Originally posted by csxengineer98 Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply csxengineer98 Member sinceOctober 2002 From: US 2,358 posts Posted by csxengineer98 on Sunday, March 27, 2005 3:01 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Sounds very comon sense practical to me what you posted. [:p][:)][:o)][:I] Originally posted by csxengineer98 have to look at things from an opporational standpoint..... when you can think of the overall big picture it sometimes becomes a bit more clear csx engineer "I AM the higher source" Keep the wheels on steel Reply ValleyX Member sinceApril 2001 From: US 1,103 posts Posted by ValleyX on Sunday, March 27, 2005 9:24 AM Oh my, you mean, you're telling me you've seen the big picture, csx? Oh, did your hair turn gray? I agree, give me some nicely spaced two mile sidings, seems to me like long running tracks would tend to bunch trains up. Reply K. P. Harrier Member sinceOctober 2003 7,968 posts Posted by K. P. Harrier on Sunday, March 27, 2005 9:32 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by robscaboose [?][?][?] In the US News article the BNSF talked about adding additional trackage (50 miles) per year. What are the advantages or disadvantages of lets say adding 10 relatively short sidings (2 miles long) sidings vs adding 5 (ten mile) sidings over a mostly single track district. Rob: I’m baffled. Assuming $2 million per mile cost … 10 x 2 = 20 vs. 5 x 10 = 50? Did you mean 25 x 2 = 50 vs. 5 x 10 = 50? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Sunday, March 27, 2005 1:07 PM Well Valley X must have had a to do with you somtime earlier. For me this is one great school to learn from [:D] QUOTE: Originally posted by csxengineer98 QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Sounds very comon sense practical to me what you posted. [:p][:)][:o)][:I] Originally posted by csxengineer98 have to look at things from an opporational standpoint..... when you can think of the overall big picture it sometimes becomes a bit more clear csx engineer Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply ValleyX Member sinceApril 2001 From: US 1,103 posts Posted by ValleyX on Monday, March 28, 2005 12:41 AM To do? No, spbed. It's rather a joke on the railroad and I imagine all the railroads to be told by a dispatcher or a trainmaster or some other quasi-authority figure, if you question something, to be told that, "You don't see the big picture". We keep looking for someone who's actually seen the big picture so they can fill us in. I was joking with csx, that's all. Reply csxengineer98 Member sinceOctober 2002 From: US 2,358 posts Posted by csxengineer98 on Monday, March 28, 2005 2:31 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by ValleyX Oh my, you mean, you're telling me you've seen the big picture, csx? Oh, did your hair turn gray? I agree, give me some nicely spaced two mile sidings, seems to me like long running tracks would tend to bunch trains up. lol......actuly i never did see csx's big picture... but i always hear the higher ups making some refrence to it..... i personly think its just a pipe dream and their is no big picture..just a bunch of post cards....lol csx engineer "I AM the higher source" Keep the wheels on steel Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 8:38 PM It would seem that it is alot more simplistic to build short sidings because infrastructure such as grade crossings and bridges can be worked around. I don't claim to be an expert, thats just my guess. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 8:57 PM How many trains are expected to run? How long will they be? How fast are they expected to run? Are they locals or long distance? What kinds of freight, what priorities? That's a few questions that pop imediately into my mind. Reply Edit MikeSanta Member sinceApril 2002 105 posts Posted by MikeSanta on Monday, March 28, 2005 9:54 PM I bet a train longer than 2 miles long is a rarity,so I don't see the point of a five mile siding. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 10:19 PM Does this make sense? Actually a long siding would be needed. If a heavy freight is moving at a good speed and has to 'side' for an oncoming train because he nearer to it. Then he would have to get onto the siding and stop in a required time/distance. Of course everyone here knows how long it takes a train to stop. I am not as knowledgeable about trains as you guys so maybe this scenario would be unlikely exept in an emergency. Maybe dispatch keeps up with where the trains are on a main line more acurrately than I think. Reply Edit stmtrolleyguy Member sinceSeptember 2004 From: Boston Area 294 posts Posted by stmtrolleyguy on Monday, March 28, 2005 10:32 PM If you build a 5-mile siding every 5 miles, then eventually you can connect them, and 3 sections later, lo and behold, you've got 15 miles of new main line (just remove the switches) and double track. Or just a giant 15-mile