The worst bottlenecks -- one railroad crossing another railroad -- where are they? This is an informal, unscientific (but nonetheless valid) survey.
The two which pop first into my mind: Tower 55 in Ft. Worth and Colton Crossing at Colton, CA. Both are real dogs, costing the railroads whose tracks intersect untold aggrevation, wasted train time, and money. What other dogs come to mind?
A thought: It may be useful to separate Eastern bottlenecks from Western bottlenecks. Chicago seems more east than west.
Thank you for your responses.
''Worst'' in what sense ? For number of trains involved only, almost any commuter line will have a good chance to qualify to be on the list. Maybe a better criteria would be average minutes or cumulative hours of daily delay. Of course, the 'senior' = 1st railroad already there - which therefore should have priority - may have a much different view of this than the 'junior' = 2nd railroad there.
And even among freight railroads that cross freight railroads - how do we rank a crossing that has 20 trains on each route, vs. one that has 40 on 1 route and 10 on another ? What if a crossing has multiple tracks ?
Also, why not include/ allow/ count a crossing that's been reconstructed into an interlocking ? That has much the same effect . . .
Despite the above - yeah, this should be interesting. [Where's Chad's popcorn 'emoticon' ? ] It might also be helpful for each nominator to describe the submitted crossing in terms of the above, to provide a better 'feel' for it's characteristics.
- Paul North.
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
Paul_D_North_Jr ''Worst'' in what sense ? For number of trains involved only, almost any commuter line will have a good chance to qualify to be on the list. Maybe a better criteria would be average minutes or cumulative hours of daily delay. Of course, the 'senior' = 1st railroad already there - which therefore should have priority - may have a much different view of this than the 'junior' = 2nd railroad there. And even among freight railroads that cross freight railroads - how do we rank a crossing that has 20 trains on each route, vs. one that has 40 on 1 route and 10 on another ? What if a crossing has multiple tracks ? Also, why not include/ allow/ count a crossing that's been reconstructed into an interlocking ? That has much the same effect . . . Despite the above - yeah, this should be interesting. [Where's Chad's popcorn 'emoticon' ? ] It might also be helpful for each nominator to describe the submitted crossing in terms of the above, to provide a better 'feel' for it's characteristics. - Paul North.
Good questions. Was thinking of any crossing for which a grade separation could be justified. This would include locations in commuter territory, out in the boondocks -- anywhere. Regarding crossings for which one railroad supplies X trains per day and the other(s) supply 2X or even 3X trains, I suppose the total train count, regardless of direction would govern. What of spots where freight and passenger (Amtrak or commuter, doesn't matter) cross? And multiple tracks? Same criterion. Ditto for hotshots versus locals, transfers, etc.
One of the worst crossings, but the best trainwatching sights in Memphis,Tenn. was the 'Railroad Avenue' area in the southern part of the downtown. At one time in there were two Stations that intersected the multiple track trunk that ran East for a couple miles from the Mississippi River Bridges, the North-South IC crossed it and controled the diamonds south of Central Station and a half mile East was the stub-end station of Union Terminal (RR&Station). It was home of passenger trains of the NC&St.L/ L&N/Southern/MoPac/ RI.
The East West traffic Crossing traffic was contoled by IC RR and at theat time there was a a number of passenger trains on their line; freight traffic was heavy until the IC's Eastern ByPass was improved and relieved the congestion,somewhat downtown. It was crossed by EastWest traffic from the Rock Is ( Yard and Freight house was 3/4 mi east. Frisco which came out of Yale Yard about 5 miles East and crossed the Mississippi on its own bridge. The MoPac from Sergent Yard about 3 Miles East. The IC had a Roundhouse Just South from the Crossing about a mile, Their major Facility was about 4 miles south at Johnson(Johnston) between pronunciation and actuallity were vast differences(?). Startng in the mid 1960's the trainwatching became problematic with the deterioration of the downtown area and it's neighborhoods.
I'd hope that maybe a current resident of the area might weigh in about conditions now with what traffic conditions are presently. MY very favorite spot was with the MoPac Bridge watchman at his shack at PP Ave and Auction. Very Safe( he was armed and had a radio to communicate with the trainmen, if needed).
CShaveRRTo hear Metra tell it, the IHB crossings at Chicago Ridge and Argo are real pains--that Argo crossing has been blamed for causing Metra to not consider expanding frequency on its Heritage Corridor, and CREATE is going to be fixing them both, eventually. But the crossing at McCook is right next to the one at Argo, and you (I) don't hear about it being a real problem for BNSF trains.
The Ridge? I am sure a good chat between the folks at Jackson and the DS team in Hammond would solve any issues. Usually Metra brass has their way in such issues. I recall in the late 80's when CNW's Night Crawler would stab trains on the Wabash in the AM. Especially when they had 120+ cars and two geeps.
It was not all that long ago that Brighton Park was a pain in the neck for Amtrak. As was Landers and Forest Hill for Metra. Since GTW has changed operations, I am sure Landers s no issue now a days, and same with B&OCT.
I am sure there are some locations in KC that just cause indigestion for DS and crews alike on a daily basis.
One crossing that can be quite the pain in the backside doesn't cross another railroad. It crosses a river. The Mississippi River crossing at Clinton can sometimes back things up for a few hours.
It really gets bad when something breaks and the bridge is locked in the open position until they can get it repaired. They keep a boat handy for just such emergencies.
Plans to replace it with a higher fixed structure must've been placed on the back burner. I haven't heard anything about it for a while now.
Jeff
jeffhergert One crossing that can be quite the pain in the backside doesn't cross another railroad. It crosses a river. The Mississippi River crossing at Clinton can sometimes back things up for a few hours. It really gets bad when something breaks and the bridge is locked in the open position until they can get it repaired. They keep a boat handy for just such emergencies. Plans to replace it with a higher fixed structure must've been placed on the back burner. I haven't heard anything about it for a while now.
Since the replacement Clinton crossing bridge spans a Coast Guard-maintained waterway, and because a wider navigable channel underneath would change the characteristics of that waterway, UP cannot replace this obsolete rascal alone: it would need Coast Guard (and all the other rubber-stamp bureaucracies') concurrence to proceed. Plus it would sure be nice for UP to have other party/parties step in and pick up a hefty chunk of the capital cost (are you listening, USCG?).
My (admittedly limited) understanding of the project is that it probably ranks as high on the Coast Guard's fix-it wish list as it does on UP's, owing to the sheer number of vessels that bounce off the bridge pilings: as is, the structure poses a legitimate threat to navigation. The State of Iowa applied for TIGR funds to replace it, but it competed for funding against a whole bunch of other, probably worthy, projects their application got shot down. Perhaps the work on the Burlington Bridge downriver was what Iowa received, but that's just my supposition. The plans for the replacement structure called for grade separating the UP main line on the Iowa side over the CP line parallelling the river. Definitely an improved design! With luck, maybe it will get funded within the next five years. But I'm not holding my breath....
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.