Trains news wire 6-19 tells of Union Pacific moving through traffic over to their Donner Pass route. The importance of the Feather River route to BNSF was acknowledged in the article.
Anything is for sale at the right price. Would Union Pacific consider selling their Feather River route at a price BNSF may accept?
I don't remember all the conditions imposed on the UP/SP merger (uh, takeover). But doesn't the BNSF already have some kind of haulage/trackage rights on both the Feather River and Donner Pass routes?
There have always been some interesting trade-offs between those two routes: short distance vs. gentle grades, horrific snowfall vs. rockslides and washouts, etc. I think that there have been some clearance issues too.
The accountants jousting over maintenance and dispatching costs ought to be fun to watch in the meantime.....
If UP moves all their traffic of the Feather River line, does that mean BNSF is expected to pay 100% of the maintenance and dispatching costs?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Victrola1 Trains news wire 6-19 tells of Union Pacific moving through traffic over to their Donner Pass route. The importance of the Feather River route to BNSF was acknowledged in the article. Anything is for sale at the right price. Would Union Pacific consider selling their Feather River route at a price BNSF may accept?
UP says closure rumors are untrue
06/16/09Linda SatchwellStaff WriterSeeking to quell rumors that Union Pacific Railroad will close the rail line through Portola and down the Feather River Canyon within the next 18 months, Director of Regional Public Affairs Wes Lujan said that while UP plans some changes in its operations, it is not closing any rail lines or transferring any personnel “at this time,” according to Portola City Manager Jim Murphy.The current plan is to redirect all intermodal (double decker) trains over Donner Summit. “UP will continue to serve all their regular customers through their Portola rail facility and along the Feather River Canyon,” said Murphy after his conversation with Lujan. One of the railroad’s primary customers is the Sierra Pacific Industries mill in Quincy.In a follow-up call to the Portola Reporter, Zoe Richmond, spokeswoman for UP, said: “We are not shutting down the line through Portola.” She added that the line would continue to operate as long as it has enough customers and the economy allows it. “It’s likely you’ve heard,” said Richmond, “that a lot of our employees have been furloughed and cars have been stored.” But, she continued, the company is holding onto both employees and cars because it knows from experience that “the economy comes back, and when it does, it comes back with a vengeance.” At that time, Richmond added, “we’ll be ready to serve our customers right away.”Finally, she said that the line is also used by UP’s competitor, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway In fact, it is the company’s only line to the Pacific Northwest, so it’s “a very important line to our competitor.”
I wasn't aware BNSF used that route, I know its the old Western Pacific line but thought UP had quite a few trains there.
CAZEPHYRSeeking to quell rumors that Union Pacific Railroad will close the rail line through Portola and down the Feather River Canyon within the next 18 months, Director of Regional Public Affairs Wes Lujan said that while UP plans some changes in its operations, it is not closing any rail lines or transferring any personnel “at this time,” according to Portola City Manager Jim Murphy.
Remember--- Its not nice to fool with mother nature. The two routes are separated enough that usually both lines are not affected by the same fierce winter storm (read lot of snow, water, landslides, wash outs,floods, etc). Over the years there have been constant detours over each of the routes. Remember the CZ detoured over the WP this past summer for maintenance.
Personnel is the main restriction of any realignment. If you were UP wouldn't you keep all your T&E persons qualified on both routes in case of detrours? They already may be?
If there is a sudden increase in traffic wouldn't a modified directional running operation could keep the lines fluid? After the traffic increases on the southern transcons UP and BNSF have had to scramble for years to increase capacity. Even with the traffic downturns CSX has had to live with its abandoment of the "S" line and B&O to STL and the overloading of adjacent lines just to give a couple examples.
Trainfan:
BNSF uses the Feather River Route as far east as Keddie, where it takes off on its own "High Line-Inside Gateway" (former Western Pacific) to Oregon and the Pacific Northwest. It's a competitive north-south route to the UP (formerly SP) "Shasta Line".
If UP transfers its major traffic to the Donner Pass/Overland Route, it will mean improving some clearances in the tunnels (probably by lowering the track somewhat instead of raising the tunnels, many of which are drilled through extremely hard Sierra granite) and re-installing some miles of double track between Emigrant Gap and the Summit at Norden, which were reduced to single track by the former owner, SP. I travel parallel Interstate 80 frequently between Sacramento and Reno, and so far I've not seen any evidence of the second track being re-laid, though UP seems to have increased the traffic somewhat over the line.
