Trains.com

Montana Coal and the Milwaukee Road

21260 views
134 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 10:48 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

Can someone explain why the PCE cost something like 3 times times the "estimated" cost? .... How did they miss it by so far?

It didn't and they didn't.

It cost $99 million to complete the mainline and related construction, tunnels, bridges, yards, depots, etc., by the close of the construction era, August 1, 1909. This was about $14 million more than the engineering estimate. MILW's PCE cost less to construct than any other transcontinental, primarily because of technology and mutliple railheads. That final "cost" also included equipment, and if that is deducted, the construction "estimate" was very close to the final actual construction cost.

Best regards, Michael Sol


OK. I'm going to have go look that one up. I've read that phrase "triple the estimate" in several different sources. Things that make you go hmmmm.......

Thanks

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    October 2004
  • 3,190 posts
Posted by MichaelSol on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 10:39 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

Can someone explain why the PCE cost something like 3 times times the "estimated" cost? .... How did they miss it by so far?

It didn't and they didn't.

It cost $99 million to complete the mainline and related construction, tunnels, bridges, yards, depots, etc., by the close of the construction era, August 1, 1909. This was about $14 million more than the engineering estimate. MILW's PCE cost less to construct than any other transcontinental, primarily because of technology and mutliple railheads. That final "cost" also included equipment, and if that is deducted, the construction "estimate" was very close to the final actual construction cost.

Best regards, Michael Sol
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 10:03 PM
Can someone explain why the PCE cost something like 3 times times the "estimated" cost? By 1906, there had been several transcons built over the big mountains. It should have been much easier for CMSP&P to figure how much it would cost, than for the railroads that went much sooner. How did they miss it by so far?

Thanks

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 8:11 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

Perhaps the abandonment of Deer Lodge Pass is closer than we expect. Apparently UP is interested in selling the line but has doubts anyone would buy the line account the legal climate in Montana regarding injuries to railroaders.

http://www.montanastandard.com/articles/2005/09/23/newsbutte_top/newsbutte_top.txt


Didn't MRL once make a bid for the Silver Bow line, but BN blocked it? Obviously, MRL would be the logical takeover entity, but if BNSF is set on keeping MRL and UP from having interchange, then I cannot think of any other buyer ('cept maybe BNSF itself, and that would mean an invader into UP's sole territory of Southern Idaho.) Maybe BNSF and UP have made one of those "smoke filled room" backdoor deals: BNSF stays outa UP's Southern Idaho and UP exits from BNSF's Montana.


What the UP does with their line in S. Montana is pretty simple. If it does not make an adequate return on investment they will dump the line. It is easier to do if a shortline operator is interested. If an operator is not interested the line gets scrapped. Montana can scream about an abandoment all they want but the money talks. The line probably should have been dumped when Butte shut down many years ago.


Aye, there's the rub. Certainly a shortline outfit would be willing to invest in the line if they were allowed to maximize it's revenue potential acting as a bridge line between UP and MRL. The whole I-15 corridor has great potential to be a major NAFTA rail route.

But of course neither UP nor BNSF will allow that to happen. One or the other will bottleneck it to death, and utlimately the line would be scrapped.

Now more than ever this nation needs anti-trust laws to be applied and enforced against the rail oligarchy. Otherwise we'll lose everything that makes Class I's useful to the nation, and all we'll be left with (in terms of railroad competitive pricing) are the Chinese import corridors.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Crozet, VA
  • 1,049 posts
Posted by bobwilcox on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 6:20 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

Perhaps the abandonment of Deer Lodge Pass is closer than we expect. Apparently UP is interested in selling the line but has doubts anyone would buy the line account the legal climate in Montana regarding injuries to railroaders.

http://www.montanastandard.com/articles/2005/09/23/newsbutte_top/newsbutte_top.txt


Didn't MRL once make a bid for the Silver Bow line, but BN blocked it? Obviously, MRL would be the logical takeover entity, but if BNSF is set on keeping MRL and UP from having interchange, then I cannot think of any other buyer ('cept maybe BNSF itself, and that would mean an invader into UP's sole territory of Southern Idaho.) Maybe BNSF and UP have made one of those "smoke filled room" backdoor deals: BNSF stays outa UP's Southern Idaho and UP exits from BNSF's Montana.


