A Hodge-Podge of Things Found …
… on Saturday, July 2, 2016
Colton, CA
Part “D” (of A-E)
The New Laurel Street Underpass
A northward running BNSF passes eastbound.
There is a decorative ‘steam engine’ formed into the walls.
Just above, note the roadway and the tracks are not at a 90 degree angle, but the track bridge angles northeastward / southwestward slightly.
The present two new bridges:
Above, the going down and up of the roadway seems a longer length than most such underpasses.
Continued in Part E
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
Part “E” (of A-E)
During the underpass construction, because of the necessity of a shoofly, BNSF’s CP RANA was moved north about a half a mile. But the signals on the east side (north) of the CP was restored to the original location, but instead of a six track signal bridge with target signals on it, TWO three-track cantilever signal structures were erected with color light heads on them.
The walls are not flush but have a decorative design. Unlike some underpasses, there is a small space between the sidewalk and the walling. (See lower right)
A final view, looking westward from the northeast side: Trees and plants decorate each side of the roadway.
In Other Areas
The present status is unknown of the Puente Ave. underpass construction in the Bassett area (SP side), and the related two-tracking of the ‘Up and Over’ just to the east. That two-tracking may be on hold indefinitely. Nor of the situation of the LA&SL at the Durfee Ave. grade separation in Pico Rivera. That one also is supposed to be a two-lane roadway arrangement as Laurel Street in Colton is.
Promo for another Thread
The following photo was in the “Metrolink – New Happenings in San Bernardino, CA Area” thread.
Presently, an extension eastward of the lines for a mile or two in San Bernardino is taking place. It is hoped an update posting can be made in that thread in a day or two. But, that extension, which happens to be a single-track rickety old branch, now is being rebuilt with two-tracks. It makes for an interesting comparison how new signal installations there are being handled in comparison to the Sunset Route two-tracking.
That thread is at:
http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/255205.aspx?page=2#2882585
This will conclude the series.
Rosenberg RR museum did not flood.
"Cement-like powder" ... is gravel that has been produced on the west side of Slover Mountain for many years.
A10
Curious as to why the Pepper st overpass is being widened? Perhaps there is going to be some development in the sandy area just to the west of Pepper. My understanding was that area was part of the infamous Colton Fly Preserve. Also judging from the height of the rebar it looks like the new Pepper crossing is going to be a couple of feet higher than the existing bridge which would mean that the existing bridge is to be removed. Anyone know what they're doing?
I'm surprised that the Pepper Avenue bridge isn't also being lengthened.
Super Hunky (7-6):
According to the SANBAG website, the new arrangement at Pepper Ave. and the I-10 Freeway will be a new FIVE lane bridge. High trafficked bridges in the past have been widened in steps, with traffic transferred to the new section while the old is replaced, so that eventually everything is new at the site. I suspect that is the approach with the Pepper Ave. project.
http://www.sanbag.ca.gov/projects/interchange_pepper.html
The present track arrangement EAST of Pepper Ave is an interesting one, with the Palmdale Cutoff track connecting to Main 2 only and BETWEEN the two mains. K.P. has long felt Main 2 would someday be rerouted alongside Main 1, leaving the Balloon track unaffected by Sunset Route traffic, which has been projected to increase quite a bit in the years to come. Such could cause problems for the Pepper Ave. RAILROAD bridge. Another problem may be in the wings with the new bridge over I-10 being higher Pepper Ave. thus in a short span would have to lower to mesh with the height of the railroad bridge! And the south lane(s) would have to severely curve too, which isn’t conducive to the many 18-wheelers that pass. In that light, it seems that it would be cheaper to make the east-west Slover Ave. to the south a through road again, though wider, and knock down the old Pepper Ave. Bridge over the Sunset Route tracks.
That last thought is a depressing one for this railfan. At this point, I guess all that we can do is wait and see what happens. Things may get better, or things might get worse. I’m all eyes now!
