CTRL plus the “+” key enlarges view, CTRL plus the “-“ key reduces view.
Update as of Friday, December 19, 2014
Odds and Ends
Part I (of I-VII)
The Riverside Ave. Underpass Construction
Riverside, CA
From the south side looking northward from the restaurant on the northwest corner of Riverside Ave. and Merrill Ave.: The new whitish bridging is in the far background.
Great advances have been made, and the bridge semi-looks ready for track.
From the north side looking southward, track seems to actually have been laid on the bridge, though in a crude, uneven state.
Just above, towards the photo bottom, the shoofly is seen. Above that shoofly is the crude track. Just above, too, the present sides of the new bridge, at this point, seem uneven, with the far, south side with higher cement, and the nearer, north side having lower cement. Note the wood hand railings height differences.
At this point in time, it is unclear if the new bridge is a single-track structure, or if it will have extra width added for a second-track once the shoofly is out of the way. Hey, SP657E44, do you know anything about this?
Continued in Part II
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 II (of I-VII)
A view back on the south side again, from the west looking northeast: Exactly what the bridge will look like is not clear either, as that newly laid track is BETWEEN the temporary wood railings far side (left) and this side’s wood railings (center and right)..
A bunch of ballast is on site.
More equipment and more ballast.
One piece of equipment had a decal clearly showing its owner.
Most earthmoving and ballast-moving equipment in the past has been from Caterpillar (CAT). This is the first time K.P. has seen equipment for John Deere, another heavy equipment manufacturer.
Continued in Part III
Part III (of I-VII)
The Additional Railroad Bridge over the 91 Freeway
Over at the 91 Freeway now …
Progressively closer views looking northeast from Panorama Rd.:
Above, on the right side of the new bridge, note the angled, floor to wall bracing is very much incomplete and only partially in place.
Continued in Part IV
Part IV (of I-VII)
An even closer view of the second new bridge:
Just above, the present shoofly bridge is right of the signal. With the permanent track allow that signal to be in the same position with the track to its left?
Another telephoto:
There has been some speculation here at the forum about what would become of the new “old” bridge once the duplicate bridge was in service. Several months ago, as reported previously, a worked volunteered that in ‘a few years’ a second bridge would be put up. Well, way before ‘a few years’ a second bridge was on site. But, maybe (“maybe”) what he was alluding to was that new first shoofly-bridge would eventually be moved to the north of the new, duplicated bridge for a second main … Otherwise, as speculated here by others, that new, now seemingly unneeded bridge would have to be dismantled and scrapped. A lot of questions remain for us outsiders …
K.P.’s cell photo rang. The dispatch had changed, and he could NO LONGER stay and get other view-angles, like from Cridge Street a bit to the north or right by the bridge itself. Maybe another time …
Leaving the area he drove under the bridge, southbound on the 91 Freeway, and the bridging looked very, very different from previous goings under it. Apparently with the old walling completely gone now, the freeway looks wider, and the bridge not so big. One would not think the same size bridges were there. What an illusion and effect on the mind!
Continued in Part V
Part V (of I-VII)
Floodlights on the Mt. Vernon Connector
Colton, CA
In returning to base in the darkness now, K.P. passed by the Colton Signal Dept. area and found an auto-rack train parked on the Mt. Vernon Connector. Some of it was all lit up. The north-south alignment portion of the Mt. Vernon Connector (parallel to the BNSF Transcon) with lit floodlights:
Just above, note that on the right background the lights seem to curve. That is where the Connector curves to become an east-west alignment. By that curve:
South of that east-west alignment (and auto-rack train) is where the all lit up Colton Signal Dept. is.
Above, the barbed wire, fenced yard is on the right. That lighting is separate from the lighting that lights up trains, as with the first photo.
Now, in the southwest quadrant of the Colton Crossing / Colton Flyover, looking basically east: That stopped auto-rack (RIGHT) is seen on the curve by the floodlights:
Above, the Colton Flyover is on the left. Two mast signals (showing red) are on the far left, and reflect red off that train on the curved Mt. Vernon Connector. The view is kind of blurry, but not bad for being just a nighttime handheld!
Continued in Part VI
Part VI (of I-VII)
The Valley Blvd. Quiet Zone Grade Crossing
A mast flasher unit (center) has been installed at BNSF’s Valley Blvd. grade crossing for presumably pedestrians as part of the requirement for a Quiet Zone conversion so trains won’t blow their horn. The Colton Flyover package included making this grade crossing a Quiet Zone one.