What the UP does with their line in S. Montana is pretty simple. If it does not make an adequate return on investment they will dump the line. It is easier to do if a shortline operator is interested. If an operator is not interested the line gets scrapped. Montana can scream about an abandoment all they want but the money talks. The line probably should have been dumped when Butte shut down many years ago.
Bob
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, September 26, 2005 9:08 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

Perhaps the abandonment of Deer Lodge Pass is closer than we expect. Apparently UP is interested in selling the line but has doubts anyone would buy the line account the legal climate in Montana regarding injuries to railroaders.

http://www.montanastandard.com/articles/2005/09/23/newsbutte_top/newsbutte_top.txt


Didn't MRL once make a bid for the Silver Bow line, but BN blocked it? Obviously, MRL would be the logical takeover entity, but if BNSF is set on keeping MRL and UP from having interchange, then I cannot think of any other buyer ('cept maybe BNSF itself, and that would mean an invader into UP's sole territory of Southern Idaho.) Maybe BNSF and UP have made one of those "smoke filled room" backdoor deals: BNSF stays outa UP's Southern Idaho and UP exits from BNSF's Montana.
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • 910 posts
Posted by arbfbe on Monday, September 26, 2005 8:52 PM
Perhaps the abandonment of Deer Lodge Pass is closer than we expect. Apparently UP is interested in selling the line but has doubts anyone would buy the line account the legal climate in Montana regarding injuries to railroaders.

http://www.montanastandard.com/articles/2005/09/23/newsbutte_top/newsbutte_top.txt
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, September 26, 2005 8:37 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

It would seem from readings with the NPRHA, the NP considered Deer Lodge Pass but opted to go to Helena for political reasons as well as engineering considerations.

I have not ever heard about the CM&PS considering the Deer Lodge Pass route but I am sure they must have given it a look since its location was well known..

The fact that Deer Lodge Pass survives has more to do with big picture considerations than engineering realities. If the UP had decided to abandon an presence in Montana as the MILW did then Deer Lodge would have sufferred the same fate as Pipestone and St Paul Passes. Homestake Pass lost it's usefulness when there was no need to retain it for passenger train service and Elk Park Pass was a gonner when the GN merged with the NP. The UP could easily walk away from Butte/Silver Bow tomorrow and Deer Lodge Pass would just become another footnote to Montana railroad history .


According to The Northern Pacific by Charles Wood, the NP seriously considered Mullan, Little Pipestone, and Deer Lodge passes. "Chief Engineer Roberts selected Deer Lodge because, although it lengthened the route by 40 miles, it required no summet tunnel, but his successor, General Adna Anderson changed the location to Mullan Pass." (p. 29)

Why the Milwaukee ended up using Little Pipestone Pass is probably better answered by Mr. Sol. I am guessing that the Milwaukee had chosen Butte apriori as the dividing line between the eastern and western segments of the PCE, and once the route over the Jawbone was finalized, the Milwaukee seems to have had the same three choices as the NP 40 years earlier, e.g. Pipestone, Deer Lodge, or Mullan. (I'm not sure about Homestake, when did NP build over this route?)

I will add Elk Park Pass since this pass was now a known commodity. It may be that since both Deer Lodge and Mullan were both occupied, Pipestone was the *logical* choice. But if routing the mainline through Butte was not apriori, then the logical routing for a line touted as being the "shortest line to the PNW" would have been to parallel NP between Lombard all the way to Haugen by going over Mullan Pass. If Butte was still deemed apriori, then perhaps the best route would have been Elk Park Pass, with a route from Lombard west over the Warm Springs plateau to Boulder, where the line could parallel GN's Butte line. Elk Park Pass may have the best westbound approach gradewise to the Continental Divide, better than Marias Pass, allowing a shorter line than Pipestone with no need for a summit tunnel.

