Second Section
K.P. was on the Humane Way overpass twice the first session. A big problem was a curve that hides coming trains from the west.
Having taken necessary photos, and after waiting a few minutes nothing seemed to be coming from the west, he thought to himself that if I leave and go to the Temple Ave. overpass, as soon as I get back to the car and put the camera away, a train will come on that NEW track. But, he also thought the likelihood of that happening was slim. So he walked off the overpass and back to the car, and put the camera away.
Would you believe once the camera was put away the sound of a train coming suddenly was heard? Just a few second later it passed, and on the new “A” track too! Now, how ironic is that?
Later on but before leaving Pomona, he climbed back up on the overpass a third time and waited. No train ever came, let alone one on the new “A” track …
Here is another related irony … Leaving the CP AL514 HAMILTON area to drive over to Humane Way for that third walk up on the bridge he saw that SAME missed train starting to move at CP CO30 ROSELAWN. That missed train had stopped under Humane Way! If he had only known it would have stopped, he could have gotten photos of a train on the now in service Track “A.” How even more ironic is that?
For nostalgia buffs, the second photo above shows an old northward roadway on the left. Humane Way years ago was a grade crossing. As mentioned recently, K.P. rode the second to last eastbound “City of Los Angeles” UP No. 104 in 1971 (led by E-8 Eng. UP 938), and remembers well after meeting the westbound No. 103 (led by E-8 Eng. UP 932), on the last car riding out of the Spadra siding and crossing Humane Way. It is amazing the very tiniest of moments one never forgets …
Second and a Half (?) Section
K.P. was out by Pomona again Monday, with his camera, involving two vehicles (don’t ask how that was possible), but he got a few more photos. Not much, but a few. Once another thread is taken care of, it is hoped a few of those new photos can be posted as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
Update as of Saturday, August 27, 2016
The Realignment of LA&SL Main 2 …
… to the Diversion Main “A” Track
Pomona, CA
Part VI (of I-VI)
Now, that laid track is basically gone, without ever seeing a train on it!
Looking the other way, west, from Hamilton Blvd. the ‘long’ crossover between the LA&SL and SP sides basically HAS BEEN almost (“almost”) connected to the switch on the SP side! A few bolts and ballast should do the trick …or insulated joints and some melting the tracks together …
In that second photo up, note that hose-like buried covering coming out of the ground on the lower left.
So, basically that is what is happening in Pomona reference the Diversion. This will end the series. However, a Second Section follows ONLY for those interested in ironic twists …
Part V (of I-VI)
At this point in downtown Pomona we take a slight detour, and travel back in time.
You may remember these April 25, 2010 Pomona views, of then new track (for “B”) having been laid westward to Hamilton Blvd.
Now, back from the time warp …
Continued in Part VI
Part IV (of I-VI)
This from the Temple Ave. overpass westward view shows Spadra, the western end of the Diversion.
A blow-up of the above view show the detail on the realignment, and how the next step might (“might”) be to realign the background LA&SL Main 1 (right) to the forefront Track “B."
In the distance above, a headlight is seen. It was hoped it was for Main “A,” but it wasn’t …
At the other end of the Diversion, on its east side, in downtown Pomona, the new box (I of 2) for the future CP AL514 HAMILTON, was being worked on by a worker or workers.
Continued in Part V
Part III (of I-VI)
Some views looking east, with the signals east side westbound units. The “A” Track heads are now facing trains.
The last photo above is the trackless alignment of the future Track “D,” the relocated SP Main, which in the Diversion through here will be SP Main 1.
Above too, especially as seen in the second photo down, in theory, when all these signals are active and the number plates are in position, the signals on the SP side should have plates in the 5000’s, and the LA&SL side plates in the 200’s. It’ll be challenging to prove that …
We now go over to the Temple Ave. overpass to the west.
Continued in Part IV
Part II (of I-VI)
The now unused “B” Track is just left of the westbound double-stack train going away from the camera.
That “B” Track is actually severed on each end, at both Pomona to the east and Spadra to the west.
