Both Snail-Paced and Big Time Activities …
… With a Few Surprises Too!
Photos Taken Monday, February 17, 2014
Pomona to Niland, CA
Part “A”, Section 9 (of 1-10)
Another view, though a crazy one, of what is just south of the track, and west of Cleveland St.
By that semi-distant pole in the above photo’s center is a bunch of empty wooden spools, presumably for signal cable. The back one is quite rotted, but the two front spools seem relatively new.
On the not activated mast signal itself, the future intermediate number plates are reversed.
Continued in Section 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 “A”, Section 8 (of 1-10)
There is another signal, this one only on a single mast and no box, at Cleveland St. at M.P. 630.88. View looks westbound.
Looking eastbound at the terrain, and where the second main will eventually be laid (left).
The future signal in relation to Cleveland St. and the crossing gate:
Before the recent and current two-tracking efforts between Mortmar and Rogoza near the Salton Sea, the old target signals were replaced with the strange one box two masts type, except for the easternmost one. The new signals in this post and the one before this post were of a dull finish, and looked very used. Likely, they were transplanted here from the Mortmar-Bertram area. Is this a sign that the 16.9 miles two-tracking gap between Thermal and Salton is approaching the time of being two-tracked?
Continued in Section 9
Part “A”, Section 7 (of 1-10)
Between the Mecca and Mortmar sidings, the present target signals were found to be in the replacement process, with color lights. The one came upon was a boxed one with two masts on it.
The above signal was along State Highway 111 at the south side “T” intersection of Wheeler St.
Continued in Section 8
Part “A”, Section 6 (of 1-10)
By the BNSF cross-Transcon, there are now piles of ballast everywhere!
At La Cadena Dr. several blocks to the east of the BNSF Transcon, wood plywood is still present on the bridging as the flyover slopes downward on the east side.
A bunch of miles to the east, in the Cabazon area, is a plant for the sand train. Returning from the Salton Sea area at night, I-10 was very much clogged and slow going for an unknown reason. K.P. got off the freeway, and took a shortcut. But the presence of that sand train’s complex all lit up forced K.P. to stop for a picture.
Now, on towards Salton Sea …
Continued in Section 7
Part “A”, Section 5 (of 1-10)
At 3rd Street, by the Colton Flyover site in Colton, the Future Track 112 had much ballast on it now.
Even a small stack of concrete ties were present.
K.P. has never seen ties such as these with a pyramid triangle designs formed into them.
The future Track 112 that goes to Colton Crossing is now heavily ballasted, and to the extent one cannot even see the new rails!
Continued in Section 6
Part “A”, Section 4 (of 1-10)
A southward view at Vineyard Ave. where an underpass will be built …
… a flashing sign had some interesting news for motorists (and us).
A long shoofly will probably (“probably”) be started assembly not too long after that flashing date.
Continued in Section 5
Part “A”, Section 3 (of 1-10)
On the SP-side in Ontario, east of Bon View Ave., a couple of pieces of track equipment were working Main 1 over within the new CP AL521 NORTH ONTARIO.
When K.P. first arrived at the Bon View Ave. grade crossing, the gates were down and traffic was backed up. The motorists seemed upset, and were continually turning around and going another way. A maintainer was working on the problem.
How the maintainer’s vehicle was equipped K.P. had never seen before, what looked like a number of yellow diode warning lights flashing
Angry motorists at seeing such will probably cut down on irate calls to the Grade Crossing Hotline.
After the problem was taken care of, the signal maintainer left at a very appropriate speed, but the dust was atrocious.
Continued in Section 4
Part “A”, Section 2 (of 1-10)
At San Antonio Ave. in Pomona, at CP AL515 RESERVOIR, a view looking eastbound on the Alhambra Sub.:
The left signal is an intermediate; hence, the lit signal does not have a lower diode unit lit.