Thus, if elimination of the need for a summit tunnel is a priority, then I think Elk Park Pass would have been a better choice for the Butte-bound Milwaukee than Deer Lodge.
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • 910 posts
Posted by arbfbe on Saturday, September 24, 2005 5:29 PM
It would seem from readings with the NPRHA, the NP considered Deer Lodge Pass but opted to go to Helena for political reasons as well as engineering considerations.

I have not ever heard about the CM&PS considering the Deer Lodge Pass route but I am sure they must have given it a look since its location was well known..

The fact that Deer Lodge Pass survives has more to do with big picture considerations than engineering realities. If the UP had decided to abandon an presence in Montana as the MILW did then Deer Lodge would have sufferred the same fate as Pipestone and St Paul Passes. Homestake Pass lost it's usefulness when there was no need to retain it for passenger train service and Elk Park Pass was a gonner when the GN merged with the NP. The UP could easily walk away from Butte/Silver Bow tomorrow and Deer Lodge Pass would just become another footnote to Montana railroad history .
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: NotIn, TX
  • 617 posts
Posted by VerMontanan on Saturday, September 24, 2005 1:29 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol

Presumably the line would have met with the Sun River branch of the Milwaukee at about Fairfield, then used the Great Falls-Lewistown line that was built in 1914, then east to Grass Range on new construction in cooperation with GN, then connecting the mainline at Melstone. This would have shortened MILW's Chicago/Seattle run by about 115 miles on a significantly easier grade.

Best regards, Michael Sol


This is interesting. The route MILW route mileage between Melstone and Missoula was 410. The current mileage on US 12 between Melstone and Missoula is 346, so this "what if" route over Cadotte Pass at 295 miles(410 minus the 115 mile saving) would be about 50 miles shorter than today's highway route. All the more interesting is when one considers that MILW mileage from Winnett to Great Falls (195) plus the the current highway mileage (167) from Great Falls to Missoula (highway 200 is a pretty straight shot) equals 362 miles alone. Clearly, the best access to Cadotte from the east for the MILW would have been to parallel GN's line from Slayton (the crossing of the Musselshell River) to Great Falls...much straighter and shorter. (For example, GN's line from Great Falls to Lewistown was 17 miles shorter than that of the MILW.) Looks to me that this route would be minimally shorter, at best.

From the "what if" standpoint of crossings of the Continental Divide in Montana, overlooked is the best crossing - and it's still in use - Deer Lodge Pass along I-15 south of Butte. I've always wondered why NP or MILW didn't build along the Big Hole River southwest of Twin Bridges and then link up with UP to its route from Dillon to Silver Bow. While a longer route, its one percent grade would certainly be preferable to others in the area. And that it survives today (and survival is always a prime factor in determining the viability of any route) is a testimony to its worth, while the routes over Pipestone, Homestake, and Elk Park no longer are.

Mark Meyer

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: NotIn, TX
  • 617 posts
Posted by VerMontanan on Saturday, September 24, 2005 12:55 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol
[
In turn Cadotte compared to the Canadian Pacific crossing farther north of 5,329 feet, the Great Northern’s Marias Pass crossing at 5,214 feet the Santa Fe at 7,622 feet, the Union Pacific at Sherman Hill at 8,242 feet, the Central Pacific at 7,042 feet (in the Sierra’s), the Northern Pacific’s Homestake Pass at 6,200, or its Mullan Pass at 5600 feet.

Best regards, Michael Sol


The figure for the Santa Fe is misleading for it's the elevation at Raton Pass, which Santa Fe ceased using for most of its freight in 1908 when the Belen cutoff was constructed. The actual elevation is not relevant in any case anyway, and the Santa Fe is the best example. Its crest of the Continental Divide just east of Gallup, NM at 7,247 is actually one of the flatter portions of its line west of Mountainair, NM as the grade is much less than 1 percent in each direction. The high point on the Santa Fe freight route is the Arizona Divide west of Flagstaff at 7,313 feet, and this is probably the best determining characteristic of the route. Today, in the single crew district between Winslow and Needles, trains drop (or climb) from the Arizona Divide to the Colorado River at Needles, at 476 feet, nearly 7,000 feet in about 225 miles.