In the third photo in Part I, a short eastside overpass retaining wall is seen. Many years ago when they built the overpass provision was made for someday widening it to four lines like the present street both to the north and south. K.P. wonders if the present huge complex under construction just south of the LA&SL will be the motivating element to actually building the other half of the bridge. A new eastside sidewalk would put a new dimension to photography.
Continued in Part III
Part I (of I-VI)
K.P. was in Pomona because of a tipoff by MikeF90. Thanks, Mike!
It was over seven years ago the four-track west side eastbound signal bridge at Humane Way was erected for the Diversion. Only now the southernmost track has been put in service.
Just above, that southernmost track is the left track.
Looking east, the eastside westbound signal bridge:
A westbound soon comes on the present Main 2, the future Track “C.”
Continued in Part II
NEWS FLASH!
Diversion Main “A” is Now Open!
In the Diversion in Pomona are, or will be, from south to north, LA&SL Mains 2 and 1 plus SP Mains 2 and 1, which at this forum have been identified as Mains A-D. Main “A” is now open and active. At the Humane Way overpass, the Main “A” west-side eastbound signal now HAS a number plate (the vertical facing the other way placard left of the head), so it is an intermediate.
Previously, there had been some question whether it would be an intermediate or absolute signal because its lower head had three lamps as opposed to all the other lower heads having only a single lamp each.
The signal bridge with west side eastbound signals has all the signal heads on it still turned aside except for Main A’s (leftmost heads, photo upper center).
Part of the confusion (intermediate or absolute) was inspired by the signal bridge having a CP type sized box next to it (lower left). But, maybe such a large box is used because on both side of Humane Way there are more signals than usual that obviously have electronics.
Temple Ave. was visited, and west of the CP an alignment shift was made so that LA&SL Main 2 now connects to the “A” Track instead of “B.” At Hamilton Blvd. some very strange things were seen, including a long track (a crossover) connected together in a very jerry-rigged manner WEST of Hamilton Blvd. that suggests there won’t be a “B” Track! The “B” Track EAST of Hamilton Blvd. has been sort of cannibalized!
In one to three days a more detailed explanation with more photos will be posted.
mvs In other news -- K.P., I have often pondered having a "connecting track" between the Redlands Loop and the Sunset Route. Would seem to make sense, but there are many other projects that need be dealt with, I'm sure.
In other news -- K.P., I have often pondered having a "connecting track" between the Redlands Loop and the Sunset Route. Would seem to make sense, but there are many other projects that need be dealt with, I'm sure.
From a historical perspective: SP and ATSF both ran into Redlands at some point in the past. Not sure if there was a connector or not but if memory serves me correctly both SP and ATSF served the same packing sheds and industries in town. I think ATSF was on the North side of the Redlands Station and SP on the South Side.
RickH
BarstowRick.com Model Railroading How To's
K. P. HarrierIn ALL such Lower Desert-Los Angeles commuter train proposals over the years conspicuously absent and nearby is the very populated City of San Bernardino. When the Colton Flyover was finished three years ago it had NO provision to transfer a commuter train on the Sunset Route (east of the BNSF) to the BNSF Transcon for the very short trip to San Bernardino. IF (“if”) there had been a provision to do so, Lower Desert commuters would have a whole new possible area to commute to, making the Sunset Route more practical for commuters. In reviewing aerials, a rather stunning route popped out to K.P., that because of its miraculous availability it must be divine! (Yah, right!) Currently, there is a study for rebuilding a segment of the Redland Loop, and running RDC-type commuter trains on it San Bernardino-Redlands. What IF (again, “what if”) the powers that be built a mile or so connecting track from the Sunset Route (in the Bryn Mawr area) to the old Redlands Loop track, and routed Lower Desert commuter trains via San Bernardino? It would have TWO or more routes to Los Angeles that way! Currently, San Bernardino is rebuilding that Redlands Loop section in their city, and extending it a mile or two eastward to “E” Street. The below photo was shot at “G” Street looking east. The link below is to an aerial, and move it FROM the Sunset Route tracks northward (upward, move view downward) along California Street to by the I-10 Freeway, where the Redland Loop is just south of that freeway. Then judge for yourself whether the concept is logical or even feasible. Regardless, ONLY a third-track along the Sunset Route would make such a proposal even in the realm of possibility.