On the below photo’s right, is the center median that had to be installed.
Another view of the median:
Continued in Part VII
Part VII (of I-VII)
While at the Valley Blvd BNSF grade crossing, a train came, and everything lit up.
From that Valley Blvd. “Quiet Zone” grade crossing, looking south, the BNSF train going by (northward, which is eastbound), is on the photo right.
Just above, on the left, those floodlights are again seen with the curving auto-rack train on the Mt. Vernon Connector.
Why the Colton Crossing diamonds-side of those auto-racks is not lit up too is unknown. Perhaps would-be local crooks are afraid on the boogie man! Seriously, they may know better, that they couldn’t get away with a BNSF Transcon train going by!
This will end the series. However, a brief Second Section follows.
Second Section
If you are not from the area, lack transportation, and wish to visit the Colton Flyover and its immediate surroundings, Omnitrans, the local transit bus service, has a few routes that pass through Colton. You’ll need to walk a few blocks to see the Colton Flyover, but transportation is available.
Schedules and maps are at www.omnitrans.org.
Go to Schedules/Maps, then System Map ... Routes 1 and 19.
If you take that little side street off Cridge you get a little closer (the mud hole by the gate should be dried out by then). I try to avoid Riverside avenue but I'll get back to you (between the traffic signal timing (or lack thereof) and limited access it's unfun.
A10
Replies
MikeF90 (12-18):
About that Campus Ave. (Ontario, CA) LA&SL grade crossing on a curve, I would venture to guess that UP sort of feels hemmed in there, and that hemming in would be a hindrance to further two-tracking of that alternate Sunset Route. Though tight, a second-track could conceivably be laid to the NORTH, as SP657E44 mentioned. Thus, to grade separate that location would be in UP’s interest. SP657E44 seemed to know something behind the scenes; hence, I anticipate that something about the Campus Ave. grade crossing will become public within a few years.
In 1903-1904 when the San Pedro, Los Angeles & Salk Lake, herein simplified just as the Los Angeles & Salt Lake, its eventual name, when the people of Ontario heard the LA&SL was coming through, they probably rejoiced! In those days Campus Ave. and State Street, if they even existed, where dirt roads for horse and buggies. And steam engines probably made so much noise innocent grade crossing collisions were unheard of. But as autos gained popularity, and with air conditioners and rolled up windows, collisions were inevitable. With LA&SL having been taken over by UP, and a vast population area having resulted in Ontario over time, UP has found itself hemmed in and in a precarious situation two-tracking-wise. An underpass may be UP’s way out! That is why I’m betting on UP’s aggressiveness at THAT grade crossing but could care little about others.
Westbound view
Eastbound: Behind the camera State Street is even closer to the track!
Westbound again, and that track closeness to State Street
Interestingly, in personally encountering that grade crossing often (especially westbound on State Street on the EAST side of Campus Ave.), in my opinion, it is an incredibly unsafe grade crossing situation, and I think UP knows that, and for that reason alone an underpass might be in everyone’s best interest. Westbound on State Street, it is one of the few grade crossings K.P. is uncomfortable at.
Replies continued
Replies Continued
Pete-M3 (12-21):
The last time I was able to make contact with sources NO eastward progression of the two-tracking east of Iris had been put in service. When I was out by Iris on October 18, 2014, the new, not in service track east of Iris looked well-manicured, so we should hear something soon. The holidays are probably slowing this presently.
SP657E44 (12-23):
Yes, awarding a contract for grading in the’ Winterhaven, CA area’ (just across the way from Yuma, AZ) probably had reference to grading that two mile Araz-Araz Jct. gap currently being graded.
Araz-Araz Jct. photo from dated November 23, 2014
For us railroaders and railfans, the technical identification of a certain area is obvious. But, for those outside the loop, outsiders, they grab a hold of ANY map name that is close by to convey a location.
Super Hunky (12-22):
Concerning the Dome, AZ area redoing of the wood ties to concrete ones, did you notice on the photos if the one- to two-tracks SWITCH had new concrete ties also or did it remain wooden ties?
On January 11, 2013 the manual switch just west of Sultana Ave. in Ontario, CA had wood ties in an otherwise concrete tied LA&SL Ontario mainline.
As we all know, that wait was for a new switch and where it would go to.
On November 10, 2013 a new concrete tied turned was being assembled by that old wood tied switch, and we were surprised by a dual control switch and signals that was in the location’s future.