Donner Pass is a steeper route than the Feather River Canyon, with grades of up to 2.4% as opposed to the canyon's 1%, but also more direct and not prone to rock-slides, as it is a 'ridge' route and not a canyon floor passage. The chief culprit on the Donner Pass route is the 'snowbelt' that begins at Blue Canyon (elevation 5000') and continues to Truckee, on the other side of Donner Pass. The snowfall in that part of the Sierra can be extremely heavy, with depths of up to 25 feet during a bad winter. However, more modern snow-fighting equipment has reduced that particular problem considerably.
But I would certainly think that UP would keep the Feather River route between Keddie and Portola open as an alternate route over the Sierra.
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
Tom:
BNSF also has rights on the WP from Salt Lake City to Stockton as part of the SP-UP merger, but there isn't a lot of traffic it solicits for that route. Public documents released last year showed an average of one BNSF train per week each way between SLC and Stockton.
Most tunnels are cleared by crown-cutting as in almost all cases it's much, much, much less expensive than lowering the floor, especially when the tunnel is under traffic. Lowering the floor by any appreciable amount will usually require removal of the track, and that means the tunnel is going to be out of service for at least a day or two. Taking the track out of service means trains don't run, and that's absolutely fatal to the railway's cash flow, service commitments, and network fluidity if it goes on for too long or for too many times. That's why following a derailment the emphasis is on re-establishing train service immediately and very little finesse or TLC is given to the equipment that derailed or the track and signals that are damaged. Just jerk them out of the way as quickly as possible and lay track!
The harder the rock, the more attractive crown-cutting becomes, because it's easy and cheap -- the rock is self-supporting and incremental cuts can be taken without the requirement to resupport or reline at the end of each work window before trains can run again. There's no problem cutting hard rock with modern tools, in fact, it's usually easier to cut than soft rock because it doesn't fall out in chunks and clog up the muck stream.
When a tunnel is lined, lowering the floor becomes even more problematic because the lining support is lost. Undermining the footers of the steel sets or timber sets is a good way to bring the tunnel down on top of you in a matter of a few hours. That's happened in a few cases I know of, and it was disastrous.
Two other very difficult problems with lowering the floor is that now the drainage in the tunnel is down in a deeper bathtub than it already was. Reestablishing drainage means lowering the track outside the tunnel too. In turn that creates vertical alignment problems with the track, and all sort of difficult drainage problems and ditching problems exterior to the tunnel.
RWM
Railway man:
Thanks for the information on the tunnels. I was just going by what SP did to the original 1867 Summit Tunnel (now out of service) on Donner Pass quite a few years back--going in and lowering the floor because of the extreme hardness of the granite. Since the tunnel was also on the beginning of a down-grade, it didn't affect the drainage.
I'm really not sure how many tunnels the UP is concerned with on the Donner Pass route--I know that there are about 32, but I don't think there are that many clearance problems with most of them. And I have seen double-stackers running through between Roseville and Sparks, so what clearance problems exist, might be solely on the old, original (1867 or so) out-of-service westbound track between Norden, to the point where it joins the newer line midway down the Summit. I have heard that UP is considering putting that track back in operation, but I've heard that for some years, now.
However, the last time I was in Truckee, about a month ago, about six trains came through in the afternoon, so it's pretty clear that UP is putting more and more traffic over 'the Hill' these days. I have heard that the goal is between 25-35 trains per day, so if the several sections of single track (Norden to Truckee, Emigrant Gap to the bridge near Cisco Grove) are re-laid to double, then the line could certainly handle it.
I grew up in Truckee, and when I was a kid, trains came through about every half-hour. THAT would be nice to see again, LOL!
Railway ManThe harder the rock, the more attractive crown-cutting becomes, because it's easy and cheap -- the rock is self-supporting and incremental cuts can be taken without the requirement to resupport or reline at the end of each work window before trains can run again. There's no problem cutting hard rock with modern tools, in fact, it's usually easier to cut than soft rock because it doesn't fall out in chunks and clog up the muck stream
RWM: What about the snow sheds? Are they tall enough or will something have to be done there? If they do have to enlarge tunnels would they first restore what portions of the second track parallel to the present track that UP considers critical including any enlargment of the second track tunnels and snow sheds first then do the track 1?
Does anyone know the pre-recession train count on both the SP and WP routes?
How has that changed during the past year? Based on the grades (single track?) of the SP, what is a realistic train count the line can handle?
ed
MP:
"The Hill" as the SP (now UP) mainline from Roseville to Sparks is called, was double-tracked in he early years of the 20th century. Between Roseville and Colfax, the two mains are non-parallel, but out of Colfax, up through the toughest part of the grade to Norden, the mains are parallel. At Norden, the original line goes up over Donner Pass while a lower level line tunnels through the crest near Donner Peak. The two lines meet again above Donner Lake, halfway down the summit, and continue on mostly parallel into Sparks, NV.
