Trains.com

356 car or 21,584 foot train on CN's Albreda Subdivision

5446 views
29 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 71 posts
356 car or 21,584 foot train on CN's Albreda Subdivision
Posted by ADRIAN BALLAM on Monday, March 8, 2021 1:08 AM

All,

I love humongous, gigantic trains and I have seen on various routes throughout Canada and the USA the trains getting longer, as well as here in the Lower Mainland. However, none compare to this one on video uploaded by Tim Stevens from his outing on February 21, 2021 near Mount Robson in BC:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYvuYuC1uho

As per his description, apparently CN 348 (manifest which runs from Prince George to Edmonton) broke down along the Albreda Sub and behind it was CN 834 (grains which runs from Vancouver to Edmonton and contained some potash cars at the front). As a result, CN 834 pushed 348 to Wynd just west of Jasper. The breakdown of the lengths are as follows:

348: 182 cars (11,733 feet)

834: 174 cars (9,851 feet)

Total: 356 cars (21,584 feet)!

In the 15 minute long video, there is a blip 12:31 into it misses about 14 cars, but still, this maybe the longest that has ever run in North America. CN trumps over UP now as the leader of humongous freights based on this video.

Enjoy.

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Monday, March 8, 2021 1:45 AM

This is a common occurrence on the Albreda Sub, which has a 0.7% grade from the junction with Robson Sub just east of Valemount to the top of the hill just west of Redpass, this is the eastbound ruling grade on CN's Canadian mainline and is almost twice as steep as any other grade trains will encounter. 

Prince George and Kamloops yards both like to send out trains that are maxed right out or over the official tonnage rating for their power on this hill, because the train will easily leave the yard and once it is out on the main it is not their problem anymore.  And these trains often do make it up the hill, spinning, chewing and clawing their way upgrade at less than 10 mph. 

When a train stalls the most common solution is to get the next one to tie on and push, due the high traffic level there is usually someone else not far behind.  It is rare to be told to double the hill but it can still happen, there is an 'exchange track' between the two mains just east of Redpass that can be used for this purpose (it used to be used for block swaps of Vancouver-Prince George traffic, hence the name).  Usually the push goes no farther than Redpass, but in case it would seem they decided that 348 would also stall on the 0.4% grade from the east end of Moose Lake up to the summit of Yellowhead Pass (a wise assumption), so the pusher stayed attached.

Even though 348 was mostly empties they would have had a tough fight even with the second unit working properly, due to the snow (you can hear the lead unit spinning even though he isn't in full throttle) and curve resistance of such a long conventional train, not to mention the sticking brakes that sometimes set themselves near the tail end as the brake pipe pressure jumps up and down a bit when the slack comes in and out.  The old 'Trudeau' grain hoppers also seem to roll poorly in general compared to other cars. 

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Sterling Heights, Michigan
  • 1,691 posts
Posted by SD60MAC9500 on Monday, March 8, 2021 6:44 AM
 

@SD70Dude At about 2:56 into the video I notice aluminum ingots. Do you know where those originate? 

 
Rahhhhhhhhh!!!!
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,275 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, March 8, 2021 7:54 AM

CN's operating practices are different than those I operated under on CSX.  When I was working (pre EHH) CSX rules prohibited a following train from shoving a preceeding train intact.  The following train had to cut their train off and secure it before shoving the preceeding train.  Post EHH ??????

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 1,002 posts
Posted by NP Eddie on Monday, March 8, 2021 10:19 AM

Balt:

Was EHH really unrealistic in the rules he made and then no one had the guts to confront him?  I saw that on my former railroad.

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,898 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Monday, March 8, 2021 11:00 AM

We often have a train stall on our Blair hill and the next train behind gets to shove the stalled train over.  Usually, the following train cuts off their power, but I've heard of some old heads (now retired) who would, if they had an empty hopper train, take it with them.

I think if one suggested "doubling the hill" now, that 1/2 of our people wouldn't know what you're talking about.  It's really starting to show all the knowledge and experience that's being lost to retirements, etc.

