Hi all,
Having recently moved house, I also had to change commuter lines. There is a facility on the new line that caught my attention - a dual-gauge intermodal terminal. I'm wondering if anyone's heard of a facility similar to this existing in the USA, or is it something found only in Australia?
Oh, and it was on the Queensland Rail dual-gauge line down to Sydney that I saw this - so it's actually coming off the narrow-gauge railroad.
Cheers,
tbdanny
The Location: Forests of the Pacific Northwest, OregonThe Year: 1948The Scale: On30The Blog: http://bvlcorr.tumblr.com
tbdanny Hi all, Having recently moved house, I also had to change commuter lines. There is a facility on the new line that caught my attention - a dual-gauge intermodal terminal. I'm wondering if anyone's heard of a facility similar to this existing in the USA, or is it something found only in Australia? Oh, and it was on the Queensland Rail dual-gauge line down to Sydney that I saw this - so it's actually coming off the narrow-gauge railroad. Cheers, tbdanny
Welcome. There are no dual gauge intermodal ternimals in North American. We only have the one gauge.
Try Brazil, they have several dual gauge railroads.
23 17 46 11
Never been on the docks at Skagway AK or at Antonito CO?
Standard Gauge in the USA is 4ft 8in. Intermodal trains only travel on standard gauge in the United States. Now whether they still transfer cargo between boxcars on different gauged rail lines I don't know. I think the only narrow gauged railroads left in America are tourist lines. Course narrow gauge maybe more common down in Mexico.
From what I hear has a pretty good rail network. Is freight rail more popular down there? For example could you walk into a school and ask the question; how does freight moves in the country and would actually have kids include railroads in their answers and not just think freight is only moved by trucks and planes like here in the United States.
BT CPSO 266For example could you walk into a school and ask the question; how does freight moves in the country and would actually have kids include railroads in their answers and not just think freight is only moved by trucks and planes like here in the United States.
Related to another thread, perhaps this is one of the challenges for US railroads, namely , that the perception of many in the US is that railroads are an anachronism. Freight service is great, but only where it goes. Many see US rails as an industry in decline because of abandonment and tearing up tracks in the past and miserable passenger service now except on the coasts and in some metro areas. To a lot of young people, railroads are irrelevant, hence they look at you like you're nuts if you suggest to them a career in the rail industry (I've tried this with some of my students in the past). Perhaps those industry folks in this forum are too close to see the bigger picture, but I believe many of those of us outside see and hear this. Maybe this sounds harsh and will be met with "you don't know what you're talking about" and defensive sarcasm. I only say it because as a lifelong railfan, I care.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
mudchicken Never been on the docks at Skagway AK or at Antonito CO?
Why does Skagway have any standard gauge trackage? Did they used to bring in standard gauge freight cars and transload them to White Pass & Yukon 3 footer rolling stock? WP & Y has no connection with the rest of the North American rail network nor with the Alaska RR...
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
Not to steal mc's 'thunder' here, but . . . WP&Y was one of the first users of containers other than Sea-Land - chiefly as a means for its survival, and often for the unusual load of outbound ore. However, I believe they were not the standard ISO size of 8 ft. x 8 ft. x 20 ft. I might be wrong about that, though . . . See -
Integration in the north Trains, July 1971 page 36 How White Pass & Yukon, Alaska, and CN-Newfoundland interchange ( ARR, CNR, CONTAINER, FERRY, "HILTON, GEORGE W.", WP&Y, TRN )
- Paul North.
BT CPSO 266From what I hear has a pretty good rail network. Is freight rail more popular down there? For example could you walk into a school and ask the question; how does freight moves in the country and would actually have kids include railroads in their answers and not just think freight is only moved by trucks and planes like here in the United States.
Yes, QR does have a pretty good rail network - I believe it holds the record for world's largest narrow-gauge system, and also for the world's fastest narrow-gauge train (the Tilt Train).