Mark Meyer

  • Member since
    October 2004
  • 3,190 posts
Posted by MichaelSol on Thursday, September 22, 2005 10:47 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73

Michael,
you have Johnson Creek tunnel as 1973' on this page and 1783' on page 3. Was the tunnel shortened or was it a typo ?I

My corrections:

The Johnson Creek Tunnel is 1973' feet long.

Pipestone Pass is at 6347' elevation with a 2.0% grade westbound. Cadotte Pass would have crossed the same mountain range -- the Continental Divide -- with a 1% grade both ways at 5,293' elevation, a significantly better crossing than Marias Pass.

Best regards, Michael Sol
  • Member since
    October 2004
  • 3,190 posts
Posted by MichaelSol on Thursday, September 22, 2005 5:16 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

Selby's had an office here in Missoula on North Ave right next door to Montana Tool.

Oh good grief, I recognize the name on the building, I thought it was an upholstery shop. I'll have to stop by there. Best, Michael Sol
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • 910 posts
Posted by arbfbe on Thursday, September 22, 2005 4:35 PM
Michael,

Selby's had an office here in Missoula on North Ave right next door to Montana Tool.

I have only seen reference to the SOO Line & Pacific extension on the bottom of a serving platter for delivering cold bottles of beer to tables. It certainly piqued my interest at the antique store I saw it in but the price was too far out of line to bring it home. I wonder what they would have chosen as their destination. Seattle, Tacoma and Portland were pretty croweded and no one seemed to be very successful in establishing a deep water port between Portland and San Francisco. That left a lot of coast line with no rail or deepwater service but lots of mountain ranges to cross to get there.

I had not considered the effects of WWI and the collapse of the bond markets as a factor in the lack of rail line expansion after the MILW built the PCE. That and recessions make for interesting marker points in railroad and railroad equipment history. The recession of 1980-1981 sure ended the careers of F units and 40' boxcars in the railroad industry, for example. I am sure there are others that can be mentioned.

I hope you are feeling well soon. I have a CD-r of scans from Munson's field construction notes of the MILW mainline in the Butte area I can send if you are interested. Nice PDF files of his handwriting.
  • Member since
    October 2004
  • 3,190 posts
Posted by MichaelSol on Thursday, September 22, 2005 4:01 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73

Michael,
you have Johnson Creek tunnel as 1973' on this page and 1783' on page 3. Was the tunnel shortened or was it a typo ?
I asked earlier about the Grand Trunk Corporation getting the line to Miles City. I was thinking about the coalfields around Decker up the Tongue River and not the gateway. I would think the GTC could have been hauling 20 million tons a year of coal for the last 20 years if they had spent $400,000,000 back in 1981.

Well, I've got a sinus cold this week, and everything I read has multiple "i"s, multiple "l"s, and multiple "t"s, as well as fuzzy. The tunnel was not shortened, so one of those numbers is a typo. I will check when I get home. I've got an error in the Pipestone Pass grade as well. best -- Michael Sol
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Nanaimo BC Canada
  • 4,117 posts
Posted by nanaimo73 on Thursday, September 22, 2005 3:40 PM
Michael,
you have Johnson Creek tunnel as 1973' on this page and 1783' on page 3. Was the tunnel shortened or was it a typo ?
I asked earlier about the Grand Trunk Corporation getting the line to Miles City. I was thinking about the coalfields around Decker up the Tongue River and not the gateway. I would think the GTC could have been hauling 20 million tons a year of coal for the last 20 years if they had spent $400,000,000 back in 1981.
Dale
  • Member since
    October 2004
  • 3,190 posts
Posted by MichaelSol on Thursday, September 22, 2005 3:22 PM
I think the electrification had a lot to do with it; making that southern mainline better than anything simply because it was electrified.

