diningcar (8-19):
Thanks for replying so quickly. You gave me much to digest.
About that "wye" situation in Ash Fork, AZ ... a MapQuest link to an aerial follows.
http://mapq.st/h/2-M2ZU
The left part of the wye on the aerial's right looks like it goes through another wye on the left, and continues westward on an abandoned right-of-way to the west part of town.
That abandoned right-of-way goes through even a third wye on the west side of town before it realigns with the traditional abandoned Transcon line on the west side of town. That third wye is visible by moving the map leftward (west) a few thousand scale feet.
The history of lines is a fascinating subject in itself, if that history is retrievable. Like in Cajon Pass here in California. Many railfans and railroaders don't know the present three-track line railroad west of CP CAJON up until the 1940's was on the camera side of the below bridged creek.
Anyway, let me digest the rest of your reply. The forum is fortunate to have someone like you that actually worked on the Arizona line relocation and is willing let his experience and knowledge be tapped!
Thanks so much.
Paul D. North, Jr. (8-19):
That was something new (at least for me) about insulating clips. I wonder if they act is a wear cushion?
For years the railroads have done without them (at least around here). So, it would be interesting to find out the logic in them now.
K.P.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
diningcarThe 'A' designation is also used where the two main lines are not parallel and the most recently constructed line will have 'A' MP's. Near to you, as an example, would be the Ash Hill location east of Ludlow, CA.
K. P. Harrier [snip] These items struck me as rail joint insulators, but I don't know ... I never had seen a pile of such before. [snip]
[snip]
They're insulators, alright, but not for rail joints - they fit between the rust-brown spring clips in the 2 bags at the upper left of your photo, and the rail, so as to better insulate the rails from the concrete ties and hence from each other for proper functioning of the signal system. I'll see if I can find a link or close-up photo of them in use so you can see how they work.
- Paul North.
EDIT: P.S. - Those spring clips look like the U3220 by Unit Rail Mfg. as I suspected, and here's the link to their webpage for clips, insulators and related products:
http://www.unitrail.com/concrete_steel_ties.html
- PDN.
KP, the following will attempt to answer your inquirys(s).
The entire Transcon from Barstow to Belen now has CTC which permits the DS to run all trains, on either main line, in any direction, crossing them over and back by controlling the signals and power switches, and using radio communication. The 44 mile line change instituted this with reverse # 24 crossovers at Williams Jct, Perrin, Double, Eagle Nest and at Crookton.
Santa Fe's practice has been, where there is a substantial variance from a 5280 mile to use the A suffix and then revert to the existing Mile Posts. In this situation the new line is longer than the former by 3016. The 'A' designation is also used where the two main lines are not parallel and the most recently constructed line will have 'A' MP's. Near to you, as an example, would be the Ash Hill location east of Ludlow, CA.
I can only speculate about the material stockpiles at Seligman. The old high star switch stands would seem to have been salvaged from yard tracks being removed. If this assumption is correct then it would likely follow that the other materials came from similar projects (or the same one) and the stockpile is at a convinient location to store material where they may be under some security and be picked up later.
I see two wyes at Ash Fork about 1/2 mile apart but do not see the 'overlay' you mention. Perhaps the two I see can be explained by knowing the history there. When the line to Phoenix from Ash Fork was originally built (1890's) it connected to the Santa Fe main line (single track then) at the east side of Ash Fork. As is evident, the Phoenix line now leaves Ash Fork at the west end of town. So it is possible (likely) that the wye at the east side was located to facilitate the reversing of Phoenix equipment. It could have served the additional purpose of being the main line wye.
The wye located north of and opposite the main body of the Ash Fork yard was the 2nd wye and had the Stock yards located along it. This wye appears in the 1916 Ash Fork Station map (1" = 100') while the other one does not; and the Phoenix connection is at the west end of Ash Fork on the 1916 map.