And with regards to the awareness of freight traffic, I would say that there is more awareness of it. Outside of the Citytrain (commuter) network in South-East Queensland and long distance passenger service, the majority of QR's traffic is freight. There are towns up north, such as Rockhampton and Townsville, where the line runs straight through the middle of town - even some street running in Rocky.
What also contributes to the awareness is that with the exception of the Gold Coast line (a commuter-only extension of the Beenleigh line), all the Citytrain lines also carry freight AFAIK. This is especially true on the Ipswich/Caboolture line, which forms part of the main North/South freight corridor. This means that kids are exposed to freight traffic on a regular basis, either catching it to school or stuck in a car with their parents waiting for it to go past at level crossings.
So in a word, yes.
One thing to (I hope) clarify a little...since Australia started as a group of disconnected colonies that eventually grew together, they have/had railways of three different gauges in different parts of the country....
Broad gauge: 5'-3"
Standard gauge: 4'-8 1/2"
Narrow gauge: 3'-6"
We had something a little bit like that in America before the Civil War, particularly in the South, but except for a few places where narrow gauge lines were required because of the terrain (like the Colorado Rockies) most post-war US lines were either built to standard gauge (like the Transcontinental RR, which was required by Congress to be standard gauge) or converted to it.
wjstixOne thing to (I hope) clarify a little...since Australia started as a group of disconnected colonies that eventually grew together, they have/had railways of three different gauges in different parts of the country.... Broad gauge: 5'-3" Standard gauge: 4'-8 1/2" Narrow gauge: 3'-6" We had something a little bit like that in America before the Civil War, particularly in the South, but except for a few places where narrow gauge lines were required because of the terrain (like the Colorado Rockies) most post-war US lines were either built to standard gauge (like the Transcontinental RR, which was required by Congress to be standard gauge) or converted to it.
I thought the northern and southern states had their own separate but standard gauges. What happened when the Union army (northern states) conquered more ground? did they instantly upgrade the track gauge as they went along?
Wasn't the union's secured victory the fact that the Battle of Atlanta took out the south's major railroad hub?
Didn't Pacific Electric and Los Angeles trolleys share some common right of ways in downtown LA ? The LA system was not standard gauge.
wjstixOne thing to (I hope) clarify a little...since Australia started as a group of disconnected colonies that eventually grew together, they have/had railways of three different gauges in different parts of the country.... Broad gauge: 5'-3" Standard gauge: 4'-8 1/2" Narrow gauge: 3'-6"
Yes, this caused all sorts of problems - I remember seeing a chap in a documentary talking about what it was like at the New South Wales/Queensland border at the break of gauge, before the dual gauge was built. Passengers, freight, everything needed to be transloaded - and this was in the days before intermodal.
Another oddity I've seen - this time in photos only - is triple-gauge trackage at the junction where the states of South Australia (narrow gauge), New South Wales (standard gauge) and Victoria (broad gauge) share a border. Looks like it would be a nightmare to model, but impressive if you could pull it off.
BT CPSO 266I thought the northern and southern states had their own separate but standard gauges. What happened when the Union army (northern states) conquered more ground? did they instantly upgrade the track gauge as they went along?
I do not recall any account of re-gauging the track; if the track were re-gauged, it would have been impossible to easily use captured locomotives and rolling stock. In some places, the Union soldiers pulled rails up, heated them in the middle, and bent them around trees or stumps.
The Montgomery & West Point (later, Western Railway of Alabama), unlike the majority of southern roads, was built to what we know as standard gauge.
Johnny
carnej1 mudchicken Never been on the docks at Skagway AK or at Antonito CO? Why does Skagway have any standard gauge trackage? Did they used to bring in standard gauge freight cars and transload them to White Pass & Yukon 3 footer rolling stock? WP & Y has no connection with the rest of the North American rail network nor with the Alaska RR...
Well, I've been on the docks at Skagway. Mudchicken is having some fun with us.