Too, by this time it was 1914, the war in Europe had dried up the Bond Market, and all of the GN, NP, Soo, UP, and MILW surveys in Montana at that time, of which there were literally hundreds, suddenly came to naught. There was simply and suddenly no financing available for any of these kinds of projects.

The Great War ended the era of American railroad expansion for good.

Best regards, Michael Sol
  • Member since
    October 2004
  • 3,190 posts
Posted by MichaelSol on Thursday, September 22, 2005 3:14 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

Sorry for the confusion about the quote attributes. I just hit the [qoute] button from the post I wanted to reply to and the Kalmbach software took care of the rest.

There was just no way the CM&PS was going to avoid Butte on it's way to the Pacific Northwest. It is hard to imagine turn of the century Butte when looking at what that city has become. It was not only the economic powerhouse of Montana but if the entire northern Rocky Mountain region. The fact that there was financial control by the Rockefellow interests between the Anaconda Copper Mining Company, the MILW and the early Montana Power sort of ties it all together. While Cadotte Pass had certain engineering advantages, Pipestone Pass held all the ecomonic and political advantages. There was just really no advantage to the MILW to build the mainline in any other direction. MILW held onto plans to build over Cadotte Pass for quite some time in order to ship grain from northern Montana to the Pacific Coast as well as to tap mineral deposits along the Blackfoot River. It would have been interesting to see how operations would have developed had bankruptcies had not intruded upon those plans.

There is an engineering/blueprint firm with offices in several Montana towns called Selby's that has engineering maps for the MILW lines in Montana for sale to the public. These include the line north from Clearwater Jct up the Seeley-Swan valley to Coram and a crossing of the GN and thence north to Canada and a connection with the CP. This line's story was told in Trains magazine several years ago. Selby's might have maps of the Cadotte Pass line but I have not checked to be sure.

Hi Alan,
I haven't checked Selby's, but I have all the engineering surveys for the Great Falls Western Railway here on my desk, plus the engineer's notes. The Trains article on the Flathead line of course had no idea why the line was there: I think the title was "The Phantom Line" or something like that and pondered why there would even be such a line. It missed the fact that it was all about Canadian coal, Milwaukee had leased huge quantities of metalurgical quality coal fields, and timber, sections and sections of enormous timber stands that the Milwaukee Road had rights to and had even incorporated a Canadian Railway subsidiary to operate on the Canadian side of the border.

Milwaukee continued to own that Flathead line right of way well into the 1970s.

Best -- Michael Sol
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • 910 posts
Posted by arbfbe on Thursday, September 22, 2005 2:42 PM
Sorry for the confusion about the quote attributes. I just hit the [qoute] button from the post I wanted to reply to and the Kalmbach software took care of the rest.

There was just no way the CM&PS was going to avoid Butte on it's way to the Pacific Northwest. It is hard to imagine turn of the century Butte when looking at what that city has become. It was not only the economic powerhouse of Montana but if the entire northern Rocky Mountain region. The fact that there was financial control by the Rockefellow interests between the Anaconda Copper Mining Company, the MILW and the early Montana Power sort of ties it all together. While Cadotte Pass had certain engineering advantages, Pipestone Pass held all the ecomonic and political advantages. There was just really no advantage to the MILW to build the mainline in any other direction. MILW held onto plans to build over Cadotte Pass for quite some time in order to ship grain from northern Montana to the Pacific Coast as well as to tap mineral deposits along the Blackfoot River. It would have been interesting to see how operations would have developed had bankruptcies had not intruded upon those plans.

There is an engineering/blueprint firm with offices in several Montana towns called Selby's that has engineering maps for the MILW lines in Montana for sale to the public. These include the line north from Clearwater Jct up the Seeley-Swan valley to Coram and a crossing of the GN and thence north to Canada and a connection with the CP. This line's story was told in Trains magazine several years ago. Selby's might have maps of the Cadotte Pass line but I have not checked to be sure.
  • Member since
    October 2004
  • 3,190 posts
Posted by MichaelSol on Thursday, September 22, 2005 9:55 AM
Terraserver is just the most useful tool; really quite amazing. Cadotte Pass is as the photo shows it; a windswept isolated spot. A BPA powerline crosses it, but it shows up more on the aerial photo than you would actually notice it on the ground. From there, you can see the Great Plains and the Highwood Mountains off in the distance. Quite a view.