Assistance from other forumists is solicited and follow-up questions welcome.
diningcar, et al (8-14):
Aerials have been studied, but they have been inconclusive regard direction of travels and any reversals of biases. It is hard to comprehend biases change just through crossovers and not some type of physical way of getting one track over or under another. My list of to-dos has just expanded (i.e., to visit Arizona and New Mexico). It has been so long since I had an accurate mental overview of the Transcon in those two states everything over there is foggy in my mind.
Anyway ... While coming into Seligman, AZ this past quick trip, at CP EAST SELIGMAN a staging area of some sort was observed and photographed.
These items struck me as rail joint insulators, but I don't know ... I never had seen a pile of such before.
There has been some mention in this thread about the old Cajon Pass tunnels. The any that need a visual, the below photo of where the tunnels use to be is offered.
About mileposts ... Am I correct in understanding that the 1960 relocated Arizona line does not have mileposts suffixed "A" but only the last one, M.P. 418A, which is the second M.P. 418, and from M.P. 418A to M.P. 419 it is only a distance of 3016 ft.?
And, then there is Ash Fork ...
The below photo looks east at the once double-track Los Angele-Chicago thru-line, with only one track remaining that eventually ends up in Phoenix, AZ. View looks east towards Chicago.
Aerials of that east side of Ash Fork above show where a removed wye kind of overlaid another removed wye! I have never seen anything like that before!
Your reply to any of the above, diningcar, surely would be most enlightening.
Thanks,
diningcar timzThe line now referred to as the Transcon-- SFe LA to Chicago via Amarillo-- did have just the one tunnel (Johnson Canyon) for a few years after it was completed. Actually when the Jonhson Canyon tunnel was complete, 1882, the Transcon through Amarillo did not exist. That line through Belen was open for operation in 1908. In 1882 the route over Raton pass was the only "transcon' connection to the east, and of course the Los Angeles connection occured in 1885 via Cajon Pass.
timzThe line now referred to as the Transcon-- SFe LA to Chicago via Amarillo-- did have just the one tunnel (Johnson Canyon) for a few years after it was completed.
Actually when the Jonhson Canyon tunnel was complete, 1882, the Transcon through Amarillo did not exist. That line through Belen was open for operation in 1908.
In 1882 the route over Raton pass was the only "transcon' connection to the east, and of course the Los Angeles connection occured in 1885 via Cajon Pass.
The Cajon tunnels were built circa 1913, so from 1908 to 1913 "the line now referred to as the Transcon" had one tunnel. (The Nelson tunnel dates from ... 1923?)
LNER4472 and, yes, the "only tunnel on the Santa Fe Transcon" did indeed depend on your ability to ignore Raton Pass and other such routes.
So how does the Cajon Tunnels fit into this thought back in the era under discussion...? Wern't these bores on the "Transcon".....
Quentin
The line now referred to as the Transcon-- SFe LA to Chicago via Amarillo-- did have just the one tunnel (Johnson Canyon) for a few years after it was completed.
There's a danged good reason vehicles are restricted on the stretch between Skull Valley and Iron Springs/Prieta: It's entirely possible to inadvertently drive right off a 120-foot-high abutment for the now-missing Ramsgate Trestle. The locals say someone has managed to do it. Once. And approaching the abutments from either direction, it's not as visible as it should be, even on foot.
The aforementioned tunnel (along with the adjacent trestle before it was filled in) has been referred to as both Fairview and Johnson Canyon; we managed to duplicate a few Santa Fe publicity photos from the area with a Jeep Cherokee subbing for the Super Chief...... and, yes, the "only tunnel on the Santa Fe Transcon" did indeed depend on your ability to ignore Raton Pass and other such routes.
LNER4472 When I have more time and/or figure out if I can upload images here, I'll come back with some photos to share.
When I have more time and/or figure out if I can upload images here, I'll come back with some photos to share.
.....I'm sure most of us on here will be happy to see additional photos.
Paul_D_North_JrRemember basic geometry - "3 points - not on the same line - can define a plane" ? As long as the location and elevation of at least 3 points in each photo are known to within a couple tenths or even hundredths of a foot, the technician can match them up enough to establish the 3-D relationship between the successive photos and the terrain.