In reviewing aerials, a rather stunning route popped out to K.P., that because of its miraculous availability it must be divine! (Yah, right!) Currently, there is a study for rebuilding a segment of the Redland Loop, and running RDC-type commuter trains on it San Bernardino-Redlands.
What IF (again, “what if”) the powers that be built a mile or so connecting track from the Sunset Route (in the Bryn Mawr area) to the old Redlands Loop track, and routed Lower Desert commuter trains via San Bernardino? It would have TWO or more routes to Los Angeles that way! Currently, San Bernardino is rebuilding that Redlands Loop section in their city, and extending it a mile or two eastward to “E” Street. The below photo was shot at “G” Street looking east.
The link below is to an aerial, and move it FROM the Sunset Route tracks northward (upward, move view downward) along California Street to by the I-10 Freeway, where the Redland Loop is just south of that freeway. Then judge for yourself whether the concept is logical or even feasible.
Regardless, ONLY a third-track along the Sunset Route would make such a proposal even in the realm of possibility.
K.P., I have often pondered having a "connecting track" between the Redlands Loop and the Sunset Route. Would seem to make sense, but there are many other projects that need be dealt with, I'm sure.
++++++
In other news -- check out this Whittier Daily News article about (arguably) the most important road/rail crossing in California -- Rosecrans Avenue and Marquardt Avenue.
http://www.whittierdailynews.com/general-news/20160825/californias-most-hazardous-railroad-crossing-in-santa-fe-springs-to-get-safety-improvements
Replies
ATSFGuy (8-11):
The Great “Divine” Right-of-Way
You brought up some interesting ideas relative to Lower Desert (Indio, Palm Springs, etc.) commuter trains on the Sunset Route westward to Colton, probably going to Riverside, and on an unknown route to Los Angeles or Orange County. I think most here at the forum can agree the Indio-Colton segment of the Sunset Route is presently totally incompatible with high speed commuter trains unless a government-financed third-track was put in.
September 9, 2011, near Fingal, CA
Is the new four-track bridging on the new Sunset Ave. underpass in Banning for such a third track AND a siding so commuter trains can meet each other?
The fact that the State of California even lists such a concept says something about such a line.
In ALL such Lower Desert-Los Angeles commuter train proposals over the years conspicuously absent and nearby is the very populated City of San Bernardino. When the Colton Flyover was finished three years ago it had NO provision to transfer a commuter train on the Sunset Route (east of the BNSF) to the BNSF Transcon for the very short trip to San Bernardino. IF (“if”) there had been a provision to do so, Lower Desert commuters would have a whole new possible area to commute to, making the Sunset Route more practical for commuters.
LINK:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bryn+Mawr,+Loma+Linda,+CA+92354/@34.0471687,-117.2282129,796m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x80dcabb7e780c8eb:0xf79de0e1123f47c!8m2!3d34.0483474!4d-117.2308736
Well, ATSFGuy, you probably weren’t thinking that kind of reply would be posted for you …
BarstowRick (8-24):
A Los Angeles-Las Vegas passenger run would be a ONE-WAY affair! People would not have enough money to come back …
(By the way, you can get a quote box if you reply FROM the post you want to quote.)
Take care all,
K.P.
KP, you wrote:
BarstowRick (8-2):
I don’t think you will EVER see Metrolink trains going to Las Vegas. Hypothetically, let's say the Mojave Desert become crowded with residents. Metrolink, as I understand it, is partially fund by the State of California. To have commuter trains transferring money OUT of California to gambling Nevada I don’t think is a possibility. Interestly, NEVADA recently upgraded I-15 to three lanes. In California I-15 is only two-lanes except for the addition of truck lanes on prolonged steep grades. I think I’m safe in saying you will see the Sunset Route Indio-Colton triple-tracked before you ever see Metrolink going to Las Vegas. Anyone want to BET with or against me? (Grin, grin!) Quoting KP.
My response:
My medication must have been playing with my mind. I was fantasizing and wishing a train like Amtrack's former Desert Wind, might return to the rails. Every so often a rumor blow's through Southern California, envisioning a high speed train from LA to LV. That would be better then one from Fresno to Bakersfield (which makes no sense).