Best,
K.P.
billio I'm surprised that the Pepper Avenue bridge isn't also being lengthened.
With the freeway itself being widened it would make sense to lengthen Pepper, the photo angle doesn't show the abutments in relation.
As for the development nearby - that'd be a good bet as the cement plant will be leveled and the property sold. (and they don't store "powder" uncovered ...)
Probably a stretch but that cement plant area would be a good spot for an intermodal yard...
Super Hunky Probably a stretch but that cement plant area would be a good spot for an intermodal yard...
Indeed. Measures over a mile square plus .... of course Rancho would need a rebuild ... like Pepper's getting ...
Maricopa AZ, Amtrak, and PATTERNS
Let K.P. preface this post with the current posting status. An effort has been transpiring for some time to get to replies. Things are pretty much allowing replies to finally be answered, but there is so many that K.P. is bogged down in composing replies. One poster, desertdog (John Timm), did post very significant bits of information on June 6, 2016, with a news link, about Maricopa, AZ and the future Amtrak station stop. Desertdog replied quickly to a few questions I emailed him Saturday, July 16, 2016, thus this post is possible. Sometime in the near future it is hoped the other replies can be finished and posted.
Desertdog advises that the future Maricopa Amtrak stop west of Highway 347 will be on the SOUTH side and on a new siding west of said highway. Obviously, then, it will be off Main 2. K.P. sees an unusual pattern with Amtrak station stop SIDINGS!
Circa 1980, Amtrak Nos. 5 and 6 went through Wyoming (UP) instead of the present Colorado route through the Rockies (D&RGW). An Amtrak stop for Cheyenne was in the Borie area, west of Cheyenne. At this point a slight diversion must be made to explain something that has unfortunately popped up at the TRAINS Magazine website! K.P. currently has NOT been able to present track diagrams to go with track explanations because post buttons are no longer present, and without those post buttons compositions malfunction in the posting process. So, hopefully written pictures or explanations will suffice …
At Borie (WY) there were Mains 1 and 2 with the CP there having but a single crossover, with an 18 passenger car Amtrak siding to the WEST of that crossover, north of Main 1. A westbound Amtrak No. 5 would come from Denver, cross Mains 3 and 4 (the latter ending there) to the south, and run over a connection to Mains 1 and 2 (the tracks mentioned above). After alighting and board passengers, it would come out west from the Amtrak siding, and continue west on Main 1. Here is the KEY detail, though: There was NO way for Amtrak No. 5 to crossover to Main 2 until the next crossover and CP a number of miles to the west was reached! Got that visualized?
Then there is Amtrak’s Palm Springs, CA stop (actually at the railroad location named Garnet). Westbound No. 1 (the Sunset Limited) comes west on either Main 1 or 2, but at CP SP589 GARNET goes west into a south side 4473 foot siding to discharge and alight passengers at the Amtrak station. Leaving the Amtrak stop and leaving the siding, Amtrak No. 1 is trapped to Main 2 until CP SP582 WEST PALM SPRINGS is reached, where a universal crossover arrangement is present! What happens when there are a number of UP freights on Main 2 in the area going the other way?
Now, we arrive at considering the FUTURE new Maricopa, AZ Amtrak stop. There is a universal crossover at CP SP899 MARICOPA. AGAIN, WEST of there is the present Amtrak stop (Main 1) east of Highway 347 and the future stop further west (west of Highway 347) OFF Main 2 on a future separate siding. A future CP west of the new station is a given. However, that new siding will have to connect back to Main 2 SOMEWHERE EAST of the new Amtrak station. If (“if”) that siding is for 18 Amtrak cars or maybe a little longer, it will necessitate ANOTHER CP! Standalone CP’s are expensive. What if UP would look at things maybe in a tax credit way, and add a switch at CP 899 MARICOPA and put in a long siding westward to the Amtrak stop? That would allow UP to use the siding if necessary anytime the almost once a day Amtrak train isn’t using it. Time will tell what will develop, but do you see a conspicuous pattern in all these Amtrak station stops on UP?
