UP has been letting Tennesee pass in Colorado go to crap and it looks like it won't change a bit. I heard from an engineer that used to work on BNSF who spoke with a UP Worker that Tennesee pass might be sold off to BNSF. Inspectors have said that the tunnels are Intermodal Approoved.
I really hope someone grows the balls to take on the challenge!
The last time we saw the route, there were lots of stored coal hoppers between Parkdale and Texas Creek on sidings and the main track. There have been rumors about the future of this route for years.
Never know what could happen. After all the former Erie across SW New York is active again - so anything could happen.
Weeds can be deceptive.
Lots of people have the cojones - it's the $$$s that have to be found to justify and support it.
Notably, the ROW and most of the track is still intact. Compare the history of Stampede Pass a few hundred miles to the northwest, and the 'Muleshoe' / New Portage RR line that was parallel to Horse Shoe Curve in west-central Pennsylvania. ''Never saw never . . .''.
If rail business really booms and the other major transcontinental lines become really congested with very profitable traffic, then reactivating Tennesse Pass might be warranted - but most likely only for empty 'bare-table' or unit train moves that have a comparatively low weight to drag up and brake down the mountain, and a low priority so that the time for the round-about route is not too much of a penalty, or traffic that either orginates or is destined to someplace near it, etc. The line costs comparatively little to keep it 'as-is', and the cost to reactivate it would be relative 'peanuts' to adding another track for a couple hundred miles along another route else to get the equivalent in capacity increase. So I'd say it's not a question of 'if', but more like 'when' that will occur - which could be 20 years out. Find one of those rail traffic density/ capacity maps that were published as the result of a study a couple years ago, and see which routes that are projected to be near or over-capacity in 10 or 20 years would benefit from reactivating this line - then you'll have a better idea of how likely it is.
There have been extensive discussions about Tennessee Pass here before, usually about once a year or so. For the best and most informed of them, look for the threads with posts by Railway Man.
- Paul North.
I would be very surprised to see a reactivation of Tennessee Pass by UP or anyone else.
The posts on this subject talk a lot about the Tennessee Pass route, but they ignore how the route fits in with current main line routings. If Tennessee Pass were reactiveated, where would the traffic moving over it come from or go to? Tennessee Pass traffic was historically tied into the MoPac route east of Pueblo (DRGW got trackage rights over this line in the UP-MP merger). That routing is no longer available. Without an eastern connection at Pueblo, the Tennessee Pass line is useless. Routing Tennessee Pass traffic on the Joint Line north of Pueblo isn't an option because that route is already congested. Tennessee Pass would only be a realistic option if there were some way to tie it into the UP Kansas Pacific line without using the Joint Line.
One other observation with respect to possible interest in BNSF in Tennessee Pass. In order for BNSF to use Tennessee Pass, they would have to operate over the still active UP portion of the route between Canon City and Pueblo. ATSF historically had trackage right over this route (acquired in connection with the abandonment of ATSF's own Pueblo - Canon City route). However, about 10 years or so ago, BNSF sold these right to a short line (Rock & Rail). To my knowledge, they didn't reserve an option to re-acquire them. The fact that BNSF surrrendered these rights is a pretty good indiction that BNSF doesn't see the TP route as strategically valuable.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.