siding. StmTrolleyguy Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 11:33 PM I did not realize the multiple use of a siding. I learn something everyday on this message board. QUESTION: Is there any way to find [approximately] the amount of trackage that has been removed over the last 25 years from the American Railroads? It is astounding to me when I see mid to late 20th Century maps w/ the enormous amount of rail lines detailed in each state, and then realize how much of that rail has been abandoned and now removed in the early years of the 21st Century. I just wonder how much has been lost........ especially when you consider that many rail lines had double trackage in several places for many miles [10, 20, 25 or more] at a time. Reply Edit railroadmike11 Member sinceJanuary 2002 7 posts Posted by railroadmike11 on Monday, March 28, 2005 11:51 PM i for one would like to see a 7500 ft siding every 10 miles where i run. it is very frustating to be on a 6800 ft train and the next 3 sidings are only 5900 ft long. this means i have a lot of waiting to do. and i hate to say but for all of us guys and gals running out there, there is no big picture for us, is there? bnsf engineer Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:42 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy If you build a 5-mile siding every 5 miles, then eventually you can connect them, and 3 sections later, lo and behold, you've got 15 miles of new main line (just remove the switches) and double track. Or just a giant 15-mile siding. Don't just remove all of the switches after installing double track, upgrade to single or universal crossovers every ten to thirty miles or so (depending on what the railroad is willing to spend to move future traffic levels efficiently). Voila, sorting capability. Obviously, sorting is accomplished much quicker in CTC territory but still it can be done in ABS-DT territory. Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:47 AM The last is essentially what the BNSF is doing on the Transcon. In any case, a good dispatcher with excellent engineers can run a single track railroad with long sidings without stopping trains at sidings, "running meets", whereas short sidings add the additional operating expense and time of stopping and starting trains. Reply csxengineer98 Member sinceOctober 2002 From: US 2,358 posts Posted by csxengineer98 on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 4:21 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy If you build a 5-mile siding every 5 miles, then eventually you can connect them, and 3 sections later, lo and behold, you've got 15 miles of new main line (just remove the switches) and double track. Or just a giant 15-mile siding. that would be nice but you have to remember how railroads realy work...they will spend millions to put the sidings in...use them for a little while...never maintain anything in them other then the switches (and only after they bust) and 10 or 15 years down the road..when the traffic demographic shifts to where they dont need them anymore..they will just rip them rigth back up agin....also the railroad isnt going to invest the money needed to build a 5 mile long siding... if they are going to put out the capital to build something that long... odds are they will make it an additional main track..not a sideing... ..you wouldnt want to remove all your switches..crossovers are very nice things to have around in chunks of double track... when you get a dispatcher that can run trains...they will krisscross trains around one another if thier are any problems like a crew goes on the law... or the train just plain brakes down... stacking up trains behind a dead one with on way to get them around it will start a domino affect.... and then the dispatchers problems just multiplyed.... also... when railroads spend the money to build a siding.. since its not main track..it donst have to be up to the same specs as main track..thier for it will cost them less to maintain then a new main line track segment would.... just a few more thoughts on the subject csx engineer "I AM the higher source" Keep the wheels on steel Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:33 AM Sounds reasonable but what if the trains just keep getting longer & longer. I would guess even right now there is a hi % of trains being run that are over 7,500 feet. Maybe 10,000 to 12,000 feet would be better or have the RR shorten the consists. [:)][:p] Originally posted by railroadmike11 Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:35 AM Somewhere I read that to build 1 mile of track costs over 1M per mile! [:)][:I] Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:38 AM OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)] Originally posted by ValleyX [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply fuzzybroken Member sinceOctober 2002 From: Milwaukee, WI, US 1,384 posts Posted by fuzzybroken on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:14 