Jeff 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,275 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, March 8, 2021 11:07 AM

NP Eddie
Balt:

Was EHH really unrealistic in the rules he made and then no one had the guts to confront him?  I saw that on my former railroad.

I retired 2 1/2 months before EHH came on the property at CSX.  When people become concerned about keeping their jobs they become 'yes' men.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Monday, March 8, 2021 12:52 PM

SD60MAC9500
 

@SD70Dude At about 2:56 into the video I notice aluminum ingots. Do you know where those originate? 

Rio Tinto Alcan's smelter in Kitimat, BC.  A block of those is a common sight on M348 or M304, the two daily eastbound manifests that originate in Prince George. 

I've heard that the Kitimat Subdivision is currently out of service due to a large mudslide, so anything that moves out by rail is probably getting trucked to Terrace. I hope CN choses to rebuild it, that line has been on life support ever since the massive Eurocan pulp mill closed in 2010.

For better or worse, doubling hills is still a fairly common occurrence on several of our branch lines.

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 1,189 posts
Posted by mvlandsw on Monday, March 8, 2021 4:07 PM

BaltACD

CN's operating practices are different than those I operated under on CSX.  When I was working (pre EHH) CSX rules prohibited a following train from shoving a preceeding train intact.  The following train had to cut their train off and secure it before shoving the preceeding train.  Post EHH ??????

 

That rule wasn't always adhered to.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,275 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, March 8, 2021 4:21 PM

mvlandsw
 
BaltACD

CN's operating practices are different than those I operated under on CSX.  When I was working (pre EHH) CSX rules prohibited a following train from shoving a preceeding train intact.  The following train had to cut their train off and secure it before shoving the preceeding train.  Post EHH ?????? 

That rule wasn't always adhered to.

Different divisions had different levels of rules enforcement. 

I worked for a number of divisions - as B&O, as Chessie and as CSX.  Under B&O and Chessie each division was effectively its own railroad with the Superintendent the 'Capo d'capo'.  The law unto themselves. 

With CSX and Centralized Dispatching, there was a concerted effort to do things the same on ALL divisions within the Dispatching Center.  Since Chicago Terminal, Indianapols and Selkirk were not broght to Jacksonville. they did their own thing.  When Dispatching was decentralized in 2008 each division started going their own way with their own 'interpertation' of the same rules.  After I retired and the operation was recentralized, I have no idea of the level of standardization that is being applied.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: NotIn, TX
  • 617 posts
Posted by VerMontanan on Tuesday, March 9, 2021 1:05 AM

ADRIAN BALLAM

I love humongous, gigantic trains and I have seen on various routes throughout Canada and the USA the trains getting longer, as well as here in the Lower Mainland. 

Well, while interesting, it's really can't be the longest train because it really is just two trains coupled together and separated prior to the next terminal, Jasper.  (Though just as one train operationally....)

BNSF operated a real single-crew 21,000+ foot train in August of 2009 for about 320 miles.

At the end of July that year, Montana Rail Link was having trouble with its Mullan Tunnel under the Continental Divide west of Helena.  Chunks started to cave in, and it was closed for a couple of days.  Trains were detoured via Great Falls.  As it was advertised that the tunnel was to reopen, detouring ceased, and the trains started staging on line for the reopening.

Then the big news hit:  Another collapse - this time one end of the tunnel, and that the tunnel would be closed for at least a week (it was closed for the better part of a month).  This created a huge backlog, because all the trains staged for the "opening" west of Laurel had to be returned to Laurel and detoured north.  Since they had to get rid of SOMETHING right away at Laurel and had limited Great Falls crews available, three Pasco merchandise trains were assembled together with five C44 locomotives in a 2X2X1 distributed power configuration and launched for Great Falls.

The train certainly was an item of interest on that morning's conference call.  I remember the train was over 21,000 feet in length and a bit less than 20,000 tons.  The question then became what to do with something that didn't fit anywhere except double track.  