There is a single crossover or a universal crossovers arrangement just EAST of all the above Amtrak stations, and the NEXT such is a number of miles to the west. Was the SAME pattern in all these cases just coincidental or was it by design?
It is unlikely a cash strapped Amtrak would pay for a single crossover (between Mains 1 and 2) WEST of the future Amtrak station in Maricopa, AZ. But such a crossover would get Amtrak out of a thorny routing situation, but as said above, that is unlikely. That lack of the single crossover west of the new station stop alone gives UP fuel for having Amtrak maintain a tri-weekly Nos. 1 and 2 instead of daily service. On the other hand the new station may be a package deal and a crossover funded. Unfortunately, it has been said all this may be at least five years away, so we might all be in the dark until then.
K. P. HarrierK.P. currently has NOT been able to present track diagrams to go with track explanations because post buttons are no longer present, and without those post buttons compositions malfunction in the posting process.
Have you tried making your diagram in WORD and then Cut & Pasteing it into the body of your post? Mine came out like below.
___/ \______________/
Perhaps UP is not concerned with the hypothetical situations presented. With two main tracks signalled for movement in either direction, with CTC the dispatcher has the ability to plan movements several miles in advance. She or he and can create the optimom flow of traffic by crossing over any trains. Whether #1 and#2 operate on Main 1 or Main 2 is only relevant for their scheduled stops and can be programmed by the DS to fit into his 'plan for that day'. That seems to be the way #3 and #4 are handled by BNSF.
Quick test of forum font change (to Courier New) using built in editor:
----- track 1 -----\---/---------- track 2 ------\-/------
Not sure if interline spacing can be changed using some trick, otherwise it looks 'serviceable'.
K. P. HarrierStandalone CP’s are expensive. What if UP would look at things maybe in a tax credit way, and add a switch at CP 899 MARICOPA and put in a long siding westward to the Amtrak stop?
The siding would have to be around 1.5 miles long-ish and the existing CP 'vital logic' would have to be replaced. A tradeoff between maintaining another CP location and the recurring cost of longer siding maintenance. Hmmm.
Back in California, I just noticed that work is finally underway for the connector track between the BNSF SB sub and the short length of former UP Riverside lead serving Cascade Warehouse - see this Google aerial:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.049507,-117.3282323,17z/data=!3m1!1e3
Perhaps Metrolink will publish a notice when CP West Colton changes will cause a schedule disruption ....
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! ***
Terminal may be more evenly spaced. 'shift' + enter puts a single space
_________________________________\_ /____/
Electroliner 1935 (7-19) and rdamon (7-19):
Brilliant technique, rdamon! (SHIFT + ENTER) Preliminary tests with a .TXT file were successful with that technique.
HOWEVER, I compose in WORD (for the spell checker), transfer the composition into a .TXT file (so the TRAINS Magazine forums posting will work), and then transfer that to the TRAINS Magazine forums screen. BUT, that SHIFT + ENTER disables the TRAINS Magazine composition preview screen! I give up …
Depressed … and absolutely tired of chronic futility,
Update as of Friday, July 22, 2016
Interpret It How You May
The Colton Signal Dept.
Recently, there has been a couple of signal dept. trailers at the Colton Signal Dept., one of such is see below on the left of a reshown view.
On a visit July 22, 2016, NO such trailers were at the locked gated facility. An empty spot is left of center below.
Such suggests some kind of signal related activity is taking place in the area.
Interestingly, about three new switch motor crates are now at the Colton Signal Dept., on the center right of the below photo:
If anyone knows where there might be some activity, please let us know.