Thanks for additional info Paul....and yes, I've seen the "X panels" right here in our addition. Some time ago, several manhole covers contained large white color "X's"....and someone had noted they were for aerial survey.
LNER4472Way on back off the roads is Fairview Tunnel, the ONLY tunnel on the entire Santa Fe Transcon until it was bypassed by the Crookton Cutoff and the rebuild of the Peavine. And then there's the old line west of Prescott, with 3.5% grades.
This tunnel is usually called the Johnson Canyon tunnel and is the one I mentioned earlier where high/wide loads could not clear and had to be sent against normal traffic.
Also, there were additional tunnels: you limit it to the Transcon so I assume you are talking about the Santa Fe after the Belen cutoff was opened in 1908 and Raton does not count in that case. The short tunnels on Cajon pass certainly qualify even though they were recently eliminated with the triple tracking project. And there remains the tunnels at Nelson, 31 miles west of Seligman.
Yes the abandoned line west from Prescott is worth a look but is currently substantially restricted for on road vehicles, and some off road vehicles restrictions also apply.
I'm a little late to this cracker barrel.
When I was last out in Arizona in 2008, my brothers-in-law, experienced 4WD/Jeep drivers, and I did some navigation of the old Santa Fe Transcon.
You missed the good ones.
Way on back off the roads is Fairview Tunnel, the ONLY tunnel on the entire Santa Fe Transcon until it was bypassed by the Crookton Cutoff and the rebuild of the Peavine. And then there's the old line west of Prescott, with 3.5% grades.
Modelcar [snip] How can an aerial {one dimension} photo supply enough data to create a Topo map....? And how is an accurate Topo map really created....To record the rise and fall every two ft. of a landscape, must require a lot of input data. And somehow that has to be gathered.....and to have it over a wide expanse of desert open space....??
And how is an accurate Topo map really created....To record the rise and fall every two ft. of a landscape, must require a lot of input data. And somehow that has to be gathered.....and to have it over a wide expanse of desert open space....??
Some very quick, brief, and hence summary and not totally comprehensive answers to Quentin/ modelcar's questions above
1. Quite correct, Quentin - a single photo can't - at least 2 are needed, with significant overlaps, like more than 50 %, so that almost each point is shown on at least 2 photos. That is done by taking many photos a few seconds apart, almost like a movie camera on very large film. They are/ were then viewed separately through a 'stereoscope', with 1 eye looking through each lens at each photo, to create a '3-D' effect, which the technician - now a calibrated machine - uses to locate and plot the contour lines.
2. Remember basic geometry - "3 points - not on the same line - can define a plane" ? As long as the location and elevation of at least 3 points in each photo are known to within a couple tenths or even hundredths of a foot, the technician can match them up enough to establish the 3-D relationship between the successive photos and the terrain.
Often, 'panels' of white 'X's and 'T's are placed in the field before the aerial photos are taken, so that they appear in the photos - you may have seen those along roads from time to time. They are accurately located by survey instruments as input data to support the mapping/ plotting operation.
If such panels are not used, certain other 'photo-visible' points can often be used instead - utility poles, manholes, corners of patios and sidewalks, and parking lot stripes, etc. are favorites, although those might have been scarce out there for the Santa Fe's project. Then, the technicians can 'bridge' between the successive photos by using common points - essentially analogous to graphically solving a series of simultaneous equations, as long as there's enough data to do that.
For a project of this size, I would estimate that a minimum of about 3 to 5 points per square mile mapped would have been required to be located in the field. As quick comparison, a few years ago both Lehigh and Northampton Counties were aerial-mapped at the same time for 1'' = 100' scale maps and 5' contour intervals for GIS maps - and I understand that only 65 points or so were needed to provide a sufficient number of 'control' points for several hundred square miles of farmland and cities that are included within them.
dknelson Thanks much to the various posting forum members for this interesting and well documented railroad archeology tutorial. You don;t have to be an Arizona resident or ATSF fan to find all of this quite interesting. Dave Nelson
Thanks much to the various posting forum members for this interesting and well documented railroad archeology tutorial. You don;t have to be an Arizona resident or ATSF fan to find all of this quite interesting.