I found my surveyor's notes.

By early January, 1913, Milwaukee Surveyor R. W. Sweet reported that he had located lines enabling a comparison between Cadotte Pass and nearby Roger’s Pass. Rogers’ would require a 1400 foot tunnel permitting a 1% maximum grade, whereas Cadotte would require a 8250 foot tunnel crossing at an elevation of 5345 feet, but saving 6.5 miles in distance, 210 feet in elevation, and 1000 degrees of curvature. Letter, Sweet to E.O.Reeder, Chief Engineer, C.M.&P.S. Ry, Jan. 2, 1913. DSC.

The total curvature of 6,517degrees permitted a maximum of 8 degrees of maximum curvature with a 1% maximum grade eastbound and westbound crossing the Continental Divide at an elevation of 5,293 feet with an 8,200 foot tunnel. Letter, Powrie to Reeder, August 13, 1913, Great Falls. DSC.

This compared with Milwaukee’s existing crossing of the Divide at Pipestone, where the Milwaukee’s mountain grade covered 38 miles between Whitehall, on the east side of the Divide, to Butte, on the west side. The maximum grade was 2.0%, required two tunnels of 2,268 and 1,148 feet in length, three steel trestles of 400 to 600 feet in length, and crossed the Divide itself at an elevation of 6,350 feet.

In turn Cadotte compared to the Canadian Pacific crossing farther north of 5,329 feet, the Great Northern’s Marias Pass crossing at 5,214 feet the Santa Fe at 7,622 feet, the Union Pacific at Sherman Hill at 8,242 feet, the Central Pacific at 7,042 feet (in the Sierra’s), the Northern Pacific’s Homestake Pass at 6,200, or its Mullan Pass at 5600 feet.

The Cadotte Pass crossing was a conservative survey. A somewhat longer tunnel would have reduced elevation. The lay of the land permitted several choices down to 5,100 feet.

Best regards, Michael Sol

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Nanaimo BC Canada
  • 4,117 posts
Posted by nanaimo73 on Thursday, September 22, 2005 1:35 AM
Murphy,
Those tunnels are in eastern Washington south of Spokane west of you and north of Dave under the ground and on the map on your screen in your computer at this time.[}:)]
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=2&S=14&Z=11&X=141&Y=1633&W
There were 50 between Chicago and Seattle, of which 3 were daylighted.
For your next library book you could try to get The Milwaukee Road by Fred Hyde. Mark Hemphill has several outstanding maps in the book which I photocopied.

Michael and Dave,
Thank you for the information.

Cadotte Pass
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=2&S=14&Z=12&X=123&Y=1629&W
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=14&Z=12&X=123&Y=1629&W
Dale
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 7:39 PM
Murphy - it's "ya'll can't get thar from heah". And sorry for all the directional confusion. Just park on the road mentioned and hike west on the grade, you'll do fine.

Michael - Thanks again for the detailed history lesson. And yes I had always wondered why those bridges on the Great Falls branch were so "overdone" so to speak.
  • Member since
    October 2004
  • 3,190 posts
Posted by MichaelSol on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 7:28 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

I cannot locate Cadotte Pass in my Montana DeLorme Atlas. Is that an earlier name for what is now Lewis and Clark Pass, or was it another passage? Can you identify the names of the creeks that lead up to Cadotte Pass?

Would this mainline reroute via Great Falls have incorporated all the branchlines that were built along that general corridor, including the (west to east) Clearwater branch, the Augusta branch, the Great Falls to Lewistown line, and/or the Lewistown to Winnett branch?

