diningcar or anyone …
The southern Transcon is said to be two-tracks now from Los Angeles to Chicago, except for a couple of short sections such as river crossings, but they are being or will soon be two-tracked. HOWEVER, AERIALS DON’T SUPPORT THE CLAIM! They show TWO single-track routes in Kansas for fewer than two hundred miles. The northern route seems to be longer and is used by Amtrak Nos. 3 & 4 and goes via Wichita. The other seems to be a more direct route. Is that latter route two-tracked now, or has BNSF played a word game by calling two different routes “two-tracks”?
Thanks in advance,
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.
What is Your Take?
Winslow, AZ
On a trip from California to Texas and back in October (2016), much of it on the I-40 Freeway, Winslow, AZ was stopped at to check things out. Something was brewing there, but exactly what is not clear. New grading was present on the WEST end of town, as seen from the roadway overpass thereat, but it is unclear if new track-work can be expected or if it was a mere touchup situation.
Looking east piles of ballast was present, as if the switches were being touched-up with new and additional ballast, which suggests the present layout would stay the same.
For the record, no discernable track-work was taking place on the EAST side of town
If anyone has a take on all this west side work, please come forward.
Transcon Rd in Winslow was named after the long-departed Transcon Truck Lines, which had a terminal at the end of that rd.
They meet at Mulvane, between Wichata and Wellington. Here is BNSF's Kansas Div. map:
http://www.bnsf.com/customers/pdf/maps/div_ks.pdf
They go south at Newton; the southern Transcon goes across Oklahoma and the Texas Panhandle; none it goes across western Kansas and Colorado.
Johnny
I apologize for a noob question- but I have not been able to find anything diffinitive on the web, this site or trainorders about this.
I know the southern Transcon splits at Ellinor, KS and that the two single lines- the one that goes south towards El Dorado and the one that goes west towards Newton- operate together as a double track section. My question is, where do the two meet up again- do trains turn south at Newton through Wichita down to Wellington or do they continue west on the old main line through Colorado? I see quite a few trains stopped in sidings on the Ellinor cutoff, so I wasn't sure how this functioned.
Thanks!
A train that heavy would need a lot of dynamic braking going down the hill. I bet some of our friends with expertise in such things could calculate the approximate weight of the train given the capacity of dynamic braking capacity of the 5 units on the head end.
K. P. HarrierIn light of the abundance of power for the train, it was felt that the Cajon Subdivision was not the intended destination of the ballast train. Possibly it was going somewhere near Los Angeles and a third-track effort out that way.
Good eye! I'll speculate that some ballast refresh is being done along the San Bernardino sub. The three grade separation (and probable third main) projects in Orange county aren't due until 2018, and the Rosecrans Ave overpass about 2020.
Links to my Google Maps ---> Sunset Route overview, SoCal metro, Yuma sub, Gila sub, SR east of Tucson, BNSF Northern Transcon and Southern Transcon *** Why you should support Ukraine! ***
Westbound Ballast Train
A plenty unit powered ballast train was westbound in the Blue Cut area of Cajon Pass (Southern California) Saturday morning September 24, 2016, in a much burnt landscape setting from the “Blue Cut” fire in August.. Some ballast cars could be seen full of ballast, others no ballast could be seen.
In light of the abundance of power for the train, it was felt that the Cajon Subdivision was not the intended destination of the ballast train. Possibly it was going somewhere near Los Angeles and a third-track effort out that way.
OvermodStrange that after BNSF made so much of this in their $4.3B capital-improvement program last year, and did the 'golden tie' thing, there is no report other than SEMA's of the project completion (nominally open to traffic June 16th).
After not seeing anything about this completion on any BNSF web site, I emailed them to point this 'favorable event' out. Finally they replied today with this article posted yesterday:
http://www.bnsfmedia.com/go/doc/7090/2879938/
This is the source for the RT&S article: http://www.rtands.com/index.php/freight/class-1/bnsf-completes-second-track-at-pecos-river.html
AFAIK the new 'service road' seen near Alva, OK on Google Maps is a paved subgrade; some RRs do this in wetter areas to promote better drainage.
You can get a pretty good idea of the alignment that would be used at Alva, OK for a second bridge just by following the right-of-way eastbound on Google Earth, in quite a few places what had been the "service" road is now part of the second main. You could surmise from this that what looks like a "service" road on the south side of the main around the curve towards the existing bridge(going westbound) would then become the second main leading to a new crossing of the Salt Fork Arkansas River just east of the existing one...if they wanted to take the "easy" way out. Of course this is must my opinion and it's based on extrapolation from following the map east.
The north side of the river appears to be flood plain in this area, while the south side looks to be more bluff or palisade.
From the overhead photos it appears that the track from the south side (eastbound) goes from terra firma right over a footing in the rock and on to the deck of the bridge directly over the river channel.
On the north side (westbound) it appears the track comes west on a large man-made earthen fill that keeps the track at the same elevation as the bridge structure over the channel, and then crosses the flood plain over additional bridge sections to connect with the bridge spans that are over the channel.
This terrain looks like an area where the big 3400 class Pacifics and 3450 and 3460 class Hudsons could really make time with the varnish. I can imagine the hoggers making the brakes smoke as they slowed for the bridge and then yanking back on the throttle to open 'er up once the drumhead had cleared the bridge.
Santa Fe all the way!
Blue Goose leaving Chicago...
3460 Class Hudson...
3400 Class Pacifics...
If indeed BNSF wishes to eliminate this short segment of single track they must coordinate with whomever in government regulates the Missouri River, plus many other Gov't agencies.