Dave Nelson
Dave,
If you're interested in some follow-up reading on this huge, remarkable project ($22 million used to be a lot of money!), I would suggest any of the following:
Pacific Rail News, September 1992, pp.18-23
The Warbonnet (Santa Fe Ry. Hist. & Modeling Soc.), 1998/#2, pp. 19-31
Railroads of Arizona, Vol. 4, by David Myrick, pp. 245-54
Enjoy.
-garyla
diningcar [snip] the maps we had in the field were 1" = 100' horizontal scale and the contours were at two (2) foot intervals. Those of you who use such tools can quickly agree what substantial help these were. [snip]
Oh, yeah - that would be just about perfect for the task, considering the distances and grades involved. Actually, for the steeper slopes a 2 ft. contour interval at 1'' = 100' scale might be too close - 5' or 10' might be more appropriate. For example, if it's a 45-degree slope that rises 100' in 100 ft. forward, that would be 50 of those 2-foot contour lines in the 1'' on the print - they'd be 1/50 of an inch = 2/ 100th's = 0.020'' apart, which is pretty tight.
Even today, until recently for residential subdivision and medium-size land development work - say, from 100 to 500 acres, or about 1/4 to 1 square mile - in this eastern Pennsylvania area a horizontal scale of 1' = 50' and a 2' contour interval was quite common. But after some problems with accurately estimating earthwork quantities and planning road connections, about 15 years ago my current employer started asking for 1 ft. contour intervals for mapping for that purpose, which was uncommon then and is still so to some degree. Even there, we specify and ask for or will accept 5 or 10 ft contour intervals for the steeper slopes, to keep the prints legible and usable. Of course, now that those maps are all digital, we instead simply ''turn off'' or ''freeze'' the smaller contour interval 'layers' when working with the resulting maps, unless until we actually need that level of detail someplace.
diningcar The process is photogrammetry of which I have little knowledge. By the way, this was not desert but a mountainess volcanic area with basalt and volcanic cinders overlaying sedimentary sandstone and limestome. Very difficult to determine what might be down below so we had to drill test holes to determine what slopes(s) to create; and we were still surprised after we opened up the large cuts to find we must re-engineer and lay the slopes back. Those who looked at the MK film can get some idea of the many problems-surprises we had to deal with
The process is photogrammetry of which I have little knowledge.
By the way, this was not desert but a mountainess volcanic area with basalt and volcanic cinders overlaying sedimentary sandstone and limestome. Very difficult to determine what might be down below so we had to drill test holes to determine what slopes(s) to create; and we were still surprised after we opened up the large cuts to find we must re-engineer and lay the slopes back.
Those who looked at the MK film can get some idea of the many problems-surprises we had to deal with
Yes, I thought about that when I wrote "desert" as the landscape.....I noted in the excellent film / video of the construction, that was posted, the ROW was put thru nasty rock cuts and plenty of fills, etc......
Modelcar .....One more question: {Well, maybe two}.... How can an aerial {one dimension} photo supply enough data to create a Topo map....? And how is an accurate Topo map really created....To record the rise and fall every two ft. of a landscape, must require a lot of input data. And somehow that has to be gathered.....and to have it over a wide expanse of desert open space....??
.....One more question: {Well, maybe two}....
How can an aerial {one dimension} photo supply enough data to create a Topo map....?
Those who looked at the MK film can get some idea of the many problems-surprises we had to deal with.
garyla, first a correction-addition to the details of the maps we used;
the maps we had in the field were 1" = 100' horizontal scale and the contours were at two (2) foot intervals. Those of you who use such tools can quickly agree what substantial help these were.