Back in the Dome, AZ area again, IF the wood tied turnout remains in an otherwise newly concrete tied, updated line, it could be a sign of future, upcoming two-tracking in that area. IF, on the other hand, the turnout was updated with concrete ties too, that might be a bad omen for two-tracking in that area, and such could be years away. But, this is second guessing the railroad with unpredictable results.
Take care all,
K.P.
PS: It is hoped we are up to date now, and that nobody’s reply that need a reply has fallen through the cracks and was missed.
The photo on Trainorders of the Dome area shows concrete ties on all three tracks at the switch, but the switch itself still has wood crossties. That switch is also a equalilateral turnout, thus trains "turnout" a little to go on either track (the single main isn't lined up with either track on the other side of the switch, but is in the middle). This was a common practice for end of two main track switches on the Southern Pacific. So double tracking may soon occur here.
Equilateral Switches and a Reply to BNSF6400 (12-24):
For those unfamiliar with the term “equilateral” switch, for all practical purposes, it is a wye switch, as at CP AL488 ALHAMBRA (M.P. 488.3) in Alhambra, near Los Angeles. On either route the speed limit through the switch is 50 M.P.H.
In the Dome area of Arizona, at CP SP753 DOME (M.P. 753.3), the equilateral switch there is for 40 M.P.H., with the speed limit to the west 35 M.P.H. because of the mountainous nature of that area. As an example nearby:
Its eastern counterpart at the end of two-tracks, where the Phoenix Line junctions in at, at CP SP771 WELLTON (M.P. 770.8) is a 40 M.P.H. equilateral also.
Southern Pacific was known for lugging their freights and slow going, hence, not having to slow on either route made for SP’s love of them. Union Pacific, on the other hand, runs their trains faster, hence, to slow their trains for an equilateral has incurred their hate for them and disdain, and they are changed out whenever possible. The general exception is where future track altering work is planned or anticipated.
For BNSF6400, thanks for the info about the Dome area switch being an equilateral with WOOD ties. Now we all know, and have a certain expectation for that area, whenever UP decides to two-track it.
Best,
K. P. Harrier Equilateral Switches and a Reply to BNSF6400 (12-24): For those unfamiliar with the term “equilateral” switch, for all practical purposes, it is a wye switch, as at CP AL488 ALHAMBRA (M.P. 488.3) in Alhambra, near Los Angeles. On either route the speed limit through the switch is 50 M.P.H. In the Dome area of Arizona, at CP SP753 DOME (M.P. 753.3), the equilateral switch there is for 40 M.P.H., with the speed limit to the west 35 M.P.H. because of the mountainous nature of that area. As an example nearby: Its eastern counterpart at the end of two-tracks, where the Phoenix Line junctions in at, at CP SP771 WELLTON (M.P. 770.8) is a 40 M.P.H. equilateral also. Southern Pacific was known for lugging their freights and slow going, hence, not having to slow on either route made for SP’s love of them. Union Pacific, on the other hand, runs their trains faster, hence, to slow their trains for an equilateral has incurred their hate for them and disdain, and they are changed out whenever possible. The general exception is where future track altering work is planned or anticipated. For BNSF6400, thanks for the info about the Dome area switch being an equilateral with WOOD ties. Now we all know, and have a certain expectation for that area, whenever UP decides to two-track it. Best, K.P.
Riverside avenue: New track is in place over the new bridge but not tied-in or in service.. There is a walkway and railing mounts on the south side, a wall of equal height extends north 4 to 5 feet on the north side which would seem to indicate a single track structure But ... the temporary pilings are so close to the bridge that until the trains return to their previous routing and those piles removed it'll be difficult to do any work.
I’m curious about UP’s apparent disdain for equilateral turnouts. Speed-wise, a standard turnout favors the straight routing, whereas anything except an extremely lengthy, low angle diverging route requires a speed restriction. Nothing is really gained if both tracks have the same priority. Could it be because both routings of an equilateral turnout require a speed reduction? Or, perhaps because both routes have a reverse curve?