Here's some background for those that don't know it. The White Pass & Yukon (actually several seperately incorporated lines due to the fact that they were "International") was built from Skagway, Alaska to Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, 110 miles, just before the turn of the 19th-20th Century. Gold had been found "Way Up North" and people went in to get it. The WP&Y was built to bring in supplies and provide general transportation. It was built to a 3' gauge. Skagway was the "natural" ocean supply port for the Yukon Territory, even though it was in the US instead of Canada.
The WP&Y continued to function as the main supply route into the Yukon after the gold rush. This sounds impressive, but The Yukon only had about 30,000 people. The railroad was important enough that the US Army took it over in WWII and operated it with a Railway Operating Battalion. It hauled supplies needed to build that Alaska Highway. Narrow gauge steam locomotives were brought in from Colorado to handle the increased traffic.
The WP&Y pioneered intermodalism. There is a dispute as to just what was the first "Container Ship". Some say it was Sea Land's "Ideal X". I think the WP&Y company's "Clifford J. Rogers" holds the title. Containers were loaded in Vancouver, BC., taken by ship to the Skagway Docks (which I have been on), loaded on to flatcars, moved to Whitehorse, then distributed by truck. The reverse happend with products of Yukon mines. Spoilsports ended all this in 1982 when they built a paved road from Skagway in to Canada. The narrow gauge shut down.
It opened back up in 1988 to haul cruise ship passengers on shore excursions. They don't go all the way to Whitehorse. Some new docks were built to accommodate the growing passenger ship arrivals. Railroad tracks were built out on the piers to accept the tourists. Only on the new piers do these tracks have three rails. The northern two rails are at the 3' gauge. The southern, unused, rail is set 4' 8 1/2" from the north rail. These piers never handled freight.
I don't know why they built the piers with dual gauge track. Nobody is going to regauge the WP&Y to haul tourists. Maybe it was some kind of weird government required waste of money. Anyway, it's not a dual gauge intermodal facility. It's just some useless steel on a pier.
Greyhounds:
I've had some professional involvment in the actual railroad and the economic development prospects of Alaska and the Yukon.
The railroad owns the three docks in Skagway and built the docks. Not the government.
There are three docks: the Railroad Dock, the Broadway Dock, and the Ore Dock. The railroad chose to make the rail in what is called the "Railroad Dock" to standard-gauge because it was in the process of standard-gauging the railroad to haul both freight and tourists, in order to reduce operating costs. It would reduce operating costs just for the tourist business alone. The railroad's parent company was acquired by another holding company, management was changed, and the standard-gauging project was canceled.
All docks have indeed handled freight and that is why there is track in them. Not for tourist trains, though they could be used for that if anyone wanted.
I've found the reality of public-private partnership, mining and mineral lands development, logistics, and railroading in Alaska and the Yukon to be extraordinarily difficult. There have been all number of people who have tried to impose ideals onto the situation from both ends of the political spectrum, both those who think that government should run everything and those who think government should run nothing. They come and go, but they leave their wreckage behind. I do not know of any idealists who have succeeded in accomplishing anything in Alaska and the Yukon other than delaying economic development.
RWM
Railway Man Greyhounds: I've had some professional involvment in the actual railroad and the economic development prospects of Alaska and the Yukon. The railroad owns the three docks in Skagway and built the docks. Not the government. There are three docks: the Railroad Dock, the Broadway Dock, and the Ore Dock. The railroad chose to make the rail in what is called the "Railroad Dock" to standard-gauge because it was in the process of standard-gauging the railroad to haul both freight and tourists, in order to reduce operating costs. It would reduce operating costs just for the tourist business alone. The railroad's parent company was acquired by another holding company, management was changed, and the standard-gauging project was canceled. All docks have indeed handled freight and that is why there is track in them. Not for tourist trains, though they could be used for that if anyone wanted. I've found the reality of public-private partnership, mining and mineral lands development, logistics, and railroading in Alaska and the Yukon to be extraordinarily difficult. There have been all number of people who have tried to impose ideals onto the situation from both ends of the political spectrum, both those who think that government should run everything and those who think government should run nothing. They come and go, but they leave their wreckage behind. I do not know of any idealists who have succeeded in accomplishing anything in Alaska and the Yukon other than delaying economic development. RWM
Very long document from one of the groups promoting the construction of an Alaska Canada rail link about the possibility of reintroducing freight service on the WP&Y including the possibility of rebuilding it to standard gauge;
http://www.economicdevelopment.gov.yk.ca/pdf/short_track_report.pdf
OK.