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)] Yep, especially when they listen to that "rock and/or roll" music... [:o)] -Mark http://www.geocities.com/fuzzybroken -Fuzzy Fuzzy World 3 Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:26 AM Long sidings are better for my model railroad and simulated railroad anyways. Some of the trains exceed 10,000 feet including intermodal, ore and grain trains. I prefer short sidings in areas where alot of locals operate but the mainline traffic is minimal. CP has had to lengthen sidings for similar reasons on the Galt Sub in Ontario. BNSF seems to be doing that on one of their transcons and CN is doing it on the Stamford Sub at Fort Erie, ON. Andrew Reply chad thomas Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Ely, Nv. 6,312 posts Posted by chad thomas on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 10:03 AM If you were to judge things based on the Sunset route it would seem Frequent sidings are the key, not nessasaraly long sidings. I was very impressed with the ability of SPs dispachers in the SP times. I would say at times they could handle as many trains on there single track CTC line as the SF could handle on it's double track ABS line across the Mojave.[8D] Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 12:39 PM The advantage of running meets vs stopped is really, really low in the overall scheme of things. The 5x2 mile sidings will get you steadier flow of traffic in both directions, while the 2x5 mile sidings will cause traffic to flow in fleeted bunches as you'd have to accumulate several trains at the siding location before it was clear to let them out. Better for schedule keeping if you have more, shorter sidings. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply jchnhtfd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,537 posts Posted by jchnhtfd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:15 PM Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Jamie Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:22 PM Yeah, but the Sante Fe ran its trains a lot faster on the Transcon under ABS than the SP did with single track and CTC. Now, except for some gaps being plugged, the SF is double track and CTC. Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:48 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Now, if we could only get train operations to adhere to the schedules being fed the models, we'd have it made! -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » 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 More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Sounds very comon sense practical to me what you posted. [:p][:)][:o)][:I] Originally posted by csxengineer98 have to look at things from an opporational standpoint..... when you can think of the overall big picture it sometimes becomes a bit more clear csx engineer "I AM the higher source" Keep the wheels on steel Reply ValleyX Member sinceApril 2001 From: US 1,103 posts Posted by ValleyX on Sunday, March 27, 2005 9:24 AM Oh my, you mean, you're telling me you've seen the big picture, csx? Oh, did your hair turn gray? I agree, give me some nicely spaced two mile sidings, seems to me like long running tracks would tend to bunch trains up. Reply K. P. Harrier Member sinceOctober 2003 7,968 posts Posted by K. P. Harrier on Sunday, March 27, 2005 9:32 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by robscaboose [?][?][?] In the US News article the BNSF talked about adding additional trackage (50 miles) per year. What are the advantages or disadvantages of lets say adding 10 relatively short sidings (2 miles long) sidings vs adding 5 (ten mile) sidings over a mostly single track district. Rob: I’m baffled. Assuming $2 million per mile cost … 10 x 2 = 20 vs. 5 x 10 = 50? Did you mean 25 x 2 = 50 vs. 5 x 10 = 50? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Sunday, March 27, 2005 1:07 PM Well Valley X must have had a to do with you somtime earlier. For me this is one great school to learn from [:D] QUOTE: Originally posted by csxengineer98 QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Sounds very comon sense practical to me what you posted. [:p][:)][:o)][:I] Originally posted by csxengineer98 have to look at things from an opporational standpoint..... when you can think of the overall big picture it sometimes becomes a bit more clear csx engineer Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply ValleyX Member sinceApril 2001 From: US 1,103 posts Posted by ValleyX on Monday, March 28, 2005 12:41 AM To do? No, spbed. It's rather a joke on the railroad and I imagine all the railroads to be told by a dispatcher or a trainmaster or some other quasi-authority figure, if you question something, to be told that, "You don't see the big picture". We keep looking for someone who's actually seen the big picture so they can fill us in. I was joking with csx, that's all. Reply csxengineer98 Member sinceOctober 2002 From: US 2,358 posts Posted by csxengineer98 on Monday, March 28, 2005 2:31 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by ValleyX Oh my, you mean, you're telling me you've seen the big picture, csx? Oh, did your hair turn gray? I agree, give me some nicely spaced two mile sidings, seems to me like long running tracks would tend to bunch trains up. lol......actuly i never did see csx's big picture... but i always hear the higher ups making some refrence to it..... i personly think its just a pipe dream and their is no big picture..just a bunch of post cards....lol csx engineer "I AM the higher source" Keep the wheels on steel Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 8:38 PM It would seem that it is alot more simplistic to build short sidings because infrastructure such as grade crossings and bridges can be worked around. I don't claim to be an expert, thats just my guess. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 8:57 PM How many trains are expected to run? How long will they be? How fast are they expected to run? Are they locals or long distance? What kinds of freight, what priorities? That's a few questions that pop imediately into my mind. Reply Edit MikeSanta Member sinceApril 2002 105 posts Posted by MikeSanta on Monday, March 28, 2005 9:54 PM I bet a train longer than 2 miles long is a rarity,so I don't see the point of a five mile siding. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 10:19 PM Does this make sense? Actually a long siding would be needed. If a heavy freight is moving at a good speed and has to 'side' for an oncoming train because he nearer to it. Then he would have to get onto the siding and stop in a required time/distance. Of course everyone here knows how long it takes a train to stop. I am not as knowledgeable about trains as you guys so maybe this scenario would be unlikely exept in an emergency. Maybe dispatch keeps up with where the trains are on a main line more acurrately than I think. Reply Edit stmtrolleyguy Member sinceSeptember 2004 From: Boston Area 294 posts Posted by stmtrolleyguy on Monday, March 28, 2005 10:32 PM If you build a 5-mile siding every 5 miles, then eventually you can connect them, and 3 sections later, lo and behold, you've got 15 miles of new main line (just remove the switches) and double track. Or just a giant 15-mile siding. StmTrolleyguy Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 11:33 PM I did not realize the multiple use of a siding. I learn something everyday on this message board. QUESTION: Is there any way to find [approximately] the amount of trackage that has been removed over the last 25 years from the American Railroads? It is astounding to me when I see mid to late 20th Century maps w/ the enormous amount of rail lines detailed in each state, and then realize how much of that rail has been abandoned and now removed in the early years of the 21st Century. I just wonder how much has been lost........ especially when you consider that many rail lines had double trackage in several places for many miles [10, 20, 25 or more] at a time. Reply Edit railroadmike11 Member sinceJanuary 2002 7 posts Posted by railroadmike11 on Monday, March 28, 2005 11:51 PM i for one would like to see a 7500 ft siding every 10 miles where i run. it is very frustating to be on a 6800 ft train and the next 3 sidings are only 5900 ft long. this means i have a lot of waiting to do. and i hate to say but for all of us guys and gals running out there, there is no big picture for us, is there? bnsf engineer Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:42 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy If you build a 5-mile siding every 5 miles, then eventually you can connect them, and 3 sections later, lo and behold, you've got 15 miles of new main line (just remove the switches) and double track. Or just a giant 15-mile siding. Don't just remove all of the switches after installing double track, upgrade to single or universal crossovers every ten to thirty miles or so (depending on what the railroad is willing to spend to move future traffic levels efficiently). Voila, sorting capability. Obviously, sorting is accomplished much quicker in CTC territory but still it can be done in ABS-DT territory. Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:47 AM The last is essentially what the BNSF is doing on the Transcon. In any case, a good dispatcher with excellent engineers can run a single track railroad with long sidings without stopping trains at sidings, "running meets", whereas short sidings add the additional operating expense and time of stopping and starting trains. Reply csxengineer98 Member sinceOctober 2002 From: US 2,358 posts Posted by csxengineer98 on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 4:21 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy If you build a 5-mile siding every 5 miles, then eventually you can connect them, and 3 sections later, lo and behold, you've got 15 miles of new main line (just remove the switches) and double track. Or just a giant 15-mile siding. that would be nice but you have to remember how railroads realy work...they will spend millions to put the sidings in...use them for a little while...never maintain anything in them other then the switches (and only after they bust) and 10 or 15 years down the road..when the traffic demographic shifts to where they dont need them anymore..they will just rip them rigth back up agin....also the railroad isnt going to invest the money needed to build a 5 mile long siding... if they are going to put out the capital to build something that long... odds are they will make it an additional main track..not a sideing... ..you wouldnt want to remove all your switches..crossovers are very nice things to have around in chunks of double track... when you get a dispatcher that can run trains...they will krisscross trains around one another if thier are any problems like a crew goes on the law... or the train just plain brakes down... stacking up trains behind a dead one with on way to get them around it will start a domino affect.... and then the dispatchers problems just multiplyed.... also... when railroads spend the money to build a siding.. since its not main track..it donst have to be up to the same specs as main track..thier for it will cost them less to maintain then a new main line track segment would.... just a few more thoughts on the subject csx engineer "I AM the higher source" Keep the wheels on steel Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:33 AM Sounds reasonable but what if the trains just keep getting longer & longer. I would guess even right now there is a hi % of trains being run that are over 7,500 feet. Maybe 10,000 to 12,000 feet would be better or have the RR shorten the consists. [:)][:p] Originally posted by railroadmike11 Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:35 AM Somewhere I read that to build 1 mile of track costs over 1M per mile! [:)][:I] Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:38 AM OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)] Originally posted by ValleyX [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply fuzzybroken Member sinceOctober 2002 From: Milwaukee, WI, US 1,384 posts Posted by fuzzybroken on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:14 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)] Yep, especially when they listen to that "rock and/or roll" music... [:o)] -Mark http://www.geocities.com/fuzzybroken -Fuzzy Fuzzy World 3 Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:26 AM Long sidings are better for my model railroad and simulated railroad anyways. Some of the trains exceed 10,000 feet including intermodal, ore and grain trains. I prefer short sidings in areas where alot of locals operate but the mainline traffic is minimal. CP has had to lengthen sidings for similar reasons on the Galt Sub in Ontario. BNSF seems to be doing that on one of their transcons and CN is doing it on the Stamford Sub at Fort Erie, ON. Andrew Reply chad thomas Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Ely, Nv. 6,312 posts Posted by chad thomas on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 10:03 AM If you were to judge things based on the Sunset route it would seem Frequent sidings are the key, not nessasaraly long sidings. I was very impressed with the ability of SPs dispachers in the SP times. I would say at times they could handle as many trains on there single track CTC line as the SF could handle on it's double track ABS line across the Mojave.[8D] Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 12:39 PM The advantage of running meets vs stopped is really, really low in the overall scheme of things. The 5x2 mile sidings will get you steadier flow of traffic in both directions, while the 2x5 mile sidings will cause traffic to flow in fleeted bunches as you'd have to accumulate several trains at the siding location before it was clear to let them out. Better for schedule keeping if you have more, shorter sidings. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply jchnhtfd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,537 posts Posted by jchnhtfd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:15 PM Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Jamie Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:22 PM Yeah, but the Sante Fe ran its trains a lot faster on the Transcon under ABS than the SP did with single track and CTC. Now, except for some gaps being plugged, the SF is double track and CTC. Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:48 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Now, if we could only get train operations to adhere to the schedules being fed the models, we'd have it made! -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » 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 More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by csxengineer98