The division General Manager at the time was kind of a quirky individual who was a semi-railfan.  He asked me (the Power Manager, on the conference call):  How far can that train go with the power it has?  "Pasco," I replied, partially because it was true, but also just to hear the reaction of everyone on the call.  "I think we should run it all the way," the GM said.  That produced a quick rebuke from the Corridor Superintendent who squashed that plan.  No way could a nearly-4-mile train be accommodated on the main line with numerous Z trains and Amtrak!  But the train did run through the crew change point of Great Falls and through to Shelby on the Northern Transcontinental where the train was busted up into two other trains and a third filled with west traffic off the CP.

After hearing the reaction from the General Manager, I was disappointed that the train didn't continue to Pasco in its original form - maybe just to see what kind of carnage it would have created en route.  But it's true: BNSF can move more tonnage westward with less power on its route between the Midwest and West Coast over Marias Pass than any other "transcontinental" route in the U.S.; I bet CN would have gone for it.  (Well, maybe not in 2009...)

I wished I'd had run a list of the train and saved for posterity.....

 

Mark Meyer

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Wednesday, March 10, 2021 2:20 AM

VerMontanan

I bet CN would have gone for it.  (Well, maybe not in 2009...)

Are you kidding!?  A train like that was Hunter Harrison's wet dream, and he was still running CN in 2009.

Since your train made it over 300 miles without problems, Hunterized CN would have started running them in both directions on a daily basis, siding length be damned, just make the crews do sawbys (they were actually a standard part of the northern Ontario operating "plan" for a surprisingly long time). 

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, March 10, 2021 6:43 AM

When saw-bys were "part of the operating plan," were they running with tw-man crews?  A third man can cut the saw-by time to a third.  A meet between mile-long trains at a siding with a length shorter than a mile. but greater thsn half-a-mile can easily take excess of two hours with only two men.  Iime and a terrific lot of hiking.

A saw-by is impossible with one-man crews.  Unless additiional employees show up to provide protection.

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Wednesday, March 10, 2021 3:29 PM

daveklepper

A saw-by is impossible with one-man crews.  Unless additiional employees show up to provide protection.

Actually it's very possible.  Just get the two crews to work together and protect each other's tail ends.  

Also, you don't have to ride the point if you have the right authority and there are no crossings.  

My understanding is that northern Ontario was a purely Conductor-only operation by this time.  Brakemen, utility employees, deadheads and additional crew starts were among the many, many things Hunter hated.

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: NotIn, TX
  • 617 posts
Posted by VerMontanan on Wednesday, March 10, 2021 5:05 PM

SD70Dude

 sawbys (they were actually a standard part of the northern Ontario operating "plan" for a surprisingly long time). 

 

Were these "real" sawbys (as in neither train fitting in the siding)?  I thought I read once where the CN "plan" east of Winnipeg was designated places where one of the trains would just double over for the meet.....

 

Mark Meyer

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Wednesday, March 10, 2021 5:36 PM

VerMontanan
SD70Dude

 sawbys (they were actually a standard part of the northern Ontario operating "plan" for a surprisingly long time). 

Were these "real" sawbys (as in neither train fitting in the siding)?  I thought I read once where the CN "plan" east of Winnipeg was designated places where one of the trains would just double over for the meet.....

While it was before I hired on, I was told by those who were there that real sawbys (two 10,000' trains meeting at a 6,000' siding) did happen on a regular basis.  The official operating plan may well have intended to only use sidings with long backtracks or yards at terminals like Sioux Lookout, Armstrong and Hornepayne, but from what I was told that didn't always happen.

One variation of the plan involved running long trains in only one direction.  Of course this created deadheads, so I don't think it lasted long.  

Since then some sidings have been lengthed to accommodate the current 12,000' standard train length, but there is still limited capacity for long trains so some run short.

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, March 11, 2021 9:51 AM

SD70Dude
Actually it's very possible.  Just get the two crews to work together and protect each other's tail ends.   Also, you don't have to ride the point if you have the right authority and there are no crossings.

In case anyone is not clear on what is involved in a double saw by, here's a video from a few months ago with simulation:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=28M1Wj1T_Jw

Someone on TrainOdors years ago pointed out that... in theory... you could saw two trains by using an 85' siding.  If you have time, lots and lots of time but not an amazingly huge Tower-of-Hanoi or halting-problem time -- I think the number worked out to about four days.  That's assuming of course there are no troublesome grades, handbrakes of dubious engagement, etc.  And that you have some way to arrange necessary recrewing, etc. etc. etc. during that time...