IIRC the train I got on was partially out on the pier to load passengers. It had three of those 800 HP GE shovel nose diesels. The locomotives were not on the pier. Only the passenger cars were shoved out by the ship. (I walked over and actually touched one of those little locomotives. I rode all the way to Canada on the open platform at the end of the car. Sure was fun.)
Your post is the first I've heard of any plans that ever existed to convert the WP&Y to standard gauge. For a 110 mile long railroad running in to the "Middle of Nowhere" that would seem to make no sense at all. The only rational reason I can think of would be to move large quantaties of mine production to the port. If that was the reason, those tons couldn't have been efficiently handled on the pier I was on and that had the three rail "marginal" track. Rational minds seem to have prevailed. The WP&Y hasn't handled any significant amount of freight in almost 30 years.
We disagree on government involvement in transportation. ( I never said the pier was built by government.) So be it. I regard your thoughts to be as much of an "Ideology" as you regard mine to be an "Ideology". No big deal. It's just a difference of opinion.
I wish you and everyone else a Merry Chistmas, Happy New Year, and the best of luck and fortune in the future.
There's lots of material available on line that quantifies the value of the railroad, the mineral resources, and the territory. It's not hidden from view. Not sure what you consider to be rational.
BT CPSO 266 wjstixOne thing to (I hope) clarify a little...since Australia started as a group of disconnected colonies that eventually grew together, they have/had railways of three different gauges in different parts of the country.... Broad gauge: 5'-3" Standard gauge: 4'-8 1/2" Narrow gauge: 3'-6" We had something a little bit like that in America before the Civil War, particularly in the South, but except for a few places where narrow gauge lines were required because of the terrain (like the Colorado Rockies) most post-war US lines were either built to standard gauge (like the Transcontinental RR, which was required by Congress to be standard gauge) or converted to it. I thought the northern and southern states had their own separate but standard gauges. What happened when the Union army (northern states) conquered more ground? did they instantly upgrade the track gauge as they went along? Wasn't the union's secured victory the fact that the Battle of Atlanta took out the south's major railroad hub?
The South had a fair amount of broad gauge trackage before the war, and I think there was some narrow gauge too. There wasn't a separate northern gauge and southern gauge, although the north probably had a higher percentage standard gauge.
Seems to me the north was more interested in destroying the south's tracks than using them?? Making "Sherman's bowties" of the rails etc.