The 91 Freeway LA&SL Bridge Area
Riverside, CA
On the way to the far southwest side of Riverside, I passed under the two LA&SL Bridges over the 91 Freeway. Much new grading was seen on the westbound side, BOTH to the north and south of the two bridges. Something is finally brewing there now! But, the very brief glimpse (while passing on the freeway) of the SOUTH grading didn’t quite make sense, at least to K.P.
Take care all,
Update as of Monday, July 25, 2016
What’s really at the LA&SL …
… 91 Freeway Bridge
Part I (of I-II)
What is currently at and by the LA&SL 91 Freeway railroad bridge? Not much. As seen below, by the photo center, the dirt as seen from driving the 91 Freeway looks freshly place horizontally. But, it is unknown how long that horizontal dirt has been in that position.
Above, a vested worker is seen on the far side of the bridge, by freeway traffic.
A never shown August 21, 2015 view from last year:
Comparing the above two photos things is a bit different, mainly with the dirt on the right.
Slight differences caught K.P.’s eye the other day, but nothing dramatic seems to be taking place.
The eastern side of the bridge’s grading looks finish, and has been that way for a while.
Continued in Part II
Part II (of I-II)
On the east side, south of Cridge Street, things look pretty much the same as it has for a while.
The ground of the southwest side looks freshly graded:
Above, it is unknown if workers had dug up something and K.P. saw it when previously passing on the 91 Freeway (the sand part on the left), then restored it to a flush appearance or not, but that southwest quadrant had a fresh dug up appearance the other day, but things don’t look dug up now.
BNSF still has much ballast left from the work of a couple of months ago, like it is waiting for some kind of trackwork in the future. Cridge Street is on the lower right.
K.P. hopes to get back here in the next several weeks to see if anything has changed
This will end the series.
Replies
kgbw49 (3-14 / 18):
Belated reply for sure. As you know, I made it to El Paso several months ago. Recently, I thought about trying to go all the way to the Houston, TX area where reportedly a section of two-tracking was recently finished. But, then I remembered the reports of severe rains and flooding., and that quickly changed that whim …. Do you know if things have dried out way out that way?
Cool steam photos in the El Paso area. And, on the first photo, semaphores in the distance!
SP657E44 (3-25):
Both ballast piles on the east side of the BNSF at WEST RIVERSIDE seem to have had big chunks of ballast taken from the last time I was out that way. Why BNSF crews would be taken ballast from the pile SOUTH of Cridge Street baffles me.
BarstowRick (3-25):
On the LA&SL, the Ontario-Pomona section is single-track.
SP657E44 (3-31):
What you say is what I’ve concluded, that the ballast piles at and by West Riverside are for each’s respective projects.
Electroliner 1935 (4-12):
Oh, yes, the ketchup commercial. And THAT reminds me of UP’s two-tracking of the Sunset Route …
rdamon (4-13):
You said MCI is now owned by Verizon.
You may be interested to know that where I live Verizon is (was) the phone outfit. They are not always getting bigger and bigger, but now spinning off things, like my rural area! I have a bad feeling about that …
ccltrains (4-13 / 4:13A):
Right now no known two-tracking is taking place. I see two-tracking in the Pomona area soon, but that stretch has long been tied up in litigation from years ago.
The two-tracking has been too slow for me to post mileage updates. MikeF90 has done that periodically. I’ll leave that updating for him. (Thanks, Mike!)
As far as putting oil on the dunes in days long gone, I have no idea. It wouldn’t surprise me if that was done in years long past, as maybe 25 years ago before the LA&SL was two-tracked, in the Mira Loma area, I saw someone changing oil on a track machine, just letting the oil drain on the ground.
BarstowRick (4-15):
The problem with those super ships, in theory, it should take longer to load and unload. When a shipper takes that into consideration, I wonder if the added time value of money factor offsets any better price shippers give, if they even give it
billio (4-15):
As of this post day, that stored power in the Marsh Station Road area of Arizona doesn’t show up the several map services. If even the map services don’t know of those stored units, I guess that works in UP’s favor.
kgbw49 (4-15):
Cool higher than the ships photos!