It is not pleasant to think about doing this with steam.  Or with a contemporary train made up with just the amount of hp/ton to get it over the road...

 

 

 

 

 

  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 1,768 posts
Posted by MMLDelete on Friday, March 12, 2021 12:20 PM

Thanks for linking that video, OM!

I had never heard of a sawby before. I never dreamed that two trains could get past each other when neither fit the siding. Amazing.

I don't know who thought that up, but it was nobody with my sort of brain!

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,275 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, March 12, 2021 2:53 PM

Lithonia Operator
Thanks for linking that video, OM!

I had never heard of a sawby before. I never dreamed that two trains could get past each other when neither fit the siding. Amazing.

I don't know who thought that up, but it was nobody with my sort of brain!

A time consuming exercise in train operations.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    April 2006
  • From: Mission BC Canada
  • 218 posts
Posted by williamsb on Monday, March 15, 2021 11:16 AM

I assume the 0.7% grade starts at Spicer M.70.6 where the Robson Sub joins the Albreda Sub starts and the video is at M.54, I find it amazing that the lone working engine an SD75I 5693 could pull a 182 car train with many of them loads at all let alone make it part way up that grade!

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,275 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, March 15, 2021 11:32 AM

williamsb
I assume the 0.7% grade starts at Spicer M.70.6 where the Robson Sub joins the Albreda Sub starts and the video is at M.54, I find it amazing that the lone working engine an SD75I 5693 could pull a 182 car train with many of them loads at all let alone make it part way up that grade!

I don't know any of the specifics about the territory involved.

However, length of train has a very big effect on how trains can be handled where the ruling grade is not of sufficient length to have the full weight of the train on the grade at the same time.

Akron, OH on the B&O - there is a 1% grade both East & West of Akron Jct. where there is a 10 MPH permanent slow order.  The grade is approximately one mile in either direction.  Loaded bulk commodity trains would routinely stall on the grade - they would have their entire train on the grade.  Autopart or intermodal trains haul in the same amount of tonnage as the bulk commodity trains would not stall.  The bulk commodity trains would be 4800-5000 feet long; the autoparts and intermodal trains would be 8000-9000 feet long; they would have part of their train shoving downhill long enough for the head end of the train to crest the 'other side' and thus the train never had its full tonnage on the grade like the bulk commodity trains. 

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    April 2006
  • From: Mission BC Canada
  • 218 posts
Posted by williamsb on Monday, March 15, 2021 4:37 PM

I didn't realize it but I have a track profile of CN's Albreda Sub from the late Ray Matthews.

The Albreda Sub grade starts just east of Valemount at m.73.0 and is 0.4% to M.69.4 about 8/10 of a mile past Spicer at M.70.6. The grade is then 0.7% for about 4 miles, slackens off to 0.2% for a mile, then 0.6 for 7 miles a little break of 0.3% for a mile then 0.7% for 1 1/2 miles to about M.55 then 0.6% to just about Red Pass at M.43.7. This grade tops out at M.46.1.

A SD75I tonnage rating is 5765 tons from Harvey to Red Pass. Harvey is the connecting point to the Tete Jaune Sub North connecting track to the Robson Sub to the Albreda Sub at M.70.6.

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Monday, March 15, 2021 10:31 PM

In this case I think the second unit died after the train was already partway up the hill.  With only one working unit they might not have made it off the north connecting track. 

Those flatter spots are at Jackman and Morey, which have been sidings right from when the line was constructed (Jackman and two other sidings on both hills have been removed, Morey is still in place but is almost never used).  I suspect they were design features to aid steam engines in starting eastward trains.

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, March 16, 2021 3:32 AM

SD70   Not rdoomog the point?   What about sudden obstructions?

I agree if point-riding is not required, time and hiking can be reduced.

If point-riding is required, then with just two one-man crews and one-mile trains, the sawby might take five hoiurs and about 20 miles total of hiking divided between the two men.