In the later years of SP operation, double track was removed from Emigrant Gap to Cisco Grove, a distance of about 15 miles, and the original track over Donner Summit was put out of service from Norden to Donner, leaving the newer tunnel route through the summit . I would think that about 20 total miles of line would have to be double-tracked again.
When UP bought SP, most of its trans-Sierra traffice was still being put through the single-track Feather River canyon (20-25 trains per dayj) and the remaining 10 or so trains per day was moving over the Donner Pass route. It was thought that the Donner Pass tunnels were too tight a fit for double-stackers, but evidently that is not the case, now that double-stacks are again moving over "The Hill" between Roseville and Sparks.
Snowshed height is not a problem on The Hill--what remains of the old SP snowsheds are concrete and have ample clearance.
As I see it, the advantage of The Hill over the Feather River Canyon is that despite more severe grades, the route is much shorter, and train speeds are not relegated to 25mph as they are in the canyon. Also, being a 'ridge top' route, The Hill is not plagued by the winter rock-slides in the Feather River Canyon. And as I said before, newer snow-fighting equipment has pretty largely taken care of the extreme snowfall over Donner Pass.
twhiteRailway man: Thanks for the information on the tunnels. I was just going by what SP did to the original 1867 Summit Tunnel (now out of service) on Donner Pass quite a few years back--going in and lowering the floor because of the extreme hardness of the granite. Since the tunnel was also on the beginning of a down-grade, it didn't affect the drainage. I'm really not sure how many tunnels the UP is concerned with on the Donner Pass route--I know that there are about 32, but I don't think there are that many clearance problems with most of them. And I have seen double-stackers running through between Roseville and Sparks, so what clearance problems exist, might be solely on the old, original (1867 or so) out-of-service westbound track between Norden, to the point where it joins the newer line midway down the Summit. I have heard that UP is considering putting that track back in operation, but I've heard that for some years, now. However, the last time I was in Truckee, about a month ago, about six trains came through in the afternoon, so it's pretty clear that UP is putting more and more traffic over 'the Hill' these days. I have heard that the goal is between 25-35 trains per day, so if the several sections of single track (Norden to Truckee, Emigrant Gap to the bridge near Cisco Grove) are re-laid to double, then the line could certainly handle it. I grew up in Truckee, and when I was a kid, trains came through about every half-hour. THAT would be nice to see again, LOL! Tom
The Pass (at least one track) has been good for low-cube double-stacks since at least 1990; it's the double hi-cubes that are the problem, and of course that's where the market has been for a number of years. UP's project includes putting back down 9.2 miles of second main track that was removed by SP.
Truckee is one of my favorite towns -- or it was until the crowds moved in.
blue streak 1Railway ManThe harder the rock, the more attractive crown-cutting becomes, because it's easy and cheap -- the rock is self-supporting and incremental cuts can be taken without the requirement to resupport or reline at the end of each work window before trains can run again. There's no problem cutting hard rock with modern tools, in fact, it's usually easier to cut than soft rock because it doesn't fall out in chunks and clog up the muck stream RWM: What about the snow sheds? Are they tall enough or will something have to be done there? If they do have to enlarge tunnels would they first restore what portions of the second track parallel to the present track that UP considers critical including any enlargment of the second track tunnels and snow sheds first then do the track 1?
I'm looking for a public document that states what the plan is, but haven't found one yet.
Wouldn't you bet the UP wishes the SP had implemented the Kaiser Plan to reduce Donner-route length by 30 miles and the summit grade to 6,200 feet? "All" it would take would be 57.3 miles of tunnels.
Mark
Golly. Up until the 1948 repeal of the California Full Crew Law, up to 7 brakemen (and a minumum of 3, depending upon train size) were required on trains over Donner Pass. After 1948, "only" four or five were the norm.
markpierce Wouldn't you bet the UP wishes the SP had implemented the Kaiser Plan to reduce Donner-route length by 30 miles and the summit grade to 6,200 feet? "All" it would take would be 57.3 miles of tunnels. Mark
blue streak 1Do you have a link to that idea? wouldn't it be interesting to read it? Did it have enough clearance planned for the present double stacks and of course CAT?
See pages 156 and 157 (they include a map drawing) of John Signor's Donner Pass, Southern Pacific's Sierra Crossing. They didn't have double stacks in 1945, so who knows?