Most intermediates with a lower head only have one bulb or diode disk, but the above lower head has two colors possible, likely yellow and lunar. The yellow over lunar likely would be for going into the new Montclair facility at the next CP to the east, whereas a yellow over yellow would be for the 30 M.P.H. crossover routing at said CP.
Traveling eastward, K.P. went over the Mountain Ave. overpass on the west side of Ontario, but nothing stood out, except the new Montclair facility’s tracks look well-manicured now.
Over by Sultana Ave. on the LA&SL, the new switch still has sections of rail missing and is incomplete.
Continued in Section 3
Part “A” (of A-D), Section 1 (of 1-10)
This series will generally be on a west to east basis.
We start in Pomona, at the present CP AL513 POMONA, with the camera by the present CP AL514 HAMILTON. Track equipment was scattered from Pomona and Ontario to the east. A heavy telephoto looking west:
Looking east:
At the southwest side of the present Alhambra Sub CP AL514 HAMILTON, the west eastbound signals, with what appears to be signal maintainers checking things out.
As picture just above, both signal sides STILL have two-bulb heads, even though with the second main between Pomona and Ontario now they need three-bulb heads, i.e., some are absent green bulbs
That situation continues possibly (“possibly”) because the future, big new CP AL514 HAMILTON might be put in service soon, and to change things electronically now might be deemed NOT cost effective.
Continued in Section 2
Quick drive-by update... drove from TUS to SAN this week, and observed:
Announcing …
On Monday, February 17, 2014, “railfan” Canadian National (CN) SD75I (said as with the letter “I” and not numerically) was down from Canada on a visit to Niland in Southern California to check out the Sunset Route two-tracking scene.
Kidding aside, K.P. found the CN unit mysteriously by itself in the heart of Niland, probably a victim of mechanical problems that required the unit to be set out.
The series “Both Snail-Paced and Big Time Activities … With a Few Surprises Too! – Pomona to Niland, CA” will be presented on a west to east basis on the following schedule:
Part A (10 sections) – Saturday, February 22, 2014
Part B (9 sections) – Monday, February 24, 2014
Part C (8 sections) – Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Part D (9 sections) –Friday, February 28, 2014
The series begins with Part A quickly dealing with Pomona, Ontario, and Colton happenings, and ends towards the Salton Sea area. Parts B through D deal with an eastward progression from the Salton Sea area to beyond Niland. Posts should be up by (“by”) 9:00 A.M. Pacific Time on the designated dates, but could be posted up to 12 hours early.
Notational:
Track 112 crossover still unfinished, tracks on either side of the diamonds also unconnected.
Through truss bridge under construction in Grand Terrorist is two tracks wide.
The temporary switch in Riverside onto the new 91 bridge is in for ballast train access. New SCRRA junction switch installed on east side.
The new Iowa avenue overpass has some nice views, especially north.
A10
Again thanks, KP, for following the area I used to live (Bakersfield) and your great coverage of the Sunset route. For all of us who live too far to visit the Sunset your photos and writeup is terrific!!!
K.P.
Let me be the first to second John Simpsons-Camp's comments.
Your threads are much appreciated for those of us why don't have the time to get out and check on things
S.H.
On Monday, February 17, 2014 K.P. was able to vehicle-travel much of the Sunset Route from Pomona (loosely M.P. 513), to along Salton Sea, and to east of Niland, CA (probably in the M.P. 670 area). Some areas two-tracking was disappointedly snail-paced, while others were unbelievable as to the related activity that was transpiring …
… and on the way even some surprises presented themselves too!
Probably within a week a post series should be able to be put together on all of this. Stay tune!
Memo to John Simpkins-Camp (2-17):
Thank for your kind words.
If by some freak chance a billion dollars falls from the sky into my yard, I definitely will have you as my chauffer! And, we could go watch trains together! Can you imagine YOU driving a Rolls Royce with four-wheel drive! OK, enough about what will likely never happen …
Not only your list of threads, John, K.P. from time to time is also in the San Diego area for various reasons (a sister-in-law lives down there for one), and tries to document a small part of the San Diego Trolley (light rail) scene there. Wednesday, February 12, 2014 was such a date …
… and a future series on that visit and ‘The Trolley’ is on the ‘To Do’ list.