John Timm
desertdog K. P. Harrier Equilateral Switches and a Reply to BNSF6400 (12-24): For those unfamiliar with the term “equilateral” switch, for all practical purposes, it is a wye switch, as at CP AL488 ALHAMBRA (M.P. 488.3) in Alhambra, near Los Angeles. On either route the speed limit through the switch is 50 M.P.H. In the Dome area of Arizona, at CP SP753 DOME (M.P. 753.3), the equilateral switch there is for 40 M.P.H., with the speed limit to the west 35 M.P.H. because of the mountainous nature of that area. As an example nearby: Its eastern counterpart at the end of two-tracks, where the Phoenix Line junctions in at, at CP SP771 WELLTON (M.P. 770.8) is a 40 M.P.H. equilateral also. Southern Pacific was known for lugging their freights and slow going, hence, not having to slow on either route made for SP’s love of them. Union Pacific, on the other hand, runs their trains faster, hence, to slow their trains for an equilateral has incurred their hate for them and disdain, and they are changed out whenever possible. The general exception is where future track altering work is planned or anticipated. For BNSF6400, thanks for the info about the Dome area switch being an equilateral with WOOD ties. Now we all know, and have a certain expectation for that area, whenever UP decides to two-track it. Best, K.P. I’m curious about UP’s apparent disdain for equilateral turnouts. Speed-wise, a standard turnout favors the straight routing, whereas anything except an extremely lengthy, low angle diverging route requires a speed restriction. Nothing is really gained if both tracks have the same priority. Could it be because both routings of an equilateral turnout require a speed reduction? Or, perhaps because both routes have a reverse curve? John Timm The UP used equilaterals at the end of or begining of double track. The max speed through field side of a No20 is 40 mph. The max speed on either side of a equilteral is 60 mph. On 70 mph track you would have to slow down 30 mph with the standard No20 on the field side or slow down 10 mph on either side of a No20 equilateral TO. On track with a speed of 60 mph you don't slow down at all with the equilateral.
The Puente Hills Intermodal Facility Area Update
Part “A” (of A-C)
On Saturday, December 27, 2014, the general PHIMF area was checked on. An unexpected development was that concrete piers are in place on the south side of Peck Road. The PHIMF future track’s bridging (as discerned by the pier supports) does NOT match the current bridging for the LA&SL two mains, which makes one wonder if widening Peck Road is in the cards. Visiting the PHIMF area was added to the itinerary at the last minute, so time could not be taken for a time consuming hike into the area for photos. Maybe next time …
At Workman Mill Road the PHIMF track had been laid through the grade crossing, but nowhere else.
One photo would have been sufficient, but the three above photos were shown to refresh the forum’s memory of the area, because new and surprising developments have occurred.
That short PHIMF track laid through the grade crossing was not present on K.P.’s September 27, 2014 visit.
Continued in Part B
Part “B” (of A-C)
A striking development was the erection of POLED, MAST signals at the EAST end of the future CP C014 WORKMAN, and NOT a signal bridge.
The above LEFT signal, for the presently not laid PHIMP track, only has a top, single diode element head, for red, flashing red, or off. So, (1) UP trains will not be using the track as a siding (from CP C016 INDUSTRY to CP C014 WORKMAN), and (2) the track may or may not (the likeliest scenario) be reconnected to the mainline at the west end, in the Peck Road area. (If the PHIMF track does connect to Main 1, it probably would be via a manual switch protected by a derail and a two-light entrance signal.)
A signal bridge base (one of two) has been put in (or at least positioned) on the Main 2 side.
Continued in Part C
Part “C” (of A-C)
A counterpart base is on the PHIMF-track side.
So, likely (“likely”) the signal bridge horizontal part just railroad west of Workman Mill Road will be attached to legs and archer-placed here.
So, in theory (“theory”), the signal bridge should be erected fairly soon. HOWEVER, that above sentence (paragraph above photo) used the word “likely.” The troublesome signal bridge to K.P. may have been troublesome because the heads now seem (“seem”) to be in reverse than they should be! If so, all the heads will have to be redone and reattached!
This will end the series, but …
----------
On that same Saturday, December 27, 2014 there was more than just the PHIMF area that K.P. checked out. The San Gabriel Trench construction area was revisited too, and a number of surprises were found there as well, including more laying down, stacked up rebar pillars than one can shake a stick at several hundred fee! west of San Gabriel Blvd.! A posting series on the San Gabriel Trench construction should be ready in three or four days.
For those that follow the Los Angeles Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension thread in the Transit forum, catenary has been partially strung and track smoothed out. If you follow that thread too expect a posting within a week.
Freedombill,
Interesting! So if it's established that an equilateral turnout allows for 60 mph on either side, why would UP want to replace them with a configuration that penalizes, so to speak, diverging movements?
I believe there was discussion on the Alhambra equalateral turnout here in the forum earlier this year. if not mistaken, the conclusion was made that these switches are a severe maintenance headache.