You never know about these things. If a outfit from LV (Las Vegas) contracted with either Metro or Amtrak to provide a weekender train, it could happen. I agree with you in that it's highly unlikely. Possible but not likely.
Thanks for the come back and a chance to hallucinate. Grin!
The Three Diagrams of Amtrak Siding Stops
(In Three Posts)
Future Amtrak stop in Maricopa, AZ
.
MARICOPA, AZ AREA
Main 1---------------------------------------- / \ / \ Main 2---------------------------------------- \ / ? \ / --------- Amtrak Stop
A common pattern is a crossover or crossovers just EAST of the station stops, with NO nearby crossover to the west. Is that just a coincidence? Planned on purpose?
(About posting ... Even with a neutal composition, this site malfunctions. Three separate posts did the trick.)
Amtrak's Palm Springs, CA stop (actually at Garnet)
GARNET AREA
Main 1---------------------------------------- / \ / \ Main 2---------------------------------------- \ / \ 4473 / ---------- Amtrak Stop
Continued ...
Amtrak's ex-Borie, WY stop area (near Cheyenne), circa 1980, before the reroute to the D&RGW:
BORE AREA
Amtrak 18 Car Siding
--------- / \ / \ Main 1---------------------------------------- \ \ Main 2---------------------------------------- \ \ ---------- \
To Mains 3 and 4 plus Denver
Regarding Metrolink being a funny beast, these days I'll never forget how ratty they looked compared to the Pacific Surfliner trains I saw elsewere or the weird trainsets along with a BNSF locomotive on one end in front of the cab car.
Who misses Metrolink's pure Bombardier trainsets with no BNSF Pumpkins or Hyundai Rotem cars?
Metrolink has always been a funny beast. When their first cars were delivered there were more station names programmed into the destination signs in the car windows then Metrolink served. Outlandish places like Palmdale, Lancaster, Palm Springs as well. Give 'em time, it only took a little over a decade to fingure out that everybody didn't work downtown from 9 to 5 ....
A10
ATSFGuyThe cities of Coachella Valley, Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Palm Desert and indio have all requested commuter service from Los Angeles and Orange County,
I'd like to see evidence of this. Palm Springs area cities have consistently shown that they have little interest (read, local money) in public bus or rail transportation for commuters or vacationers.
First exhibit - the poorly located yet wierdly 'gold plated' Amtrak station in ubernorth Palm Springs. The local bus service (Sunline Transit) doesn't stop there, not surprising given the Sunset Limited's schedule. The parking lot is a great place if you want your car sandblasted.
Second exhibit - no Indio platform yet. At least the city built a 'transportation center' (bus loop) with room for platform and sidings opposite the old SP passenger station location. You would think this would be in the works, given the popularity of the Coachella Valley Music Festival.
AFAIK the Colton Crossing agreement gave Metrolink rights to serve the Coachella Valley after 'suitable upgrades' to the Yuma sub are negotiated. If Metrolink ever comes up with a plan and some $$$, UP will 'ask for the world' due to their traffic modeling programmed for worst case scenario. When the Yuma scanner was active, it revealed that many bottlenecks were self inflicted (crews DOL, congestion due to fleeting, equipment breakdowns).
Not holding my breath for more passenger service ....
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! ***
K.P. Harrier,
Regarding Metrolink Service, The cities of Coachella Valley, Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Palm Desert and indio have all requested commuter service from Los Angeles and Orange County, but the Union Pacific opposes further passenger service on it's tracks outside of Amtrak's "Sunset Limited". Even if passenger service did happen, it would require significant money for infrastructure at least $500 million according to the California State Rail Plan of 2005.
Diagraming
It was hoped that diagraming (for three Amtrak station stops with sidings) would be possible by now, but the forums website still hasn’t been fixed. Sorry guys.
desertdog (8-3): Follow-Up
Your understanding that the future siding for the future Amtrak stop west of Highway 347 (Maricopa, AZ) is ‘government funded’ makes it less likely that the future siding would be laid to CP SP899 MARICOPA. Such an extension would have to cross the present grade crossing at Highway 347, which would be a logistics nightmare to lay track through. As is recalled, when UP laid the second main across Highway 347, it was a huge disruption, with a temporary grade crossing with gates and flashers too.