MikeF90 (4-16):
Hmmm. Yes, when the two subdivisions (Los Angeles and Alhambra) are taken into consideration, that all is two- and triple-tracks.
Paul D. North Jr. (4-18):
You got it, “Better than spies.” Your daughter must have been surprised indeed that you already knew about that stored power by Marsh Station Road in Arizona.
diningcar (4-20):
Funny, diningcar! It is good to have company …
I’m kind of in a turmoil of sorts and from time to time debate possibly going to the El Paso again, Houston, or BNSF’s Fort Sumner, NM areas, or all three. Another angle is somehow looking at matters from an IRS point of view and maximizing any benefits that could be received. Whatever, I am both in a hurry and not in a hurry, but at this point I believe the latter will win out. But, you never know with whims … and if time opens up.
desertdog (4-20):
I am not sure of the ins and out about fiber optics cables, but it must be a nightmare when one gets cut or damaged. For good reasons any line, cable or fiber optics, put up warnings of their presence.
I suppose there is a benefit for an outfit to have their line next to the tracks, because that eliminated most outsiders from digging the line up.
ws Corwinda (4-21):
That’s kind of a possibility, the gate for cattle people in order to move a flock. Now THAT with a train in the background would definitely make a fascinating photo composition!
BarstowRick (4-22):
In line with ws Corwinda’s post, any animal movement would add pizzazz to any photo. I haven’t seen it for a while, but here in Southern California by the Sunset Route in the Ontario area sheep or goats were annually moved here and there for grazing. Great land clearing method! Herds wre often seen by the tracks.
rcdyre (4-23):
Yes, “true tri-light” signals will probably remain in the Positive Train Control era. You mentioned the Golden State Route. When I was in New Mexico, as you known, I saw new color light signals AND tri-lights on the western portion of that line. The only reason that I can see to replace tri-lights is if (“if”) parts become scarce.
In the High Desert of Southern California, on the Palmdale Cutoff, old vertical color lights were present for intermediates. One was relocated about twenty to twenty-five years ago, and a new “tri-light” was used, probably because of the Anschutz influence on the old SP at the time.
All photos this post taken February 28, 2015.
And that signal lingers to this day. So, as you say, rcdrye, those types likely will remain for a while. But, it may be influenced by who is in change and where. On the western end of the Palmdale Cutoff, old signals remain, but the east end saw a wholesale changing them out to the new UP type signals.
Interesting situation!
Hey, rcdyre, do you want to have some fun and bring intrigue to your life? Check out this highly blown-up photo:
That green signal in the above middle photo was green because a southbound UP was coming. But, look at the bridge!
Reply to rcdyre continued …
That nearly 50 year old bridge that the southbound UP was going under is as old as the Palmdale Cutoff and is now being taken apart and rebuilt!
Above photos May 24, 2016
Never have seen anything like that before …
Continued …
Replies continued …
blue streak 1 (4-26):
About those C&O signals, wow!
I do not know the technical answer to your inquiry. As mentioned in the reply rcdyre in the posts above, the Palmdale Cutoff here in Southern California has OLD (early 1980’s installation) color lights in place, and they are with Positive Train Control antennas by them.
July 28, 2016 photos
The above two photos were taken earlier today at Johnson Road and the Palmdale Cutoff track in the Phelan (CA) area. About 45 miles further south the Palmdale Cutoff wyes into the Sunset Route in Colton by West Colton Yard.
Maybe someday here at the forum we will have a definitive answer to your inquiry.
MikeF90 (4-28):
That Alhambra Wash work in San Gabriel (CA) “by summer” wasn’t met, in my opinion. That may have been why crews were working weekends and even holidays!
It will be most fascinating when track is laid in the trench itself! Supposedly, only a year if left on the construction, so that day may be closer than it appears.