Cadotte Pass is about half way between Rogers Pass and Lewis & Clark Pass. The original Pacific Rail survey thought that Cadotte was the best crossing of the Divide, and Great Northern engineers had looked at it very closely. When Isaac Stevens, who had done the survey work in the area in 1854 for the Pacific Railroad Survey was sent back as Governor of the Washington Territory, he officially proclaimed the existence of the Washington Territory while standing on Cadotte Pass.

I see that it is not labeled in the DeLorme Atlas, but the Atlas shows Cadotte Creek, which flows west into the Blackfoot, and which can be seen north of Highway 200 as it approaches Rogers Pass. Cadotte Creek's headwater aims right at Cadotte Pass.

Even after the GN mainline was finished, GN engineers were up there, still looking around, that pass was so favorable. Indeed, it was the Great Falls engineering office, P.S. Hervin, of the GN that suggested to Milwaukee Road's C.A. Goodnow that MILW ought to go up there and look at it, it was the most favorable crossing they were aware of.

Presumably the line would have met with the Sun River branch of the Milwaukee at about Fairfield, then used the Great Falls-Lewistown line that was built in 1914, then east to Grass Range on new construction in cooperation with GN, then connecting the mainline at Melstone. This would have shortened MILW's Chicago/Seattle run by about 115 miles on a significantly easier grade.

This is why those branchline bridges over Judith River, Sage Creek, and Indian Creek are such "mainline" kinds of bridges, and why Great Falls has that MILW "Million Dollar Depot," bigger and more imposing than MILW's Butte depot, which was its Montana headquarters at the time, as well as the financial heart of Montana.

Best regards, Michael Sol

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 7:22 PM
For what it's worth, and just for the record, I did not post the above post that uses north,northeast,south,southwest and northeast all in one sentence.[:-,]. Where are these tunnels? ' Couldn't help but chuckle at your description. It sounds like a joke that ends with "but you can't get there from here". [:)]

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    October 2004
  • 3,190 posts
Posted by MichaelSol on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 7:18 PM
Tunnel 41 2559' Watts Tunnel mp 1840 (Sorrento, Id). Timber lined.
Tunnel 43 756' mp 1892 (Rock Lake) Solid rock tunnel.
Tunnel 44 704' mp 1894 (Rock Lake) Solid rock tunnel, partially timber lined.
Tunnel 45 1973' Johnson Creek Tunnel (Boylston), solid rock tunnel.

Tunnel 42 was located east of Rosalia, Washington. The line had been opened for traffic in 1909, and the tunnel was determined to be unstable although lined with timber. It was undergoing a concrete lining in 1911, the footers had just been set, when the tunnel collapsed. It was daylighted and so Tunnel 42 was a temporary proposition.

Best regards, Michael Sol
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 7:17 PM
Michael,

I cannot locate Cadotte Pass in my Montana DeLorme Atlas. Is that an earlier name for what is now Lewis and Clark Pass, or was it another passage? Can you identify the names of the creeks that lead up to Cadotte Pass?

Would this mainline reroute via Great Falls have incorporated all the branchlines that were built along that general corridor, including the (west to east) Clearwater branch, the Augusta branch, the Great Falls to Lewistown line, and/or the Lewistown to Winnett branch?

If electrification ameliorated the usual operational considerations with the grades, then the elimination of the electrification in 1974 must have brought those old demons back to life even with dieselization.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 7:01 PM
nanaimo,

The two tunnels you refer to are technically on the south side of Rock Lake, not the north side (but on the northeast end of the south side, since Rock Lake runs southwest to northeast). Although gated off at the first trestle, one can still hike the Milwaukee grade, accessing from the Hole-In-The-Ground road and heading west. That's where you'll traverse those two tunnels you mentioned. The third? I have no idea.
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Nanaimo BC Canada
  • 4,117 posts
Posted by nanaimo73 on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 1:32 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal
. They managed to grab the Montana Central from J.J.Hill which took them from Harlowton (mile 1335) to Lombard (mile 1430).
OOPS, but no. The Montana Central ran from Pacific Jct just west of Havre to Great Falls, Helena, Boulder and Butte in Montana. Jim Hill kept control of that line and the GN operated it until after the BN merger. What the MILW did get control of was the Montana Railroad which ran from Lewistown to Harlotown to Lombard. and a connection with the NP. The CM&PS abandoned most of the line through 16 mile canyon and rebuilt at a higher level.


