleman.
John Timm
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.