greyhounds Railway Man Greyhounds: I've had some professional involvment in the actual railroad and the economic development prospects of Alaska and the Yukon. The railroad owns the three docks in Skagway and built the docks. Not the government. There are three docks: the Railroad Dock, the Broadway Dock, and the Ore Dock. The railroad chose to make the rail in what is called the "Railroad Dock" to standard-gauge because it was in the process of standard-gauging the railroad to haul both freight and tourists, in order to reduce operating costs. It would reduce operating costs just for the tourist business alone. The railroad's parent company was acquired by another holding company, management was changed, and the standard-gauging project was canceled. All docks have indeed handled freight and that is why there is track in them. Not for tourist trains, though they could be used for that if anyone wanted. I've found the reality of public-private partnership, mining and mineral lands development, logistics, and railroading in Alaska and the Yukon to be extraordinarily difficult. There have been all number of people who have tried to impose ideals onto the situation from both ends of the political spectrum, both those who think that government should run everything and those who think government should run nothing. They come and go, but they leave their wreckage behind. I do not know of any idealists who have succeeded in accomplishing anything in Alaska and the Yukon other than delaying economic development. RWM OK. IIRC the train I got on was partially out on the pier to load passengers. It had three of those 800 HP GE shovel nose diesels. The locomotives were not on the pier. Only the passenger cars were shoved out by the ship. (I walked over and actually touched one of those little locomotives. I rode all the way to Canada on the open platform at the end of the car. Sure was fun.) Your post is the first I've heard of any plans that ever existed to convert the WP&Y to standard gauge. For a 110 mile long railroad running in to the "Middle of Nowhere" that would seem to make no sense at all. The only rational reason I can think of would be to move large quantaties of mine production to the port. If that was the reason, those tons couldn't have been efficiently handled on the pier I was on and that had the three rail "marginal" track. Rational minds seem to have prevailed. The WP&Y hasn't handled any significant amount of freight in almost 30 years. We disagree on government involvement in transportation. ( I never said the pier was built by government.) So be it. I regard your thoughts to be as much of an "Ideology" as you regard mine to be an "Ideology". No big deal. It's just a difference of opinion. I wish you and everyone else a Merry Chistmas, Happy New Year, and the best of luck and fortune in the future.
I don't quite understand why a railroad should be standar-gauge to move ore efficientliy. The South African Railways (Transnet) are hauling ore-trains on narrow-gauge (cape-gauge, 1067 mm) from Sishen to the Port of Saldana.
martin.knoepfelI don't quite understand why a railroad should be standar-gauge to move ore efficientliy. The South African Railways (Transnet) are hauling ore-trains on narrow-gauge (cape-gauge, 1067 mm) from Sishen to the Port of Saldana.
No one is saying a railway must be standard gauge to be efficient. (I am very familiar with the Saldanha Bay operation). However, operating and maintenance costs in North America are substantially less expensive for a standard-gauge operation than a narrow-gauge operation because it no longer requires custom-built locomotives, wagons, and maintenance-of-way machinery.
If one already has a built-up plant, such as Saldanha, the cost-benefit ratio of standard-gauging is small. But if one is starting essentially with nothing much more than a right-of-way, such as one would have with the WP&Y, and one has to put a great deal of investment into track structure and rolling stock to enable start-up of ore or coal transportation, then the cost-benefit ratio of standard gauge is very large. In other words, the model for a new rail transportation system in the Yukon, northern British Columbia, the western Northwest Territories, and Alaska is the Australian iron-ore lines, not Saldanha Bay. The existing gauge of the existing railway is an artifact, not a guide.
carnej1The 2 reasons put forth in recent years for rebuilding the White Pass to 4 Ft. 8 1/2 are the proposed Alaska Canada rail link(most proposals include a coonnection with the WP&Y) and building the line out into the Yukon to haul coal and ore to the docks at Skagway. Both are big "Ifs"...
The 2 reasons put forth in recent years for rebuilding the White Pass to 4 Ft. 8 1/2 are the proposed Alaska Canada rail link(most proposals include a coonnection with the WP&Y) and building the line out into the Yukon to haul coal and ore to the docks at Skagway. Both are big "Ifs"...
The first reason is indeed a big if. The second is not a big if, but merely a matter of time. There are substantial, defined mineral resources in the potential service basin. I have in front of me a chart that calculates exactly how many carloads of inbound material and outbound concentrate, coal, or ore, would flow from each mining operation. It's merely a matter of time until global exhaustion of lower-cost resources reduces the threshold where each one of these resources becomes economical to open. Large-scale mining on the Faro ore body resumed several years ago. If enough of these resources come on line, then a rail operation becomes the lowest cost method to move material and minerals between the mine and tidewater. Just like Australia, the Pocohontas coal region, British tram lines of the late 18th century, etc., there is no magic required, just market demand measured against extraction and transportation cost.