SP657E44 (5-1):
There sure are a lot of questions about that 91 Freeway LA&SL bridge in Riverside, as well as that bridge on Pepper Ave. in the Colton area. I sure would like to see something ‘official’ on both.
desertdog (5-4):
Those back-to-back sidings on the Golden State Route at Vaughn, NM were probably the most practical under the circumstances. Likely a movement from the western siding to the east siding was rare, hence, there was no need to a universal crossover. It is an odd arrangement for sure..
SP357E44 (5-8):
The reply to you included links, which causes the TRAINS Magazine website to malfunction. What's new ...
blue streak 1 (5-11):
It is doubtful there is a shortage of signal equipment. But, things may be happening too fast for the industry. Along the Sunset Route are PTC antennas everywhere. But, up on the deserts of the LA&SL those PTC antennas are nonexistent even though new color light signals have been erected. Seems like I read recently trackside signals may be done away with. What’s next?
kgbw49 (5-11):
Yes, two-tracking is way down on both the BNSF and UP. UP’s Los Angeles-El Paso line is sufficiently two-tracked that through fleeting they could run a whopping amount of trains per day. But two-tracking in Arizona the last few years has been conspicuously not as much as in California. Why the difference is a mystery to me, but I wonder if there is something about Arizona that causes UP to spend its money elsewhere.
SP657E44 (5-12):
In response to kgbw49 you mentioned that in the Clay Street area was NOT a very secure area for auto-rack cars. In would seem public access to the tracks is becoming less and less possible. But as far as the Clay Street underpass bridging itself, in light of your recent reply about bridge widths, I now am curious what the railroad is dealing with on the Clay Street Bridge. Is it 40 feet as Vineyard Ave. is? If so, three tracks would not fit. The aerial below shows the present single-track track is in the middle of the underpass bridge. Obviously, you have more direct knowledge about it’s width than I do.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Pedley,+Riverside,+CA/@33.9694592,-117.4622979,50m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x80dcb41642b4c609:0x4a0573f9a2b8ef5c!8m2!3d33.9845537!4d-117.4732571
desertdog (5-12):
As far as taking one of two tracks out of service in the Chicago area in slow times to reduce wear and tear, I serious doubt that, though I am not from that area and have no specific knowledge of what the railroad does there. However, it would seem taking a track out of service would have no effect on wear and tear. “Wear and tear” is cause by trains going over it, so shifting it to only one track means that track would ware twice a fast. Maintenance cost is another matter. Maybe that was what they were thinking about. Inspecting one track is cheap than two and running track machines through one track is cheaper than two.tracks. Maybe someone here at the forum has experience of such things.
ccltrains (5-13):
Metrolink did start operations on the Perris Valley Line June 6, 2016. I rode it round trip Tuesday, July 12. Interference with BNSF trains (hence, also alternate Sunset Route trains) seems to be minimal.
What TERRIFIES me, though, is having BNSF, LA&SL, and alternate Sunset Route trains passing that platform, sometimes with kids on it, at a relatively moderate speed! I suppose that will change real quickly when some gal employed by the city mayor has her $1000 wig blown off, squashed, and shredded underneath a passing freight train …
Replies Continued …
Norm48327 (5-14):
Yes, UP could add two more tracks over the Sunset Ave. four-tracks wide underpass bridging. Of course, for what, though? It seems, even though on a grade, empty well cars / 85-foot flats could be tied down there. Those cars could be parked just west of a derail and entrance signal. That would get them away from the high density Los Angeles areas.
Interestingly, when I rode those Metrolink Perris Valley Line trains (mentioned to ccltrains above), the PVL train passed such cars south of Van Buren Blvd. in Riverside.
Both the Sunset Ave. and Van Buren Blvd. tracks are kind of (“kind of”) secluded, and in plain sight of freeway motorists, which seems would discourage any would-be vandals.
SP657E44 (5-14):
I too like ‘the low evening light’!