My mother lives one-quarter of a mile from one of these equalateral turnouts on the NorfolkSouthern main line in Central Virginia. I can say that passing trains make a TREMENDOUS amount of noise as they hit the points, which would suggest huge forces acting on them. The noise more resembles that made going over a diamond than that of hitting a switch. Why there would be so much noise, I cannot say; but that turnout has been there for many decades.
Bill Russell
John,
I had not thought of the maintenance angle. It makes sense. Thanks.
freedombill (12-24):
In the past sources have shown me official timetable information and equilateral “wye” type switches have a set timetable speed without reference to “TO”, “POTO” (which stands for what?), or anything else. Apparently, such abbreviations are not of direct interest to trainmen per se. Since you brought up such technical references, freedombill, might you be connected with Maintenance-of-Way, or know someone in that department? Years and years ago I knew a Santa Fe track worker, and from time to time he would convey interesting tidbits, but it has been years since there was contact with him, and he is probably dead by now. If you are in Maintenance-of-Way or know someone in that field, more power to you!
SP657E44 (12-26):
Those temporary construction wood hand railings that you speak of seem to be of way different heights, of which I personally interpreted as a sign of an eventual two-track bridge, which doesn’t make a whole lot of sense in view of the single-track Pachappa Cut around the curve, unless taxpayers will fund cutting all that rock away. Since it is so difficult to visually see what is going on while on just off site, we may not know what is there until we can drive UNDER the railroad bridging on a publicly open roadway.
freedombill (12-28):
You said in your above dated post, ‘The UP used equilaterals at the end or beginning of double-track.’ From a historical perspective, I may be mistaken, but “UP” did not use equilaterals in such applications. The railroads that UP merger with, such as Missouri Pacific and Southern Pacific, did use them, hence UP inherited there use. Such an equilateral wye switch inheriting was (“was”) on Tehachapi Pass, at Bena, where two-tracks southbound become one. A high speed RIGHT handed switch is present now.
Instead of ‘The UP used equilaterals at the end or beginning of double-track,’ might you have meant the SP instead?
Status
The San Gabriel Trench material is coming along fine as time permits, and may be ready sooner than expected, but the most time consuming part has arrived, the photos …
‘We Have to Stop Meeting Like This!’
K.P. was involved in an unexpected, surprise dispatch to Redlands (CA) on Monday, December 29, 2014, and before and afterward revisited the Highgrove area, on the BNSF Transcon, the portion that the alternate Sunset Route traverses. It seems almost every time Highgrove is visited these days, regardless of the hour, the San Jac train, or whatever it is called now, comes by!
Above, note one of three side-by-side truss bridges is seen on the background right.
Above also, note the orange track derail on the photo bottom. The four-track signal bridge’s shadow strangely crosses the BNSF GP60M’s nose.
Below, a heavy telephoto from Center Street, a view of two of three truss bridges over the I-215 Freeway:
Above, the important part is on the background lower left, what looks like grading, presently to or from the unused, new, left truss bridge.
In the next several days a short presentation and report on K.P.’s findings there should be ready for the forum too, but after the San Gabriel Trench material is presented.
One group of items that was new to the area, in the BNSF fenced Maintenance-of-Way yard in Highgrove, was a bunch of stacked panel track. While their future use is presently unknown, it should be interesting to see what those panel tracks prove to be used for.
I spoke not of the temporary railings but of the holes in the walkway deck on the south side for the permanent metal railings. The wall underneath both ends of said walkway(deck) are the same as on the north side. Unless there is some reason to build a second bridge next to the current new bridge instead of a double-track bridge ....
SP657E44 (12-29):
Thanks for the clarification!
How on earth did you see the ‘holes’ on TOP of the deck? You don’t have a drone with a camera, do you? (Hehehe. Just having fun …)
So, do I interpret you right that the bridge will be for two-tracks?
The term POTO comes directly from Union Pacific Track Charts (a track chart is a engineering document, usually 5 miles per page, that shows all the information about that track, including curve, rail, signal and switch locations plus rail type, installation date plus a lot more). POTO stands for "Power Operated Turn Out" and the other switch term is HTTO, which is "Hand Thrown Turn Out".
Talking about equailateral turnouts, there was a No. 30 equailateral installation on the former Surf Line north of Oceansie at the end of two main tracks (it was just north of the Stuart Mesa yard). It was good for 90 MPH on either side for passenger trains! It was a monster of a turnout. It was removed when double track was extended further north.
As far No. 30 turnouts, I don't know of any installed on the BNSF (but I could be wrong). The No. 30 was a Union Pacific thing, at least among western railroads, first installed in the early 1990's.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.