What type of mining operation would be used for this coal and ore, and what type of ore would be mined?
There are more than 30 economically significant major mineral resources that have been evaluated. Metallic ores of copper, zinc, lead, silver, gold, iron, molybdenum, tungsten, and cobalt are included. Mining methods would include underground and open pit. Potential underground methods include longwall, room and pillar, block caving, and shrinkage stope.
Bucyrus What type of mining operation would be used for this coal and ore, and what type of ore would be mined?
The document I posted the link to in an earlier post has lots of info about the current and proposed mining operations...
carnej1 Bucyrus What type of mining operation would be used for this coal and ore, and what type of ore would be mined? The document I posted the link to in an earlier post has lots of info about the current and proposed mining operations...
Thanks for posting that link. I am in the process of reading through it.
I noticed that the WP&Y says they are receptive to resuming freight operations, but they do not want to let it interfere with the tourist train operation. In that regard, they refer to allowing a time window for freight operations. This focus on the actual interference between passenger and freight trains would be one thing to consider. However, an integral part of the railroad asset that is being sold to the tourist market is the charm of the narrow gauge railroad with its tunnels, trestles, sharp curves, narrow cuts and fills, etc. If they were to renovate the line into a modern, standard gauge, heavy haul ore railroad, it seems like the charm would be lost.
I understand the advantage of using standard gauge locomotives, rolling stock, and MOW equipment. Aside from that issue, I can see there being a large cost in upgrading the narrow gauge line to handle heavy ore traffic. But standard gauging the line would impose the additional cost of a whole new roadbed structure, which would eliminate tunnels, bridges, sharp curves, steep grades, etc. in the course of attaining modern standard gauge specifications. If this were done, would sufficient mining come on line quick enough to justify the investment?
I have not read this part of the document, but how does it reconcile the replacement of the current WP&Y with a modern standard gauge freight railroad; against the effect it would have on the tourism passenger market?
BucyrusBut standard gauging the line would impose the additional cost of a whole new roadbed structure, which would eliminate tunnels, bridges, sharp curves, steep grades, etc. in the course of attaining modern standard gauge specifications. If this were done, would sufficient mining come on line quick enough to justify the investment?
How do you know that it would require a whole new roadbed or any aspect of this?
Perhaps it has zero effect. The average cruise ship passenger knows gauge from anything?
Railway Man BucyrusBut standard gauging the line would impose the additional cost of a whole new roadbed structure, which would eliminate tunnels, bridges, sharp curves, steep grades, etc. in the course of attaining modern standard gauge specifications. If this were done, would sufficient mining come on line quick enough to justify the investment? How do you know that it would require a whole new roadbed or any aspect of this? I have not read this part of the document, but how does it reconcile the replacement of the current WP&Y with a modern standard gauge freight railroad; against the effect it would have on the tourism passenger market? Perhaps it has zero effect. The average cruise ship passenger knows gauge from anything? RWM
I am just guessing that it would require lots of revisions. It seems to me that the narrow gauge concept is fundamentally intended to shoehorn track into places that were too tight for standard gauge, especially in mountainous terrain where the physical challenge of building a railroad would be the greatest. So I just figured that the WP&Y was built right up to the limit of curvature, clearances, and etc. for 3-foot-gauge, and those limits would have to be increased in order to become standard gauge.
I have never ridden the line, so I tend to visualize it from the photos, leaving the impression that the whole line is curves, tunnels, and trestles. But maybe that is just a small part of it, and the rest is wide-open territory where a standard gauge track could easily be substituted for narrow gauge.
Regarding the standard gauging having an effect on the tourist riders, I guess it depends on why they are riding the train. Perhaps most of them are only interested in the scenery and don’t care what the railroad looks like. As a tourist, I would not care about the operating efficiency of the railroad, but would rather see a railroad that seemed to be dramatically challenged by the terrain.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.