Back on the Sunset Route … A number of miles east of Indio, CA (M.P. 610.9), between CP SP620 THERMAL (M.P. 620.2) and the new CP SP637 SALTON (M.P. 637.1) is a section of old single-track line 16.9 miles in length. It has two CTC sidings, and mostly old target signals. The portion between the Mecca and Mortmar sidings of that section now have not-activated-yet, transplanted (“transplanted”) color light signals erected with different signal spacing than the old target signals had. A few photos of that will be in the upcoming Sunset Route series.
Take care all,
K.P.:
As a rail-fan, I feel silly having to gush, but I needed to send you a thank you note for all the thorough, informative reporting you do for us!
I am a follower of this and your other threads (Perris Valley Line, Techachapi, Cajon Triple-Tracking, Metro Gold Line Extension), and I never stop being impressed with all your fine reports and opinions. In a perfect world, I would love to be your driver!
So, for myself and the others who regularly follow your forums, my sincere thanks to you! And that goes for Mrs. K.P. as well, for her apparent patience and understanding for giving you the time to go to all these places that the rest of us WISH we could visit as often as you do. I hope that she is aware of what a loyal following that you have, and the countless hours of entertainment and education that you have provided us fans.
Many, many, many thanks to you, K.P.!!
John
WDC
Replies
Deggesty (2-15):
Three-tracks (one subbing as a switch track) in some areas would work, but in Casa Grande, AZ it would not work. There are just too many grade crossings.
diningcar (2-15):
Yes, two-tracks can handle 100 trains a day. On BNSF’s Cajon Pass line the adding of a second “North Track” (terms from years past) between Cajon and Summit is what made everything flow nicely. Three-tracking everything else was like dessert, sort of speaking.
Between Orange Country and Riverside here in California, Metrolink commuter trains tend to run left handed. That probably came from the orientation brought down from Cajon Pass. In the 1970’s Richard Steinheimer in one of his classic TRAINS pieces speculated that the natural crossover at M.P. 39.1 might be eliminated. That never happened. There are two places on the Needles Sub with a paired track arrangement, and they have gradients that favor biases, and that fact argues again eliminating the natural crossover at M.P. 39.1.
On this Sunset Route thread a few days ago the conjectural concept of flyovers in Pomona was highlighted. If the big bridge over the Colorado River in Yuma, AZ …
… was to remain just single-track, the Sunset Route in California would make sense having a right bias throughout. But the proliferation of spring frog switches at the future big CP AL514 HAMILTON argues against that. All your area’s track, diningcar, on the Transcon is pretty much set. Unfortunately, so much of the Sunset Route is yet to be two-tracked that questions just abound.
Its evening time, so sleep well,
Thanks KP for your further elaboration about your concept of "bias train running".
The Cajon Pass "bias" is because of the difference in grades. Of course BNSF wants the eastward trains to use the easier grade to the top. And they may continue on that same track for so long as the dispatcher is comfortable with it given the other trains he has in his que at that time. But he has the option of switching tracks any time the prioritizing of his then given traffic dictates, and that varies with each hour and each day.
Fleeting is minimal; I have never seen it on the double track portion of the Transcon but it may have occured. It is used on the Belen - Clovis line because of the two remaining single track segments - crossing the UP at Vaughn and over the Pecos River just west of Fort Sumner.
In summary, double track CTC adequately handles the 100+ trains per day except in special situations like Cajon Pass where UP trains in addition to BNSF's made triple tracking necessary.
Three-tracking in industrial areas?