Unrelated per se, in reviewing aerials it has been observed there now is a high school south of the tracks and west of Highway 347. I don’t recall that being there before. Is it new, John? A bunch of high school kids crossing the UP tracks at Highway 347 a couple of time a day should be someone’s incentive to expedite the Highway 347 overpass!
eolesen (8-7):
About using part of the Sunset Route for commuter trains between Tucson and Phoenix, AZ, I think that commuter study and effort will run into a similar problem to what is here it California. UP emphatically said NO to a commuter effort on the Sunset Route between Indio and Colton because of the mismatch environment present! Sometimes both tracks are jammed with 25 M.P.H. freight trains. Tri-weekly Amtrak is bad enough. Of course, if the commuter effort is willing to pay for a third track, UP might welcome that with open arms. A third track between Tucson and Picacho may be the only way a Tucson-Phoenix effort would ever become reality.
I tend to agree with you about commuter trains between Tucson and Benson. The idea of commuter trains reaching Benson was a hypothetical, if a rich or some rich people built up Benson greatly (for more riches), there might very well be a demand for Tucson-Benson commuter trains.
Concerning Metrolink charters, see reply below to Electroliner 1935.
Electroliner 1935 (8-7):
You might have hit the nail on the head! Mismatched and unfair competition from subsidized majority-government funded entities.
Such a mismatch might have been responsible for ending parcel service on Amtrak under Amtrak president’s Gunn some years back. At the time I use to wonder how UPS and FedEx tolerated the government funded Amtrak as competition. Gunn might have saved Amtrak, for IF there had been a lawsuit, Amtrak likely would have lost bigtime, and the judgment may have been more than Amtrak could have paid, thus putting it out of business. I don’t have the actual facts, but that is a common sense surmising. Amtrak and Nos. 1 and 2 gone sure would have solved UP’s thorn on the Sunset Route for sure! But, that didn’t happen, and Amtrak fans more than likely have Mr. Gunn to thank.
Take care, everyone,
K. P. HarrierBarstowRick (8-2): I don’t think you will EVER see Metrolink trains going to Las Vegas. Hypothetically, let's say the Mojave Desert become crowded with residents. Metrolink, as I understand it, is partially fund by the State of California. To have commuter trains transferring money OUT of California to gambling Nevada I don’t think is a possibility.
If I recall, in the fifties, when I lived in the Cincinnati area, there was a suit brought by some Intercity bus lines complaining that subsidized local transit busses were being chartered for runs beyond the transit companies territory and undercutting the non subsidized carriers creating "unfair" competition. As a result, the local transit could no longer use the idle busses on weekend charters. Could that ruling apply to Metrolink? Of corse, what railroad is going to complain as they are not in competition with Metrolink. Perhaps a bus company?
Re:Metrolink.... I thought the suggestion was for charters to Vegas, not scheduled service. I can't think of any reason why Metrolink or Coaster equipment couldn't be hired for a public charter If they could secure permission from the track owner.
re: Tucson commuter service... ADOT is already pretty far along on a feasibility study for service north thru Marana to Phoenix.
I can't see any justification to have service to Benson. South to Green Valley could be supported with a few upgrades, but the real demand is along the PHX-CGR-TUS corridor.
I don’t think you will EVER see Metrolink trains going to Las Vegas. Hypothetically, let's say the Mojave Desert become crowded with residents. Metrolink, as I understand it, is partially fund by the State of California. To have commuter trains transferring money OUT of California to gambling Nevada I don’t think is a possibility. Interestly, NEVADA recently upgraded I-15 to three lanes. In California I-15 is only two-lanes except for the addition of truck lanes on prolonged steep grades. I think I’m safe in saying you will see the Sunset Route Indio-Colton triple-tracked before you ever see Metrolink going to Las Vegas. Anyone want to BET with or against me? (Grin, grin!)