Mark:
What's also fascinating in that Signor book is the projected maps for the double-track had the non-parallel mainline extended past Colfax, as originally planned by Harriman. That new Eastbound trackage was all OVER the place, LOL! I believe the ruling eastbound grade was set at something around 1.5%.
Like he said, Donner has never been able to handle 20-foot-2-inch doublestacks-- until now they've always used the WP. But work is under way to cobble together a good-enough-for-now route over Donner: as I recall the plan is to leave the traditional-eastward track untouched from Bowman to Colfax, which means they won't enlarge tunnels 22 thru 32. The tall stack trains will all use the Central Pacific route thru there; the signals for bidirectional running on that track are being installed now (or have been?).
My railfan-reading-Internet-boards impression is that a conceivable increase in traffic could lead to them replacing the second track from Switch 9 (where I-80 crosses above the RR just above Emigrant Gap) to Shed 10 (just east of the Butte Canyon bridges)-- seven miles or so. The empty roadbed over Donner Summit (maybe five miles?) will remain empty for many years to come, or longer.
Ralway man:
Truckee is still one of my favorite towns, crowds or not, LOL! Though all of the development north around Prosser has screwed up some really good jeep trails (mostly on abandoned logging railway embankments). I lived there during WWII, when I was a little kid, and then spent summers up there working for the Forest Service while I was going to college. It's a great setting to watch trains for hours on end.
But evidently some double-stacks are getting through on the eastbound line, I've seen two or three in the past several months. I think it would be the old, original westbound line that may have to have all the tunnel work before westbound empties can be sent down.
I know that UP has contacted the State of California about chipping in funds for renewing the double-track--and adding a third track from Auburn to Sacramento for passenger service--but right now the State is so bankrupt that I'd be surprised that it can help. It will be interesting to see if UP decides to come up with the funds on its own. But right now, to me at least, it looks like a pretty nasty bottleneck out of Emigrant Gap to Cisco, and again, at Norden, with only the long tunnel in operation over the Summit. I've seen my share of westbounds backed up in Truckee awaiting the arrival of eastbounds through the tunnel from Norden.
Of course, I understand that UP still dispatches everything in California from Omaha, so that might be part of the problem, LOL!
While reading Vance's North American Railroads, I used Google Earth to follow the routings he described. The attack on Donner was very interesting, particularly for this Midwestern guy.
Has anyone every seen the Nystrom Raised Relief Maps which show the actual mountain ranges, valleys, etc? A customer has one and it never ceases to amaze me. One learns a considerable amount of geography thru those maps.
When will California get back on its feet? I see the Gov. is promising a long hot summer if the spending doesnt get under control. He is also proposing a flat income tax for state residents in order to keep high income earners at home.
I heard that California was ready to kick in a chunk of change for tunnel and track work over the Donner Route, but with that wanted rights to run passenger service even as far as Reno. UP said thanks, but no thanks.
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
jeaton I heard that California was ready to kick in a chunk of change for tunnel and track work over the Donner Route, but with that wanted rights to run passenger service even as far as Reno. UP said thanks, but no thanks.
jeaton:
There are as many "if's, and's and but's" about that one as there are stories about it. One story is that UP is so busy concentrating on their Sunset Route double-tracking that a 'good enough' reworking of the Donner Pass line is all they're interested in right now (using part of the original Central Pacific line as bi-directional, etc.) since the Port of Oakland is not as busy a traffic source as their LA ports to the south.
The State would like a third track between Sacramento and Auburn for passenger service, and eventually extend passenger service to a once-daily each way between Sacramento and Reno. UP says that it doesn't fit in with their projected increase in freight traffic over "The Hill" and right now because of the Recession (and our less than competent State Legislature), the state is bankrupt, and the Recession has hit UP and the Port of Oakland gateway kinda/sorta hard. So right now, all bets are off.
I would say that once the Recession begins to recede and traffic comes back to kinda/sorta normal levels, that California and UP will start bargaining again.
But at least IMO, even with traffic increases, a fully double-tracked Donner Pass route should be able to handle the traffic plus a daily Sacto/Reno passenger. After all, SP did it during its heyday--30-40 freights PLUS around four passengers daily. But then, SP dispatched everything from San Francisco, not Omaha, LOL!
twhite The State would like a third track between Sacramento and Auburn for passenger service, and eventually extend passenger service to a once-daily each way between Sacramento and Reno. UP says that it doesn't fit in with their projected increase in freight traffic over "The Hill" and right now because of the Recession (and our less than competent State Legislature), the state is bankrupt, and the Recession has hit UP and the Port of Oakland gateway kinda/sorta hard. So right now, all bets are off.