Johnny
Big Boy Steamer 4-8-8-4 UP 4014 and Amtrak
Passing on Slover Ave. in Bloomington, CA (between Cedar and Riverside Avenues), one can see a greyish beast behind West Colton Classification Yard’s very obstructing fencing. That beast is UP 4014. K.P. has personally seen – or perhaps barely seen – the steamer from the public street. But “Sunset Route Two-Tracking Updates” thread reader Kevin Gray was invited into the grounds to see and photograph UP 4014. K.P. received a copy of his photo work, and is sharing a photo with followers of this tread.
Photo by Kevin Gray
Sometime in the future (word is that there will be a five year rebuilding of the steamer), UP 4014 will grace the Sunset Route and its two-tracking.
Mr. Gray recently rode Amtrak Nos. 1 and 2, and has been slowly emailing K.P. a small selection of the photos he took. Some of his photos were absolutely thrilling, like views from the Sunset Limited of the new Marsh Station Rd. area reroute, and from one big bridge to the other in El Paso, TX.
It will probably take a few weeks for K.P. to receive all the photos and compose a posting series, but that is what is going on behind the scenes …
For the forum’s information, K.P. has plans to visit soon the two-tracking down by Salton Sea and Imperial County of Southern California. Things have been pretty slow-going two-tracking-wise down there, and K.P. expects to find the same when visiting that area again.
Reply to blue streak 1 (2-14):
Switching of industries is seldom seen by K.P., but obviously it occurs.
One technique that is popular is to have power in the middle of a bunch of cars. The cars are presumably put in order beforehand and just pushed to customers in whichever way and direction the track layout is.
In Casa Grande, AZ a separate track has been (and is being) built to switch shippers.
It used to be dispatchers could give a switching crew some allotted time on the mainline to do their work, but with so many trains on the Sunset Route these days, a separate track is probably the ideal.
Best,
KP: One thought about running bias.
What if most of the running on a section was trailing point access instead of facing point to industrial locations? We know from MC that most new facilities are requiring a siding to prevent plugging a track.
MikeF90 (2-12):
About the future four-track CP SPADRA, those turnouts are of the movable point frog type.
Previously, these two photos were posted in this thread:
The latter one above was highly blown up today, and is post-shown below.
There is no question they are of the movable point frog type.
It is interesting that the switches for CP SPADRA and CP HAMILTON are of two different types, both the spring frog and movable point frog types! My gut feeling is that CP HAMILTON will be of lessor importance (use-wise) than CP SPADRA
Take care,
BNSF6400 (2-11):
Interesting story you conveyed about Cajon Pass. The press exposing matters usually benefits society. In this case, society lost out on a great benefit.
San Bernardino County is a strange creature. Lacking the population of the cities, the desert areas often gets the short end of the stick money-wise because the force of the masses to influence decision-makers is with the cities.
diningcar (2-12):
The entire Los Angeles, CA to El Paso, TX is under CTC, and the railroad can and does do what you brought up, just like BNSF does on its Los Angeles-Chicago Transcon. The thought of “biases” is something I’ve kind of coined, because the railroads, both BNSF and UP (as well as others), tend to operate trains repetitively, using on the same track over and over and over again under a normal situation.
As an example, BNSF in Cajon Pass tends to use Main 1 for eastbound trains climbing the west slope of Cajon Pass, such as the going away from the camera eastbound below at their CP CAJON.
You mentioned the Transcon, diningcar, between San Bernardino and Belen, NM. As pictured above, the BNSF is left biased from Los Angeles eastward over Cajon Pass to M.P. 39.1 where a natural flyover is present, and thereafter is right biased.
As I recall, you were involved as a land surveyor in the big AT&SF Crookton line change in Arizona circa 1959.
Circa that time Santa Fe was basically an Automatic Block Signal (ABS) railroad with “double track” (each track signaled in only one direction). Between M.P. 39.1 in California and somewhere out in the middle of nowhere in Arizona was another natural flyover.