desertdog (8-3):
It must be admitted your ‘confession’ of not being trackside much in the Maricopa east area since your return to Arizona in 2014 is sort of my confession too. My problem is that I’m so scrambling around I can’t enjoy one location. Maybe I should spend a day in Maricopa, and watch Amtrak come in, etc. Without west of Estrella being two-tracked to Yuma, it is questionable if perceived (and logical) biases are verifiable. But, spending just relaxed time around Maricopa does sound tempting. But, I got a gut feeling that would be an unplanned, spirit of the moment type thing like so many Arizona trips of the past …
I had thought just last week of going to Houston, TX and seeing and photographing that two-tracking west of town (and the Brazos River Bridge situation), but that fell through. Everything seems to be in limbo …
MikeF90 (8-4):
My friend might need an adjustment in his medication? Maybe I do! Hey, I was able to find 2014 links to news items about that Santa Paula (CA) idea, so it probably was legitimate, but their doesn’t seem to be any news on it of late.
On reviewing aerials, the old line west of northern Saugus is built over. Of course, big bucks could be spent on wash bridging. But, that prospective line to Santa Paula currently seems so rural. Maybe the idea is being promoted by some very young visionary that bought up a whole bunch of land with an eye on retiring in 25 years super rich! I sure would like to get the real facts on all this.
ccltrains (8-5):
Not at all! It is just that I think UP will be spending its money on Positive Train Control things (as per the law) and put two-tracking on the back burner, with the flames on the burner almost out. How soon after the full implementation of PTC two-tracking will resume is anybody’s guess. However, a remote (“remote”) possibility is that the Sunset Route in Arizona might just be two-tracked in those three years and NO new signals will have to be replaced later. But, I hardly doubt that scenario.
The thing K.P. is waiting for now is the finishing of the Diversion in Pomona (CA), and about 5 miles of new two-tracking therewith. With all the new crates (with switch motors in them) at the Colton Signal Dept., it has to be wondered if more two-tracking west of the Diversion will take place also, and maybe the Ontario to Fontana stretch too.
mvs (8-6):
Concerning a restoration of a line westward from Saugus to Santa Paula, CA, the right-of-way being built over in aerials between Saugus and I-5 is what popped out at me. But, knowing public outfits and the money available to them, building bridging in the river or wash or whatever is out there seems feasible.
Somehow I wonder if that is all a political game for whatever reason, typically involving money to be made. It was only brought up in this “Sunset Route Two-Tracking Updates” thread because it seems that other areas of this thread might be subject of interest by commuter efforts someday. Tucson-Benson comes to mind, and the old abandoned EP&SW. I know of nothing out that way presently, but if some investor(s) thought they could make money what is presently rural could become cityscape.
A Special Memo to All:
It was desirous to have ONE post in these replies, but after much trouble it was decided to make two posts, and that seemed to work. K.P. plans on consulting with the TRAINS staff to alleviate such malfunctions in the future.
MikeF90 (7-29):
Having seen the San Gabriel Trench effort onsite myself I have to somehow wonder if things will soon ‘blow up,’ sort of speaking. The way lower than expected bid winner of a few years ago may now in the actual construction be trying to figure out how to do the impossible. This all should be interesting to see what happens.
diningcar (7-29):
Yes, UP could ‘create the optimal operation’ on the Sunset Route for Amtrak Nos. 1 and 2, but UP is in business to make money and not cater to an outfit that can cost them profits. In contrasting the extreme differences in track arrangements between BNSF (with Amtrak Nos. 3 and 4) and UP (with Nos. 1 and 2) I can’t help but wonder if the track layout design of both railroads is based on traffic volume vs. operating philosophy. Of course, in second guessing UP, we are at a disadvantage. We can analyze BNSF’s for all practical purposes completed two-tracking of the southern Transcon but have significant gaps in the UP two-tracking. Additionally, BNSF siding placements make sense, but UP’s seem illogical, at least to me. Each railroad definitely has a “way” about them.
One thing that kind of baffles me on the BNSF is their inconsistent use of switches. For example, at Amboy (CA) the crossovers are 50 M.P.H. but the siding switches are 30 M.P.H. (presumably). At Peach Springs (AZ) both the crossovers and siding use 50 M.P.H. switches (presumably).
mvs (7-30):
Conceptually, a second platform is not an option for the future Maricopa (AZ) station stop, as the boarding will only be via the siding. The new station not being land locked as the present Amtrak station is, the platform can be the entire length of the Amtrak train.
As I recall, back in 1980 when Amtrak Nos. 5 and 6 stopped at Borie, WY as the Cheyenne stop, the ‘platform’ (more like walkway) was the entire 18-car length. Undoubtedly, the future Maricopa, AZ station stop will be similar.
About the Puente Ave. / Workman Mill Road underpass construction, if you can get out there in daylight hours (rather than at night), the shoofly is something to see. When I was out there a number of weeks ago there was no time to park somewhere and hike in for a photo or two. But, the shoofly surprised me by its long swoop-like way. The Vineyard Ave. underpass construction in Ontario was similar, I suppose, but in the construction a visual was next to impossible to take, but with the Puente Ave. underpass construction it is only a matter of hiking in to the grade crossing just to the west.
ATSFGuy (7-30):
That is correct. And, the Rolls-Buckeye stretch of the Phoenix Line is mothballed, and signals pretty much gone. In maybe 50 years growth of the area and industries may warrant re-opening the line, but not now or for the years to come.
John Simpkins-Camp (7-30):
Well, great to have you back.
There outta be a law against crazy and malfunction computers! If you ever hear about a new U. S. Constitution amendment petition drive that would make trouble-free computers mandatory, let me know as I want to be among the first to sign it!
There has been a lot of local news about the Redlands Loop line of late. Matter of fact, it won some TIGER funds! I was out Tippecanoe Ave. way recently, and got a few photos, with the track in the grade crossing gone!
A southward view:
Looking west:
Looking east:
I thought you might find that of interest. The above views were taken on Friday, July 22, 2016, about half a month ago.
For others, about a mile or so south of here is the east-west I-10 Freeway, and a half a mile south of that is the Anderson Ave. overpass over the Sunset Route. Just north of the I-10 Freeway, a major revamping of the freeway entrances were recently completed, easing congestion dramatically.
Pete-M3 (7-30): Amtrak and the Super Man Co.
I was surprised Amtrak has such an offering, a passenger train tracking system, and the Brazos River Bridge area trackage was on it. Cool.
Man, it has been too long since I rode an Amtrak train. My now 28-year old boy was just a little tot, and my step father-in-law and I rode Santa Ana-San Diego (CA) roundtrip, on Amfleet cars. On the way back between the Pacific Ocean and a siding called Galivan our train hit a horse trailer! Needless to say our two-hour return trip took four and a half hours!
That was a humorous childhood story you conveyed. My childhood is rather devoid of such-like stories. Surely they were heard, but none were remembered. Even as a kid I took life seriously, hence, I was too much a realist. I do remember playing in my dad’s car with a neighbor friend, and my dad’s car was our imaginary submarine. We were heroes, and my friend painted a picture that we had won a zillion metals! I was surprised. Maybe ten medals, but a zillion? I guess I can laugh about it now.
In that ‘zillions’ light, perhaps Union Pacific hired the wrong company to repair the Sunset Route Brazos River Bridge. When the bridge problem first arose, IF they would have just hired the Super Man Company, the bridge would have been fixed and back in service in an hour or two …
SP657E44 (7-31) and others …
It is seen neither of us would lose any money in Las Vegas if the Sunset Route was on the table!
Your post sounded strangely familiar, until it was realized the first paragraph was a quote. That ‘all blending together’ confusion can be avoided by simply replying FROM the post you are replying to, and hitting the ‘Quote’ button. That process is sometimes challenging because what one wants to quote is often several pages back, but one is rewarded by having a more logical and easy to understand post.
UPRR11 (7-31):
Thanks for your truly superb update report and photo concerning the Brazos River Bridge at Richmond near Houston, TX on the eastern half of the Sunset Route.
It is understood the Houston to San Antonio single-track Sunset Route line is quite crowded, and the finished new 10 miles or so laying of a second track near Houston is a welcome addition. But, UPRR11, do you know of any projections for other two-tracking to help alleviate congestion on the line? Part of the problem is that the Houston-San Antonio line is host to other railroads and not just UP Sunset Route through trains. Obviously, UP cannot be expected to help their competitors. It is wonder if those other railroads are funding two-tracking sections, or if UP gets to change high use fees?