Just looking at the maps furnished by kghw49 it would appear that an alinement connecting to the south bank of the river at/near E Atherton Sibley road would be the logical and shortest distance which would then aline with the long tangent track going eastward.
billio (9-2):
Is this the site of the Alva, OK presently single-track bridge?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Alva,+OK+73717/@36.8132334,-98.6627543,384m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x87af6fe53e8e4b29:0x5507c579d3a68a71!8m2!3d36.8050308!4d-98.6664737
If so, it looks like access to the site is very limited, with a public dirt road going under the bridge from the northeast.
Apparently the bridge over the Missouri River at Sibley, MO (that kgbw49 very recently posted about) has a similar access problem. Such bridges are so few and old does anyone in America know how to bid and build such a bridge anymore?
Take care,
Here is the Google Maps link to the single track bridge over the Missouri River at Sibley, MO:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sibley,+MO/@39.182626,-94.1838894,2881m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x87c108de915a9d67:0xe01def2fa9ae375b!8m2!3d39.1786169!4d-94.1932796
Not a long distance, but it looks to be expensive distance with a long approach over a flood plain on the north side of the river in addition to the bridging over the actual river itself, which lends solid evidence as to why it is the last stretch remaining as single track.
The angle of the sun gives a great "shadow view" of the bridge structure if one zooms in.
Everything I have seen on the BNSF web site or in various publications is that they consider that section pretty much two track main line paired track.
Another way to look at it is really wide track centers!
However, others may have better information.
Has the line over the Flint Hills been double tracked, or do they consider the line thru Newton part of a paired track arrangement?
Yup.
When Alva is completed, will that just leave the bridge and approaches over the Missouri river as the last single track on the Southern Transcon?
For construction geeks (like me) who like to look down from above on railway lines, there appeared a day or so ago a newly posted overhead on Google Earth of the remaing stretch of single track on the Southern transcon at Alva, OK. Imagery date is quite recent: 6 July 2016. The change from the previous overhead image is on the east side of the single track, which shows it ending two miles from the little yard in Alva. BNSF added a goodly amount of shiny new second track since the prior overhead date (30 November 2013), 7.7 miles worth by my fuzzy reckoning.
And from what we've heard, the remaining 2.5 miles of single track will disappear by about this time next year -- unless the economy really goes to hell. Wow!
Alas, Google Earth has not published/released new overhead imagery showing the second BNSF track at Ft. Sumner, NM.
Cheers!!
A follow-up regarding the Ft. Sumner, NM bridge and second track. From another website (RailPictures.Net) come reports the project was completed 25 July. Probably so; this allows easier passage for the holiday traffic surge, which starts to ramp up in late August/September, and less wear and tear on the neurological and digestive systems of BNSF dispatchers and corridor managers.
Agree.
Strange that after BNSF made so much of this in their $4.3B capital-improvement program last year, and did the 'golden tie' thing, there is no report other than SEMA's of the project completion (nominally open to traffic June 16th).
Some construction details of the new structure can be found in this PDF presentation on BNSF track structure.
Ft. Sumner, NM Track Construction -- An Update and Query:
Update: While surfing the web last night to combat insomnia (maybe a nightcap will help!?), I stumbled across a Facebook post by SEMA Construction, the contractor for BNSF's Ft. Sumner, NM second track and bridge over the Pecos River. Pictures of a completed bridge adorned the post, along with words implying the project is done. Which leads to my
Query: Can any BNSF'ers in the know conform or deny whether the project is done?
Thanks and Cheers!!
While surfing the web, came across a couple of interesting and recent construction pics of BNSF second track bringing the Pecos River at Ft. Sumner, NM. Check our the SEMAConstruction website and look among their railroad projects. The new span will cross the river north of the existing one.
Thanks to KP, for his pics, interesting as always. Also to Harold Jr for squaring me away on Southern Transcon second track work remaining, and to PNWNMRM (Mac) for his insights.
Cheers to all!!
What is happening to the Signals?
Part V (of I-V)
Traveling the old Highway 66, such as at Peach Springs, AZ, all the signals seen were un-large hooded.
In Southern California, signals seen were all hooded ones, such as by Hidden Springs Road near Daggett.
At Daggett itself, at the junction with the LA&SL (UP), heads were all the hooded type.
Where the transition point is is unknown, but it probably is somewhere between Kingman, AZ and Daggett, CA.
It is unknown and unclear why BNSF is taking such changing-the-head-coverings approach, but I did notice one non-hooded signal from a semi-side view angle moderately in the distance, and it blending in with its surroundings, kind of like an incognito type signal. Hooded signals stand out like a sore thumb. Maybe BNSF finds their incognito-type signals are safer with crazy type people like graffiti idiots. Union Pacific where hooded signals are the standard, has been having a ferrous time with graffiti. K.P. personally likes the hoods and is saddened by their demise on BNSF, but maybe they’re absence is the secret to keeping graffiti fools away from their signals.
Perhaps someone on the northern Transcon can convey if a similar situation is transpiring there, and how extensive it is. Of course, the northern Transcon may or may not have color light signals yet. Most of the northern tier signals K.P. have ever seen in photos from various sources over the decades typically show target signals, so BNSF may be faced with a predicament like on UP’s two-tracking of the Sunset Route with the PTC law bearing down on them: Should they convert the old signals during the two-tracking, or change all the signals and rearrange everything later.
Anyone have details or thoughts on all this?
This will conclude the series.
Part IV (of I-V)
West looking overviews at West Winslow:
East facing ground level overview:
We leave now for parts west.
Continued in Part V
Part III (of I-V)
This trip, in Winslow, AZ, those two mast signals at CP WEST WINSLOW had been changed, so they no longer had a large SINGLE hood, but THREE small shade covers.
In the above first photo, note the switch heater. Also, in the above photos, the ladders go different ways. Odd tidbit!
The signal bridge on the east side of that same CP still have the large hoods:
Continued in Part IV
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.