That was my screw up.


Michael,
There were 3 tunnels on the main between Idaho and Beverly. I have found two near the north end of Rock Lake, about a dozen miles west of Malden. Do you know were the third one was ?
Dale
  • Member since
    October 2004
  • 3,190 posts
Posted by MichaelSol on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 11:03 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal
[
Back to the topic at hand, I had always wondered if Milwaukee's grabbing the "Jawbone" was necessarily the best route choice for a line that was intended to be a shorter faster route to the PNW, especially since they had to practically rebuild the entire line from scratch. Even with the nice grades through Sixteenmile Canyon, in my view the Milwaukee would have been better served skirting the Belt Mountains to the North via Great Falls, thence over Rogers Pass, a much lower CD crossing than Pipestone Pass, Deer Lodge Pass, Elk Park Pass, or Mullan Pass.

The Montana Railroad was the "quick" route, and removed a potential JJ Hill obstacle. The route that Milwaukee spent a lot of time on broke north at Melstone, through Lewistown to Great Falls, then west over Cadotte Pass (which is just north of Rogers Pass) at a 1% grade through a short tunnel, the best crossing of the Continental Divide of any transcontinental, bar none. With a little more engineering, Milwaukee could have beat 1% and at a lower elevation than Marias Pass and with far less curvature on the west side than GN's Marias crossing.

Why didn't they do it?

Butte of course was the big revenue producer in Montana in that era. The mainline through Butte enjoyed the same priority that Hill gave to the GN when the GN mainline ended in Butte.

However, at the time the final surveys were being made, the final studies were being completed on the delayed electrification project. The results were so favorable that a 1% Divide crossing could not be justified as new construction compared with the cheaper operation and faster transit times, plus doubling of track capacity, that the electrification provided on the existing mainline.

Milwaukee could operate its 2% Pipestone crossing with Electrification more cheaply, faster, with heavier tonnage than GN could achieve on the 1.2%/1.8% Marias Pass crossing with steam. The "total engineering solution" of electrification combined with compensated curve track design was far superior to anything that could be achieved at that time with steam regardless of gradient. The engineering solution was economically and operationally superior to the 1% or less grade without the electrification.

GN's Ralph Budd kicked and screamed to get the Milwaukee's data on the first year of electrification and stormed off when Milwaukee's VP-Electrification avoided ever providing it to him.

Best regards, Michael Sol
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 8:29 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73

Originally posted by futuremodal
. They managed to grab the Montana Central from J.J.Hill which took them from Harlowton (mile 1335) to Lombard (mile 1430).

This site has a lot of interesting maps from the 1800's http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/gmdhtml/rrhtml/rrhome.html




OOPS, but no. The Montana Central ran from Pacific Jct just west of Havre to Great Falls, Helena, Boulder and Butte in Montana. Jim Hill kept control of that line and the GN operated it until after the BN merger. What the MILW did get control of was the Montana Railroad which ran from Lewistown to Harlotown to Lombard. and a connection with the NP. The CM&PS abandoned most of the line through 16 mile canyon and rebuilt at a higher level.


For what it's worth, and just for the record, I did not post the Montana Central post. I think arbfbe mistakenly included my signature post with nanaimo's post when he cut and quoted. No big deal, but I get enough flack as it is from the ilks for presumed detail discretions.

Back to the topic at hand, I had always wondered if Milwaukee's grabbing the "Jawbone" was necessarily the best route choice for a line that was intended to be a shorter faster route to the PNW, especially since they had to practically rebuild the entire line from scratch. Even with the nice grades through Sixteenmile Canyon, in my view the Milwaukee would have been better served skirting the Belt Mountains to the North via Great Falls, thence over Rogers Pass, a much lower CD crossing than Pipestone Pass, Deer Lodge Pass, Elk Park Pass, or Mullan Pass.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy