Update as of Friday, April 15, 2011
Colton to Alhambra, CA Report
Part IV (of I-X)
Previously, on Wednesday, March 30, 2011, the following night shot was taken, and subsequently posted about.
In that above photo, a temporary screen fence is seen just left of center. On the Friday, April 15 visit, the fence was gone. So, whatever construction inspired that fencing was now complete.
A strange zigzag type track was present that seemed, though not connected, to head back to the new, never put in service LA&SL switch (left).
By Hamilton Blvd, that zigzag track seemed to align with the new, not-in-service-yet switch put in last year. (Note the present signal on the upper right.)
K.P. interprets that weird arrangement as a possible future, temporary track that will replace the present track turnout at CP C031 OAK. Such would allow the SP-side tracks to the west to be rearranged.
Afterward, our "B" track could be laid with transitioning track between our Main "A" and Main "B, and between Main "B" and Main "C" (see lower part of above photo).
Continued in Part V
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 V (of I-X)
From time to time, worker vehicles came by. In the below eastward view from Hamilton Blvd., such a vehicle kicks up the dust (upper left).
After the dust settles ... and the truck parked.
In the first of the above two photos, all four tracks are visible, from bottom to top, are our designated Mains "A" to "D."
Continued in Part VI
Part VI (of I-X)
In the below view, a signal from CP C031 is visible on the far left, the one on the right is from the present CP AL513 POMONA. Yellow track equipment seemed to be reworking the SP Pomona siding.
The below October 17, 2009 photo is reshown for comparison.
As a side note, K.P., when traversing Valley Blvd., noted that an active shipper (with boxcars) was located not too far east of Temple Ave. So, when the Diversion is operative and the Temple Ave. grade crossing is done away with, from downtown Pomona a track may continue westward towards Temple Ave. (but not cross it) to serve that shipper.
Continued in Part VII
Part VII (of I-X)
To refresh forum viewers' memory, at CP AL504 E. MARNE, the single-track Main becomes two-tracks westward.
And, at CP AL503 MARNE X-OVER to the west, there was a double-crossover with old signals. New cantilever signal structures were erected, and the heads of the signals were covered with black wrapping.
On Friday's visit, K.P. found the CP converted over to the new tri-light signals with the black wrapping removed. The east signals:
The west structure:
K.P. also found that that CP AL503 MARNE X-OVER had been renamed CP AL503 INDUSTRY.
Continued in Part VIII
Part VIII (of I-X)
At the 'Up and Over' in the City of Industry, a chain link fence was put around the intermediate signal box at ground level.
A broader view with the signals on top of the flyover:
Continued in Part IX
Part IX (of I-X)
In Alhambra, a view from Marengo Ave. looking east: The new tri-light heads have been put up on the old cantilever bridge, plus a new east side mast at CP AL488 ALHAMBRA.
A side view of the signal bridge.
Continued in Part X
Part X (of I-X)
Now, from Marengo Ave., looking the other way, west: The spur that mvs posted about ... that climbs the north side of the Alhambra trench.
In the above photo, vegetation growth clearly shows the steep track is no longer used. But, more than vegetation shows the track can never be used now (note lower right)!
Another, wider view:
Nevertheless, UP does have a use for the steep track path!
When it was an active track many years ago, it must have served dual purposes: A rail route, and a vehicle path.
This will end the "Colton to Alhambra, CA Report" post series, but as was seen in the series, many things have been and are going on right now between those two cities.
K.P.,
Thank you for the neat perspectives in this last photo essay. I am sad to see the searchlights go, but hopefully we will see a pickup in traffic along this line.
Forgot to mention: I really liked the telephoto looking southeast down the tracks from Walnut Grove Avenue. Didn't know the little downhill from San Gabriel to El Monte.
Union Pacific is closing the crossings in order to reset concrete panels and patch the asphalt afterward because of the recently opened second lines."
John Timm
K.P. had a surprise, one day advance notice dispatch to Fontana, CA, so the Milliken Ave. future Flyover site in Ontario and the Magnolia Ave. underpass construction in Riverside were checked out briefly.
Update as of April 20, 2011
Two Quick Site Visits
Part A (of A-B)
Milliken Ave.
Ontario, CA
The SP Flyover site at Milliken Ave. appeared to have preliminary grading on the east side now. There were also a number of ground stakes on that east side, consisting of a row of north staking just right of photo center, and south staking on the far right (by the black fencing).
In the above photo, a DPU unit pushes a slow train moving eastbound away from the camera.
Four pieces of grading equipment were parked on the east side.
To the west, nothing obvious had transpired.
Continued in Part B
Part B (of A-B)
Magnolia Ave. Underpass
Riverside, CA
Dramatic progress had taken place at the LA&SL Magnolia Ave. underpass construction site. The flooring seemed ballasted, and 75% of the bridge screening had been attached.
A north side view. There was an attractive, almost bricklike side pattern on the side walling, partially painted tan with white trim.
There were a surprising number of UP workers within a six block area. The still active, temporary CP C055 STREETER box (to the west) was open and a number of workers were in that area. At Magnolia Ave. itself, UP workers with a piece of construction equipment was moving dirt around.
As K.P. was getting into the 'mood' of the site with his camera, a dreaded cellphone call came. He had to return to Fontana. The free-time fun was over.
Some significant information was gleaned from site workers before the call, though. In about two weeks, one track will be laid over the bridge and put in service. Thereafter, it is presumed UP can work at its leisure in restoring the second main, and reactivate the original CP C055 STREETER (to the east).
K. P. Harrier [snipped] Update as of April 20, 2011 Two Quick Site Visits Part A (of A-B) Milliken Ave. Ontario, CA The SP Flyover site at Milliken Ave. appeared to have preliminary grading on the east side now. There were also a number of ground stakes on that east side, consisting of a row of north staking just right of photo center, and south staking on the far right (by the black fencing). In the above photo, a DPU unit pushes a slow train moving eastbound away from the camera.
The interesting question is where to put the track temporarily while they're piling up the fill for the fly-over. I surmise that the "south staking on the far right (by the black fencing)" is for the location of the 'toe' or bottom of the fill's slope. That's becasue the black fencing is most likely 'silt fence', which is a fine-mesh fence that is used to keep the fill material from washing off the site and onto other properties and/ or into streams, so that is the most logical place to install it. Therefore, I also speculate that the "north staking just right of photo center" appears to be for the center-line of the temporary track. It's about the about the right distance from the south stakes for that, and would not involve too much in the way of reverse curves to get over onto that alignment from the existing track where the DPU is shown in KP's photo above. Also, that would provide a decent width of roadway on that side - away from the construction zone - for trainmen to walk, etc. It'll be interesting to see how this progresses, with the usual break-down into multiple steps to temporarily relocate both the road and the railroad, as well as underground utilities, etc.
- Paul North.
KP, and all the others here, too -
In looking for some more info on the MIlliken Ave. 'fly-over' project, I stumbled across the following study. If it hasn't already been mentioned here, it may be of particular interest as it pertains to, addresses, provides, analyzes, and discusses rail traffic projections on the 2 major systems to 2025, including several "Routing Alternatives", etc. (157 pages, approx. 848 KB in size), at:
http://www.ieor.berkeley.edu/People/Faculty/leachman-pubs/InlandEmpire.pdf
Inland Empire Railroad Main Line Study Final Report - Contract 04-010 Prepared for Southern California Association of Governments June 30. 2005 From the Executive Summary (Page 7 of 157): "The Inland Empire Railroad Main Line Study examines railroad infrastructure needs and operations for both freight and passenger trains in Southern California. This document serves as the Final Report for this study. The existing railroad main line infrastructure from downtown Los Angeles east and north to Barstow and Indio is described. Passenger and freight traffic patterns are documented, and future train volumes are forecast. Alternatives for routing future main-line train movements are formulated and analyzed. Results are presented from simulating Year 2010 and Year 2025 train operations in scenarios of increasing track capacity. These results identify track capacity improvements for each alternative required to maintain Year 2000 transit times while accommodating forecasted 2010 and 2025 traffic levels. Capital costs for these infrastructure improvements are estimated. Emissions from locomotives powering through train movements and from vehicular delays at grade grossings are estimated. Finally, the alternatives are ranked along the dimensions of capital costs, total emissions, population exposure to main-line freight train operations, and population access to passenger train operations."
Inland Empire Railroad Main Line Study
Final Report - Contract 04-010
Prepared for
Southern California Association of Governments
June 30. 2005
From the Executive Summary (Page 7 of 157): "The Inland Empire Railroad Main Line Study examines railroad infrastructure needs and operations for both freight and passenger trains in Southern California. This document serves as the Final Report for this study. The existing railroad main line infrastructure from downtown Los Angeles east and north to Barstow and Indio is described. Passenger and freight traffic patterns are documented, and future train volumes are forecast. Alternatives for routing future main-line train movements are formulated and analyzed. Results are presented from simulating Year 2010 and Year 2025 train operations in scenarios of increasing track capacity. These results identify track capacity improvements for each alternative required to maintain Year 2000 transit times while accommodating forecasted 2010 and 2025 traffic levels. Capital costs for these infrastructure improvements are estimated. Emissions from locomotives powering through train movements and from vehicular delays at grade grossings are estimated. Finally, the alternatives are ranked along the dimensions of capital costs, total emissions, population exposure to main-line freight train operations, and population access to passenger train operations."
From the Executive Summary (Page 7 of 157):
"The Inland Empire Railroad Main Line Study examines railroad infrastructure needs and operations for both freight and passenger trains in Southern California. This document serves as the Final Report for this study. The existing railroad main line infrastructure from downtown Los Angeles east and north to Barstow and Indio is described. Passenger and freight traffic patterns are documented, and future train volumes are forecast. Alternatives for routing future main-line train movements are formulated and analyzed. Results are presented from simulating Year 2010 and Year 2025 train operations in scenarios of increasing track capacity. These results identify track capacity improvements for each alternative required to maintain Year 2000 transit times while accommodating forecasted 2010 and 2025 traffic levels. Capital costs for these infrastructure improvements are estimated. Emissions from locomotives powering through train movements and from vehicular delays at grade grossings are estimated. Finally, the alternatives are ranked along the dimensions of capital costs, total emissions, population exposure to main-line freight train operations, and population access to passenger train operations."
KP, I particular suggest looking at the "Routing Alternatives", diagrams/ figures, tables, and discussion of them on Pages 8 through 19 (inclusive) of 157.
Paul, that's an interesting analysis of the new grading near Milliken Ave. I had assumed that the flyover would be placed closer to the north edge of the ROW due to several industrial siding connections on the south side. Perhaps the 'temporary' main will become an industrial lead in the end. Also, there appear to be pipeline markers on both sides of the ROW which may or may not predict more complications.
I do thank you for the link to that 2005 consultant study, largely an example of taxpayer funded waste. There are more of these armchair academic studies around if one Googles a little. IMO the study assumptions have been completely overtaken by events - BNSF 3MT construction, Colton crossing flyover and, of course, the 2008 economic meltdown.
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! ***
desertdog (4-21):
Contrary to the newspaper information you referenced, source contacts associated with UP have seen no general order issued about the Maricopa, AZ area. So, I suspect the second main east of Maricopa is still not in service.
The press is notorious for getting railroad matters mixed-up. Of course, too, a few times railroaders have been known to be asleep at the switch ... (Hehehe.)
Take care, John.
K.P.
Flyovers A-Go-Go
Thanks to Paul D. North Jr., who posted link information about an official 2005 study about broad Los Angeles area routings, K.P. gained much food for thought! In that study, K.P. got a sense of vindication about past conjectured posts. As the forum knows, the Colton Flyover construction is projected to start in October this year (2011). This series of posts will focus on other flyovers the 2005 study mentioned.
Part I (of I-II)
Pasadena Jct.
In the past, one of K.P.'s hot subjects was the changing of the present counterclockwise orientation between the LA&SL and SP lines to a clockwise pattern. A super big problem in either orientation was the many Metrolink commuter trains crossing what is now called the Sunset Route at Pasadena Jct. (formerly a LA&SL designation).
Apparently officials and those that study such matters have pointed to the need for a flyover at Pasadena Jct.!
The problem area:
San Bernardino and Riverside Metrolink lines arrive or leave Union Station on this single-track bridge, once the route of the City of Los Angeles and Challenger.
The rusted truss bridge in the background is the original Sunset Route's final bridging before Union Station (out of view towards the left).
Just east (right) of the above Metrolink traversing bridge, the single-track junctions into a two-track line (see lower left in the below photo).
The above photo is of what is now known as CP PASADENA JCT. In the upper right are two signals, one on each side of the two-tracks. It is one of the few locations were back-to-back CP's exist.
On the south side of CP PASADENA JCT, the Metrolink owned Sunset Route track (lower) follows the Los Angeles River. The Metrolink San Bernardino Line is the track (there IS two tracks there), with the left signal for the mainline, the right for the siding.
If a flyover was built at Pasadena Jct., a clockwise bias would work very, very well, AND would explain the proliferation of spring frogged switches (that, in theory, would be little used in turnout mode) at the future CP AL514 HAMILTON in Pomona.
A MapQuest aerial link is below of CP PASADENA JCT. The big intermodal facility on the right is LATC.
http://mapq.st/eZ6RQO
The above and the Colton Crossing were listed first under "Separated Crossings."
Continued in Part II
Part II (of I-II)
The Pomona Flyover
In the 2005 study, underneath the title "Separated Crossings" was the title "Flying Junctions," which flyovers K.P. will list on a west to east basis.
First, is in Pomona. That seemed to have been concocted on the theory that LA&SL commuter trains EAST of Pomona would need to travel the Alhambra Sub WEST of Pomona. In K.P.'s opinion, that will never happen.
The West Colton (Rancho) Full Flying Junction
In K.P.'s opinion, a flyover associated with Rancho Ave. is also very unlikely to ever come about.
What would be useful, though, is running Main 2 on the north side of the Balloon ...
... alongside the present Main 1 (formerly the Bypass).
Two Junction Flyovers (Colton / Riverside)
K.P. has long seen the need for 'a' flyover between Colton and Riverside. "A" implies just one. But the 2005 report suggested TWO transition flyovers, one in Colton (not to be confused with the Colton Crossing Flyover), the other in Riverside. Two such flyovers would certainly help in rail traffic being free flowing, with each flyover serving either an east or west bias.
It is known that debate among officials has transpired whether the future BNSF Bridge over I-215 (in the freeway widening project) in Highgrove should be three or four tracks wide. The monkey wrench is the junctions to the UP lines. At Colton, there would be a junction. Likewise, there would a junction in Riverside. Unless there is a fourth track, congestion would invariably result.
For northbound trains (biased toward BNSF Main 1) flying over at Colton, there would of necessity have to be a way of getting trains from UP Main 2 to UP Main 1. If UP Main 2 was occupied by a train already, the transitioning train would have to stop, and hang over the BNSF, blocking it!
With only three tracks, if a southbound UP on BNSF Main 3 was blocked on the LA&SL single-track at Pachappa Cut ...
... the BNSF line would be blocked.
So, efficiency would be greatly hindered. But four-tracks would solve that, and make for a free flower BNSF line between Colton and Riverside.
Gratifying
K.P. has long saw the need of flyovers for Los Angeles (Metrolink) and the BNSF Colton-Riverside line. Official studies seeing that need also is particular gratifying to this forumist. Thanks, Paul North, for bringing the study to our attention, and making that gratifying possible.
Take care all,
An Analytical Look at Two-Tracking in the Los Angeles Area
At this time the Los Angeles Sub (LA&SL) is two-tracked between Los Angeles and Pomona, CA, whereas the Alhambra Sub (SP) is single-track.
In the past this forumist was of the opinion that the Alhambra Sub would remain basically single-track. However, investigating matters put things in a new light. The purpose of this post is to present facts to the forum for its OWN analysis ...
A key fact is that the Alameda Corridor East's (ACE) website shows a possible second main between Los Angeles and Pomona on the Alhambra Sub with a dashed line. (In the link, if one clicks on the view, it expands or reduces in size.)
http://www.theaceproject.org/photo/mainmap.jpg
However, a subtle, hidden fact concerns SP's old State Street Line down the middle of the I-10 Freeway between Los Angeles and El Monte, which line is now owned by Metrolink, the local commuter agency. (UP does have trackage rights over that line.) That line CANNOT be two-tracked! So, Metrolink is hemmed in in that respect commuter train-wise.
In the link below, that Metrolink commuter 'hemmed in' line is shown with eastbound AT&SF steamer 3751 doing the honors.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=360661
Another steamer view with the short 947-foot CTC siding in the distance: Note the high green signal.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=324013
In the heydays of the Pacific Electric trolley system nearly 100 years ago, this was a double-track line, and as autos became popular, the freeway was built on each side of the trolley line.
So, this all MAY explain the ACE's interests in a possible second main on the SP Alhambra Sub between Los Angeles and Pomona, at least to El Monte. It seems Metrolink would find difficulty in adding more commuter trains on the LA&SL between Los Angeles and Pomona. But, adding a second main on the SP Alhambra Sub between Los Angeles and Pomona for Metrolink's San Bernardino and Riverside Lines' commuter trains might be the answer. And, UP is savvy enough to make sure their bread and butter freight trains will be free-flowing and not blocked or interfered with!
Update as of Thursday, April 28, 2011
Ontario-Pomona, CA
Part A (of A-D)
The Future Milliken Ave. Flyover
The Milliken Ave. flyover project is now moving along gung-ho! More of a shoefly path is forming on the east side, looking east.
That east grading lines up with the next-to-the-fence alignment on the west side, where the yellow grading equipment is seen on the photo left:
Another westward view:
At this point in time, unless it is found otherwise, the shoefly apparently will be right next to the bushes and trees on the left.
Part B (of A-D)
Fencing has been erected on the north side of the tracks, along Guasti Rd. View looks northwestward. Guasti Rd. is a popular dead-end road for 18-wheelers.
A northeastward view:
As can be seen in the below reshown November 23, 2010 eastward photo of the then new Milliken Ave. grade crossing panels, that fencing was not present (upper left).
Continued in Part C
Part C (of A-D)
Downtown Pomona
All was quiet in Pomona, with no workers present (like off for their long on-off work cycle), and the two new CP AL514 HAMILTON boxes were all locked up.
The new, not hooked up WEST control box is right by the present west CP signals.
In the above photo, a dark colored vehicle is seen going over the Hamilton Blvd. grade crossing in the background.
The still unleveled west box is right by a private residence (and wood fencing around that residence) on Myrtle Ave. that dead ends on the north side of the tracks.
Continued in Part D
Part D (of A-D)
Along east-west Mt. Vernon Ave. (near Erie St., and not to be confused with the north-south street of the same name in Colton), the original SP Sunset Route is visible in the forefront bottom, the LA&SL Sunset Route at the west signals of CP C030 ROSELAWN is in the background.
The CP box is a graffiti disaster.
The signal heads AND concrete ties are likewise covered with graffiti. An eastbound (leftward) double-stack passes between the signals on the present LA&SL Main 1, our future Main C.
Ever see graffiti painted ties being buried in ballast and ribbon rail attached to them?
With the future big CP AL514 HAMILTON finally being installed, CP ROSELAWN is on borrowed time now.
Undoubtedly, UP workers will converge on this whole area soon in their many-hours-long sort of week-on week-off work schedule.
Update as of Saturday, April 30, 2011
Construction Sites
Part A (of A-L)
The Magnolia Ave. Underpass
On Wednesday, April 20, 2011, the below photo was shot and soon afterward was posted about here at the forum, with the bridge's Main 1 (the right track) then anticipated to open for service within two-weeks.
As a refresher, the below previously shown August 11, 2010 photo from Brockton Ave. looking eastbound is again posted. Both the single-track shoefly at the Magnolia Ave underpass construction site and the barricades blocking the normal two-track line were visible.
On Saturday, April 30, 2011, the site was again visited, and the barricades over those tracks had been cleared away, and Main 1 (right) was in service and Main 2 (left) was being worked on.
In comparing the first and third photos above, the bridge's protective fencing on the right had been completely installed now.
The shoefly had been removed, except through the Magnolia Ave. roadway and its immediate sides. Magnolia Ave. was completely closed to auto traffic at photo time, and equipment parked on it. The sidewalk was open for pedestrians, though. View looks westbound.
Part B (of A-L)
An eastward view of the ex-shoefly:
With Magnolia Ave. closed, for the first time the roadway could be pedestrian crossed and the incomplete digging out of the underpass could be photographed.
The equipment reworking Main 2 was now on the new bridge and getting closer.
Part C (of A-L)
Then, it started crossing the street.
It was all one machine.
Then, the main pushing unit came into view. (Note the yellow connecting poling on the lower right.)
Part D (of A-L)
At the grade crossing panels, the equipment had to bypass the digging into the ballast.
Continued in Part E
Part E (of A-L)
It was no simple piece of equipment.
Continued in Part F
Part F (of A-L)
A worker was watering the track as another piece of equipment approached.
The equipment in Part E stopped as it ran out of track, still unconnected just west of the original CP C055 STREETER in the distance. Note the attached bright light on the lower left.
A strange alignment (Main 1 is the turnout route).
Continued in Part G
Part G (of A-L)
The Merrill Ave. cross street (below foreground), a half a block south of the tracks, has had the pavement torn out and is has now started to be dug down.
To the west, equipment and workers were working the line, which crossed grade crossings.
In comparing the above photo with the previously shown August 11, 2010 one below, it can be seen the temporary CP C055 STREETER has been removed and the track's alignments restored.
And trains WERE running through the area! View looks eastward several blocks west of Magnolia Ave.
Continued in Part H
Part H (of A-L)
In a previously shown August 6, 2010 photo, the original CP C055 STREETER box east of Magnolia Ave. is seen, and it had a tan coloring with some kind of odd roofing on top.
On the Saturday, April 30, 2011 visit, a new box had been brought to the sight, of a silver color without the odd roofing.
It MAY or may not be the same new box used for the temporary CP C055 STREETER west of Magnolia Ave.
Continued in Part I
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.