Some of the most memorable and vivid times were trackside at dusk, with a warn desert breeze passing. A train passing is better in such conditions, but just a warm breeze and the horizon sky being lighter is absolutely wondrous! I just wish it wasn't so short in duration …
BarstowRick (5-23):
Oh, you like night shots too!
Last year before summer I was privileged to ride a BNSF special out of San Bernardino roundtrip, return to Berdoo just about a half an hour before twilight.
It was disappointing, though, when the train quickly shot off to Los Angeles. I would have loved to get some dusk shots of the special parked by the old San Bernardino depot!
Talking with a riding crew staffer, it appears BNSF does such things from time to time. What the motive is was not clear. But, it sure was fun! I haven’t heard of anything like it for UP. Man, would I love to ride a UP dome down and up Beaumont Hill on the Sunset Route!
BNSF6400 (5-26):
Thanks so much for explaining where the east switch of the old Spadra siding was in Pomona on the LA&SL, by the west side of the overpass at Humane Way. I was in the last car of the second to last City of Los Angeles #104 and remember well the car curving back onto the mainline after coming out of the Spadra siding’s east end, which for those other than BNSF6400, is now just beyond the not activated signals and bridge in the first below view.
About the WEST end of the old Spadra siding WEST of the Temple Ave. overpass, note left to right the “B” (old Main) and “C” (siding) Tracks, how the foreground “C” Track goes back to a wider center in the background.
That was where the old Spadra siding ended. Back in 1971 when on the second to last #104 I remember going into the Spadra siding, and right away going over a two-lane grade crossing. That obviously was the old State Street grade crossing, which grade crossing is now a two-lane underpass, the small bridging by the last engine below.
It is strange that I have absolutely no recollect of going under the Temple Ave. underpass back in 1971. It was there, though, wasn’t it, BNSF6400?
Super Hunky (5-27):
Yes, the San Gabriel Trench’s work by Alhambra Wash is most interesting. But, Super Hunky, the most exciting part is yet ahead! They sometime in the future will be laying ONE track in the trench by the Alhambra Wash. ONLY one, with walling on each side of it! The other half of the trench on the western end (where the lowing track is presently) will then have to be dug out and concrete walls and flooring put in. Can you imagine what a concrete wall on one side of a passing train will look like and the other side of the narrow passageway a steel wall of I-beams and whatever? That can’t be that far off now!
kgbw49 (5-27):
I win some, and lose some!
If (“if”) I had been playing SP657E44 for money, I would have lost big time on those bridge widths!
Not being a gambler is a safe bet (“bet”) …
Hey, something I’ve been hearing is that coal is not dead, and is halfway having a revival. If true, I guess there won’t be a funeral on the Central Corridor.
tdmidget (5-27):
Well, for practicality’s sake, consider from Yuma to Estrella in Arizona all single-track. There is about four miles in the Fortuna area, OLD two-tracks between Dome and Wellton (that is technically two-tracks but biased as if double-tracked), and the next about eleven miles of relatively new two-tracks in the Mohawk area.
MikeF90 (5-28):
One of the benefits of getting behind in replies, is that time marches on. Note these time photos of Alhambra Wash.
May 21, 2016:
June 25, 2016:
Above, it looks like they are completely taking out the old cement-work, and putting a new. Maybe someone at the forum has a different interpretation …
About the Rubio Wash area and east, I’m somewhat baffled, and have been so from the word “Go.” However, the reshown June 25, 2016 below photo is one that gives me a sense of what might occur.
It looks like to the right (south) of the current track in the grade crossing at Walnut Grove Ave. (in the photo background) the new trench track will be laid on the far right and angle across that street. However, that street will not be lowered and track laid to the east UNTIL the track in the trench is laid and signaling ready to be cut over. Then, probably in a one day or weekend blitz Walnut Grove Ave. will be closed, roadway lowered, a cut will be lowered for a new track, track laid, put in service, the old track removed from Walnut Grove Ave., and then the roadway lowered on each side of the new track, paved, and everything passable again! That is what I think, but won’t bet any money on it …
mvs (6-5):
Yes, the Milliken Ave. in Ontario and Buena Vista St. in Burbank flyovers seem to indicate that sand in squares must be a favorite of flyover designers. Even the Colton Flyover had a similar construction technique, but that one had concrete poured instead of sand.
desertdog (6-6):
That was a very good article that you found and linked for us.