AERIAL LINK: The Once Magical Point in Arizona
With the abandonment of about 40 miles of the rollercoaster-like “double-track” old line …
… and trains now using the new line that you surveyed, diningcar, WITHOUT another natural flyover the railroad faced conflicts, as westbound would meet eastbound. So, AT&SF CTC’ed Seligman to Winslow, AZ, and I guess that worked well for years and years. Now that the whole line is CTC, and train counts reach almost 100 trains a day at times, I don’t know how BNSF copes with the head-on semi-biases situation.
“The Conjectural Times News” series offered a way out of what I perceive as a major conflict dilemma of the future on the Sunset Route in Pomona, CA. The way out of a major conflict situation is flyovers, or to a lesser degree three tracks for a short distance. If AT&SF would have built a flyover in Arizona circa 1959 for the line relocation, operations undoubted would be a lot smoother now that the Transcon is packed with trains!
As on the UP Sunset Route, the thorniest situation on the BNSF Transcon undoubtedly is when a westbound fleet meets an eastbound fleet. Amtrak #3 got caught up in something like that some years back, and only could go 60 M.P.H. because of freights ahead, and that very much may have been a blessing. In the wee hours of the morning an earthquake struck in the Mojave Desert, and the Amtrak completely went on the ground. If it had been going the usual 90 M.P.H. (under ATS) it could have been a real horrendous disaster. A fleet meeting a fleet isn’t always so bad, I guess … except at the point of biases conflict, which basically turns a two-track segment into a single-track one …
Of course, BNSF got nearly 100 trains a day through the about five miles single-tracked Abo Canyon in New Mexico before it was finally two-tracked.
Replies continued …
Update as of Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Grand Terrace / Highgrove Area, CA
K.P. drove by the BNSF two-track bridge over theI-215 Freeway (and on the return trip too) on the alternate Sunset Route, the bridge that will need replacement because of freeway widening. A few days ago it was posted that workers and vehicles are again onsite after a lengthy absence. On these passes, it was noted that the center piers are already being built! Whatever held up matters, it must have been resolved and they might be trying to make up for lost time.
For any that might want to pass by the site, be advised driving by is precarious to say the least, with narrow barricades funneling the three traffic lanes in each direction. It is even more difficult to sightsee, and virtually impossible to photograph what is happening at the site.
@diningcar, I agree and amplify by noting that the remaining single track on the Yuma and Gila subs makes biased running moot. UP's use of 'fleeting' further complicates matters. With the recent addition of the seven mile Alhambra sub second main section east of Pomona, DS 250 runs more eastbounds on it compared to the past (as expected). Whatever works!
@K.P., installing a new LH spring frog crossover at CP Hamilton seems puzzling until I looked at the new / inactive CP Spadra - the LH turnouts there appear to be high speed. Can't tell if they are movable frog type from the aerial photos. Further, the original compact (cramped) Hamilton layout may have to be modified due to the upcoming grade separation project - we'll see.
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! ***
KP, it would seem that a two main track railroad between El Paso and Los Angeles ( wherever in LA a train originates or terminates) would be controled by CTC and UP would want (need) to eliminate left hand/right hand biases. This would permit dispatchers to run the trains on either track, crossing them over and back as dictated by the various priorities of each train. That is what BNSF does on the Transcon from San Bernardino to Belen and beyond. This is why the expensive high speed crossovers (40 - 50 MPH) are installed.
The Conjectural Times News
Where What Is Illogical …
… Starts to Make Sense
Part III (of I-III)
Another matter to consider is the SWITCHES for the future CP AL514 HAMILTON.
Two February 13, 2010 views of a switch being assembled by Hamilton Blvd. in downtown Pomona, CA for that future big interlocking:
February 13, 2010 photos
Those switches are of the spring frog type and NOT the typical moveable point frog type! Those spring frog types excel with little use, such as with sidings where most routings are for the mainline. With the conjectured diagram in Part II, such a condition would exist, and little crossing over ratio-wise would take place!