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Tuesday, March 16, 2021 11:30 AM

daveklepper

SD70   Not rdoomog the point?   What about sudden obstructions?

I agree if point-riding is not required, time and hiking can be reduced.

If point-riding is required, then with just two one-man crews and one-mile trains, the sawby might take five hoiurs and about 20 miles total of hiking divided between the two men.

In our rulebook main tracks and sidings are controlled by the dispatcher, and if train has a written work authority (or a permissive signal indication in CTC) shoving moves may be performed without anyone on the point, as the track is "known to be clear".  Trespassers, landslides etc do not exist for the purposes of rule compliance. 

Such moves must not approach within 100 feet of any crossing. 

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, March 16, 2021 12:07 PM

daveklepper
SD70   Not rdoomog the point?   What about sudden obstructions? I agree if point-riding is not required, time and hiking can be reduced.

In case you wonder why I advocated putting adjustable cameras in a FRED (or comparable device to drop into a knuckle or whatever)... here's another example of legitimate potential Big Savings.

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Sterling Heights, Michigan
  • 1,691 posts
Posted by SD60MAC9500 on Tuesday, March 16, 2021 2:00 PM

SD70Dude

 

 
daveklepper

SD70   Not rdoomog the point?   What about sudden obstructions?

I agree if point-riding is not required, time and hiking can be reduced.

If point-riding is required, then with just two one-man crews and one-mile trains, the sawby might take five hoiurs and about 20 miles total of hiking divided between the two men.

 

 

In our rulebook main tracks and sidings are controlled by the dispatcher, and if train has a written work authority (or a permissive signal indication in CTC) shoving moves may be performed without anyone on the point, as the track is "known to be clear".  Trespassers, landslides etc do not exist for the purposes of rule compliance. 

Such moves must not approach within 100 feet of any crossing. 

 

Use to hear that quite often on the radio at CN's Indian Rd. Yard in Sarnia. RTC would grant them back up through a permissive signal without someone on the point.

Rahhhhhhhhh!!!!
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,275 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, March 16, 2021 4:15 PM

SD60MAC9500
 
SD70Dude 
daveklepper

SD70   Not rdoomog the point?   What about sudden obstructions?

I agree if point-riding is not required, time and hiking can be reduced.

If point-riding is required, then with just two one-man crews and one-mile trains, the sawby might take five hoiurs and about 20 miles total of hiking divided between the two men. 

In our rulebook main tracks and sidings are controlled by the dispatcher, and if train has a written work authority (or a permissive signal indication in CTC) shoving moves may be performed without anyone on the point, as the track is "known to be clear".  Trespassers, landslides etc do not exist for the purposes of rule compliance. 

Such moves must not approach within 100 feet of any crossing.  

Use to hear that quite often on the radio at CN's Indian Rd. Yard in Sarnia. RTC would grant them back up through a permissive signal without someone on the point.

Where I was working - you could not 'talk' someone past a signal they could not see; you could not communicate any signal indication to crews - crews needed to see the signal in order to accept its indication.  FRA and all that.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Tuesday, March 16, 2021 4:23 PM

BaltACD

Where I was working - you could not 'talk' someone past a signal they could not see; you could not communicate any signal indication to crews - crews needed to see the signal in order to accept its indication.  FRA and all that.

That is also the case in Canada. 

The conductor will be on the ground at the signal to see it, but will not ride the point as the movement passes the signal, as the track beyond is "known to be clear" for the length of that block, which the crew will know if they are familiar with their territory. 

The point of this type of move is usually to get the conductor on the head end more quickly, or shove the train out of one end of the yard and then proceed in the opposite direction with the entire crew on the head end. 

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,008 posts
Posted by tree68 on Tuesday, March 16, 2021 4:30 PM

NORAC rules for dark territory restrict reverse movements (on a one-way Form D) to the last station or milepost your train could be called clear of, regardless of whether you heard someone call you clear.

To go past that point would require permission of the DS, or possibly a new Form D.  

If you have a both directions Form D, the railroad is yours within the limits stated on the form.

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

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