My (mis)understanding is that Amtrak's Zephyr runs between Oakland to Chicago over Donner Pass once in each direction daily and that Caltans's Capitol Corridor trains similarly run between San Jose and Sparks three times a day each direction daily. Or does Caltrans just run busses over the pass?
It's busses over the Pass except for the once-daily Zephyr. And oddly enough, though the Zephyr runs on time eastbound, westbound from Reno it's a real catch as catch can. I've waited up to four hours in Reno for the westbound to come through on its scheduled 10:30 AM stop. The usual excuse is "It got hung up in Colorado." Hm.
But the Amtrak busses run relatively frequently from Reno to Sacramento and only make a few brief stops on the way--Truckee, Soda Springs, Colfax, Auburn, Roseville.
Only ridden them once, after an absolutely disasterous railfan trip up the Feather River Canyon a few years back. We were scheduled to get into Portola at five in the afternoon, arrived after midnight, and didn't get to Reno until 1AM. I was NOT going to repeat the trip back down the canyon, so I grabbed an Amtrack bus out of Reno the next morning and got into Sacramento about eight hours before the train. Never again. Four hours sitting on a siding in Spring Garden between the Loop and the tunnel was quite enough for me, thank you.
markpierce My (mis)understanding is that Amtrak's Zephyr runs between Oakland to Chicago over Donner Pass once in each direction daily and that Caltans's Capitol Corridor trains similarly run between San Jose and Sparks three times a day each direction daily. Or does Caltrans just run busses over the pass? Mark
According to the Capital Corridor route map, rail service only extends as far east as Auburn. All service east of there into Nevada is by bus.
http://www.capitolcorridor.org/included/docs/schedules/CCJPA_routemap.pdf
Mike
timz Like he said, Donner has never been able to handle 20-foot-2-inch doublestacks-- until now they've always used the WP. But work is under way to cobble together a good-enough-for-now route over Donner: as I recall the plan is to leave the traditional-eastward track untouched from Bowman to Colfax, which means they won't enlarge tunnels 22 thru 32. The tall stack trains will all use the Central Pacific route thru there; the signals for bidirectional running on that track are being installed now (or have been?). My railfan-reading-Internet-boards impression is that a conceivable increase in traffic could lead to them replacing the second track from Switch 9 (where I-80 crosses above the RR just above Emigrant Gap) to Shed 10 (just east of the Butte Canyon bridges)-- seven miles or so. The empty roadbed over Donner Summit (maybe five miles?) will remain empty for many years to come, or longer.
Timz:
That sounds entirely feasable, since the original Central Pacific route between Bowman and Colfax, though somewhat 'roundabout', avoids the heavy tunnelling of the Harriman second trackage. And the gradient isn't that bad, either, I think it's about 2% rather than the 2.2% on the original line between Rocklin and Bowman. Actually, the heaviest grades are encountered between Colfax and Emigrant Gap, where there are several stretches of 2.4% on parallel double track. After that, between Emigrant Gap and the summit at Norden, the grade eases considerably, which I've always found interesting, as that is when the line enters the true 'Mountain' country--but it only proves that Judah knew what he was doing when he laid the original CP line out as a 'ridge-top' route. That long ridge rises gradually to the Summit, instead of just jutting up suddenly.
As to re-laying the second track between switch 9 to shed 10, I have a feeling that once the Recession eases, that will be high on the priority of the railroad, otherwise projected traffic levels will create a logjam between Emigrant Gap and Cisco Grove.
I would think however, that to smooth traffic patterns considerable, that the railroad would be seriously considering putting the original CP Summit line back into operation. Granted, there is a fairly stiff 2.2% grade just east of the Chinese Wall through Summit Tunnel, but with the power available to the UP these days, that would seem like a somewhat minor problem.
I keep hearing mixed reports on the Summit--everything from "Yes, that's a priority" to what you've stated, that it will remain empty for years to come.
But I think that those miles between Emigrant Gap and Shed 10 will need to be double-tracked ASAP when traffic begins to warrant it.
twhite there is a fairly stiff 2.2% grade just east of the Chinese Wall through Summit Tunnel
As I recall the special instructions say westward trains that can't make 14 mph on the climb to Donner are not supposed to enter the formerly-eastward summit tunnel, which is 1.96 miles of constant 1.47%. Would there be any need for such a rule for westward trains via the old line? Maybe not, in which case the tonnage rating on the old line would likely be no lower than at present. (Might be higher.)
By the way: looks like SP removed 7.0 miles of track above Emigrant Gap and 6.7 miles over the summit.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.