Within the future, big CP AL514 HAMILTON, that after four to five years still has not been completed, the “B” track is the track that will NOT continue through the CP, but will turn into Track “A” as the below photos illustrate.
March 31, 2010 photos
Interestingly, it will be the key future “B” track that is bridgeless at Towne Ave. That would be expected if the master plan was to have an elevating track that would flyover D / AL-2 and C / LA-2.
We will have to wait and see what develops, but seeing that the local commuter agency’s trains sometimes gets in the way of freights, K.P. is inclined to think Uncle Sam might just fund such a flyovers arrangement and everything will be wondrously free flowing!
Part II (of I-III)
First, the counterclockwise-clockwise issue … To have a clockwise orientation in Los Angeles is very logical, and diagram-wise very harmonious in light of the bias for Cienega Creek-Los Angeles. Theoretically, a westbound on the Sunset Route in Pomona traversing Main 2 could loop around via the LA&SL through Los Angeles and return to Pomona eastbound on the Sunset Route, on Main 1. But, the problem with a clockwise bias by the Los Angeles River (that the tracks follow for a bit as in the below view that looks south) …
February 15, 2010 photo
… is that the river’s water runs downhill in a southward manner. Thus, clockwise trains have a winding, uphill route with sharp curves here and there, which is somewhat like looking for trouble. The same route counterclockwise, on the other hand, seems more compatible with the area and safer. But, with counterclockwise operations by the Los Angeles River the unfortunate place of conflict is Pomona …
July 10, 2009 photo
… where eastbound trains would meet westbound trains head-on (diagram-wise), and that can cause log jam situations with everything bogging down as trains start getting in each other’s way.
The answer is a flyovers (plural) arrangement!
Such a flyovers arrangement in Pomona, CA would work perfectly, especially when the future Red Rock Classification Yard in Red Rock, AZ is considered. A classified, put in order train out of West Colton Yard would head west on AL-2, alignment shift in Pomona to head to Los Angeles on the “D” track. Drop off and pick up in the Los Angeles basin, loop around, and return on Track “B”, flyover in Pomona, head east on AL-1, but NOT go into West Colton Yard as has been the custom …
September 26, 2008 photo
… but instead go all the way to Red Rock, AZ …
April 14, 2008 photo
… where the new eastbound classification yard will be built..
Make sense?
As implied by the title of this three-part series, this is all unofficial theorizing. But, does anyone else have anything that gets away from the illogical and halfway makes sense?
Continued in Part III
The Conjectural Times News*
Part I (of I-III)
For the past several years in this thread the below diagram concept has been brought up from time to time, where BECAUSE of the Cienega Creek natural crossover in Arizona …
March 13, 2011 photo
… the long term (“long term”) operating biases El Paso, TX to Cienega Creek is right running, but Cienega Creek west towards (“towards”) Los Angeles, CA will be (“will be”) left running.
Long term, too, there will eventually be four main tracks (related to the “Diversion”) through Pomona, CA, two on the SP Sunset Route, and two on the LA&SL. Signal bridges for that arrangement are already mostly in place.
June 12, 2009 photo
July 1, 2009 photo
With that awareness, commonsense (“commonsense”) tells us that the future left running bias in Southern California (when El Paso to Los Angeles is all two-tracked) will necessitate a reversal of the current counterclockwise bias to a clockwise bias on the very western end of the Sunset Route, in the Los Angeles area.
HOWEVER, at Towne Ave. in Pomona, the future four-tracks has a problem, as bridging thereat is only for three tracks.
August 24, 2009 photo
So some type of additional track bridging over the Town Ave. underpass will be necessary. Even though CP AL514 HAMILTON has signals for four-tracks …
June 8, 2009 photo
… the absence of any fourth-track by Towne Ave. has been a mystery, a mystery that persists. But, K.P. thinks that mystery might be (“might be”) solvable!
Continued in Part II
--------
* A fictitious, hypothetical title
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.