In Arizona,, between CP SP887 ENID (M.P. 887.2) and CP SP899 MARICOPA (M.P. 898.8) is 11.6 miles. That is an operating thorn in an against the flow situations. The most practical thing is for Amtrak to pay for a crossover between Mains 1 and 2 just west of the future Amtrak stop, but somehow I doubt Amtrak would. But, they have to live with the consequences of UP resisting the passenger carrier.
Pete-M3 (6-16) and UPRR11 (6-17):
Concerning the Richmond, TX bridge problem near Houston., I haven’t heard anything about the bridge of late. Is it open again by now, almost August?
mvs (7-1):
Airport Blvd. in Thermal being open adds another overpass to the scene. I was surprised it was almost open a few months ago when out that way. It must be a real boon for motorists out that way.
diningcar (7-19):
I did a quick mental review of some of the Amtrak stops on the western portion of the Transcon, and the ones I know about, such as San Bernardino, Barstow, Needles, and Winslow, all those Amtrak stops are in a good position, with CP’s on each side of the Amtrak stops. Kingman and Flagstaff seem to have a problem with access and fluidity. But, BNSF trains operate so fast fluidity may be only a minor problem. UP, on the other hand, lugs more of their trains, so the same problem would be more intensified and pronounced on the Sunset Route.
What you are saying, though, is basically true, but the problem is Amtrak can be a thorn in a freight railroad’s side. BNSF’s track layouts are better as those layouts are more conducive to getting faster trains around slower ones. Nevertheless, Amtrak often is force to follow not as fast freights. A dispatcher can’t do the impossible.
An interesting situation Amtrak and dispatchers must deal with on the BNSF is Automatic Train Stop (ATS). When BNSF put CTC on previously Automatic Block Signaled “double track” it didn’t have to put in ATS in the reverse direction! So, Amtrak is confined to the old double-track concept in a way. I’m not sure if Amtrak is still running 90 M.P.H. on the BNSF or not, but that 90 M.P.H. running has been in itself a thorn for that railroad.
To All:
OK, I think I’m caught up on replies. If I missed one of yours, and want a reply, well, Chihuahua (small dog) bark!
Take care all.
The San Gabriel trench webcam shows that they still haven't finished the wall between Ramona St and Mission Rd. That 'by summer' date for installing the trench track looks extremely iffy; BTW that date is government-ese for 'by September 22'. The latest ACE minutes state that the contractor is behind schedule concreteing the walls, trench bottom and excavating the remaining soil - work hours are being extended.
My 'single track remaining' number for the Sunset Corridor (Colton to El Paso) is 128 miles (~83% complete) and holding.
That bridge widening 'improvement' crossing the Palmdale cutoff looks like it was done late, on the cheap and probably part of Caltrans funded earthquake mitigation. Don't be on it during The Big One!
Speaking of cheap, ships have already been scraping the sides of the new Panama Canal due to the tugboat based (non)restraint system.
Kp, thanks for your response and analysis of the BNSF Transcon and #3 & #4.
My point was (is) that UP can create the optimum operation as they complete the Sunset 2nd track given the known Amtrak stops.
Hi, K.P.,
I admit to being confused here. Since the Amtrak depot is going to be on the south side alongside Main 2 (nominally eastbound), and the dedicated siding will parallel it, I don't see how building a CP just west of there will make any difference. Whether an eastbound Amtrak would cross over at CP 887 or closer, it would still be going with, rather than against the flow of most traffic.
John Timm
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.