A California company flew the routes and made the maps but I cannot furnish their name.
diningcar ACTUALLY Santa Fe had their own maps created by a private service which flew over the possible routes and created 1' - 100 ft contour intervals. These were then provided to field parties and were used in locating the ' final line'. All government Bench Marks and and brass caps with land line ties were on these 1'= 100 maps. We surveyors were able to very accurately establish elevations and alignment with this current information in very remote and pristine wilderness.timz tomikawaTT The mid-20th century survey started with USGS topo maps which weren't even a dreamland artifact 70-odd years earlier.I wonder how much they bothered studying the 1:250,000 maps-- which I suspect were all USGS had done by then. Offhand I'll guess MP 418A is a mile west of new-line MP 418. No reason to expect it to be at the junction.
ACTUALLY Santa Fe had their own maps created by a private service which flew over the possible routes and created 1' - 100 ft contour intervals. These were then provided to field parties and were used in locating the ' final line'. All government Bench Marks and and brass caps with land line ties were on these 1'= 100 maps. We surveyors were able to very accurately establish elevations and alignment with this current information in very remote and pristine wilderness.
timz tomikawaTT The mid-20th century survey started with USGS topo maps which weren't even a dreamland artifact 70-odd years earlier.I wonder how much they bothered studying the 1:250,000 maps-- which I suspect were all USGS had done by then. Offhand I'll guess MP 418A is a mile west of new-line MP 418. No reason to expect it to be at the junction.
tomikawaTT The mid-20th century survey started with USGS topo maps which weren't even a dreamland artifact 70-odd years earlier.
Offhand I'll guess MP 418A is a mile west of new-line MP 418. No reason to expect it to be at the junction.
diningcar, the part about aerial photography caught my attention.
Do you perhaps know the name of the firm which did the aerial surveys? My family's business used to operate next door to Pacific Air Industries in Long Beach, California. PAI was founded early after World War II by a group of ex-Navy pilots and did a lot of such work around the West. It was later bought out and became Teledyne Geotronics.
diningcarKP, it's always a pleasure to discuss RR specifics with someone who wishes to know the more obscure details.
KP, it's always a pleasure to discuss RR specifics with someone who wishes to know the more obscure details.
KP's not the only one enjoying what you have to say about the line change. Even though I'm an EE, the "obscure" details are quite fascinating.
- Erik
Kootenay CentralThe following pertains starting at approx 8:20.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QCQt_5hO5Q
.....Thanks for the video. This really shows it wasn't an easy route to create. Lots of money..! And engineering.
Thank You.
Thanks for the pictures and info. Back in June-August of 2001 I did a Route 66 trip from Chicago to Santa Monica. Spent about ten days between Winslow and Kingman on 66 and saw the old transcon as you show but didn't know for sure that was it. In my nosing around I came across a what I think was a DASH 8 in peices on the side of the main line just east of Williams. Took a few 35mm photo's but would need directions on how to post them. It looked like it caught fire, the engine had been pulled off the frame and was setting on the ground. Looked like it had been there a while it was rusted up a bit.
KP, it's always a pleasure to discuss RR specifics with someone who wishes to know the more obscure details. Your continuing story of the UP double tracking project has kept my interest, thank you.
The Williams -Crookton line change was not designed to obtain any specific distance. Quite the opposite, it was designed to achieve the maximum 1% grades and to have no curves exceeding one degree and to "take on" whatever was in the way. As it turned out the new line was 3016 feet longer than the old and therefore MP 418A is 5280 feet from MP 418 on the new line. MP 418A is then 3016 feet distant from MP 419.
By the way, the engineering design criteria, partially described above, resulted in a 31 mile continuous 1% declining grade westward from Williams Jct. to Eagle Nest where an ascending grade of 0.88 % was engineered. To mitigate slack action a 10,000 foot verticle curve was engineered at this location.
To accomplish maximum operating efficiency the 44+ mile new line had CTC and # 24 turnouts so that trains could cross between tracks at Williams Jct.; Perrin; Doublea; Eagle Nest and Crookton. The left hand running bias could be established at any of these locations. Now of course the entire Transcon from San Bernardino to Belen is CTC.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.