BNSF6400 (8-1):
I’m not sure your 99% figure is accurate, but the Sunset Route two-tracks spend a whole lot of time being devoid of trains. Having driven the line numerous times sometimes it is wondered why UP even two-tracked the majority of the Los Angeles to El Paso section! But, I guess the fleets play a big part. But, of late, I’ve seen more scattered runs in lieu of fleets. With two-tracks, fleeting could be less important.
K. P. HarrierJust a day or so ago a colleague informed me that a similar operation in Southern California has a major court battle because Metrolink (the Southern California Regional Rail Authority) wants to relay long gone track and run commuter trains to Santa Paula from the Saugus area. Trouble is a tourist outfit runs trains on part of that line! There are a lot of branch lines off the Sunset Route, some abandoned, other barely used.
MikeF90K.P., I think your colleague is confused or perhaps needs some adjustment to his medication. The Fillmore and Western Railway has had a lease with the Ventura County Transportation Commission (the ROW owner) but, very strangely, the latter has been on a mysterious vendetta using legal trickery to force the F&W off the property. I say 'strangely' because the F&W handles what very little freight business there is and desires to maintain the branch per contract. There are no known competitors (including UP) who would want the business. Moreover, restoring the connection from Piru east to Saugus is out of the question. Use of the ROW was abandoned in 1979 and then has been built over. Contrary to above statement, Metrolink has no plans to serve the branch from either end.
Moreover, restoring the connection from Piru east to Saugus is out of the question. Use of the ROW was abandoned in 1979 and then has been built over. Contrary to above statement, Metrolink has no plans to serve the branch from either end.
K.P., I would be very interested to learn more about your colleague's school of thought. As neat as that would be, I tend to agree with Mike. However, I will say that (in my opinion) the ROW could reasonably be restored from Piru to Interstate 5. From Interstate 5 eastward, the right-of-way is way built over.
K.P. Spent the Morning …
… totally wasting his time trying to get the very worsening malfunction-mad TRAINS website to work properly so a bunch of replies could be posted in a timely manner, but to no avail. Maybe in a few weeks this website will have gotten its act together.
Hey, has the forum seen the great, very well written article on the Transcon and Route 66 by Elrond Lawrence in the July 2016 issue of Railfan & Railroad? A bunch of related photos are included too! The cover even has a cool power consist with a tee-pee in the background upper right. The Sunset Route (the subject of this thread) is NOT the Transcon, which BNSF route seems to be running circles around UP and the Sunset Route. One has to wonder why …
KP- Does your comment mean that the Sunset route doubletracking blog is done/finished?
K.P., I think your colleague is confused or perhaps needs some adjustment to his medication. The Fillmore and Western Railway has had a lease with the Ventura County Transportation Commission (the ROW owner) but, very strangely, the latter has been on a mysterious vendetta using legal trickery to force the F&W off the property. I say 'strangely' because the F&W handles what very little freight business there is and desires to maintain the branch per contract. There are no known competitors (including UP) who would want the business.
Seventh Section
The Bottom of Cima Hill …
… and a Time Warp
More …
In the top photo above, on the far left, the Kelso Depot can be seen. For those that are familiar with the area, that landmark should give them a feel of where these signals and CP boxes are at.
This Sunset Route two-tracking observer is inclined to believe when the remaining single-track in Arizona is signal upgraded because of Positive Train Control regulations UP will do it as cheaply as possible, and replace the target signals with red over ONLY flashing red signals for entering sidings, just as the many sidings on Cima Hill. A good bet as storage places for all the old signals (after an upgrade) are Gila Bend, Coldfred, and Yuma. And, then UP will have to do it all over again when that section is two-tracked. Interesting times are ahead on the single-track portions in Arizona ... and a few places in California too.
This will end the series and sections.
Sixth Section
Across from the Kelso Depot on the LA&SL, between Las Vegas (NV) and Barstow (CA), presently is a bunch of old signals and CP boxes, and it has been a year since the new signals were activated.
Continued …
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.