QUOTE: Originally posted by robscaboose [?][?][?] In the US News article the BNSF talked about adding additional trackage (50 miles) per year. What are the advantages or disadvantages of lets say adding 10 relatively short sidings (2 miles long) sidings vs adding 5 (ten mile) sidings over a mostly single track district.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
QUOTE: Originally posted by csxengineer98 QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Sounds very comon sense practical to me what you posted. [:p][:)][:o)][:I] Originally posted by csxengineer98 have to look at things from an opporational standpoint..... when you can think of the overall big picture it sometimes becomes a bit more clear csx engineer Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply ValleyX Member sinceApril 2001 From: US 1,103 posts Posted by ValleyX on Monday, March 28, 2005 12:41 AM To do? No, spbed. It's rather a joke on the railroad and I imagine all the railroads to be told by a dispatcher or a trainmaster or some other quasi-authority figure, if you question something, to be told that, "You don't see the big picture". We keep looking for someone who's actually seen the big picture so they can fill us in. I was joking with csx, that's all. Reply csxengineer98 Member sinceOctober 2002 From: US 2,358 posts Posted by csxengineer98 on Monday, March 28, 2005 2:31 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by ValleyX Oh my, you mean, you're telling me you've seen the big picture, csx? Oh, did your hair turn gray? I agree, give me some nicely spaced two mile sidings, seems to me like long running tracks would tend to bunch trains up. lol......actuly i never did see csx's big picture... but i always hear the higher ups making some refrence to it..... i personly think its just a pipe dream and their is no big picture..just a bunch of post cards....lol csx engineer "I AM the higher source" Keep the wheels on steel Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 8:38 PM It would seem that it is alot more simplistic to build short sidings because infrastructure such as grade crossings and bridges can be worked around. I don't claim to be an expert, thats just my guess. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 8:57 PM How many trains are expected to run? How long will they be? How fast are they expected to run? Are they locals or long distance? What kinds of freight, what priorities? That's a few questions that pop imediately into my mind. Reply Edit MikeSanta Member sinceApril 2002 105 posts Posted by MikeSanta on Monday, March 28, 2005 9:54 PM I bet a train longer than 2 miles long is a rarity,so I don't see the point of a five mile siding. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 10:19 PM Does this make sense? Actually a long siding would be needed. If a heavy freight is moving at a good speed and has to 'side' for an oncoming train because he nearer to it. Then he would have to get onto the siding and stop in a required time/distance. Of course everyone here knows how long it takes a train to stop. I am not as knowledgeable about trains as you guys so maybe this scenario would be unlikely exept in an emergency. Maybe dispatch keeps up with where the trains are on a main line more acurrately than I think. Reply Edit stmtrolleyguy Member sinceSeptember 2004 From: Boston Area 294 posts Posted by stmtrolleyguy on Monday, March 28, 2005 10:32 PM If you build a 5-mile siding every 5 miles, then eventually you can connect them, and 3 sections later, lo and behold, you've got 15 miles of new main line (just remove the switches) and double track. Or just a giant 15-mile siding. StmTrolleyguy Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 11:33 PM I did not realize the multiple use of a siding. I learn something everyday on this message board. QUESTION: Is there any way to find [approximately] the amount of trackage that has been removed over the last 25 years from the American Railroads? It is astounding to me when I see mid to late 20th Century maps w/ the enormous amount of rail lines detailed in each state, and then realize how much of that rail has been abandoned and now removed in the early years of the 21st Century. I just wonder how much has been lost........ especially when you consider that many rail lines had double trackage in several places for many miles [10, 20, 25 or more] at a time. Reply Edit railroadmike11 Member sinceJanuary 2002 7 posts Posted by railroadmike11 on Monday, March 28, 2005 11:51 PM i for one would like to see a 7500 ft siding every 10 miles where i run. it is very frustating to be on a 6800 ft train and the next 3 sidings are only 5900 ft long. this means i have a lot of waiting to do. and i hate to say but for all of us guys and gals running out there, there is no big picture for us, is there? bnsf engineer Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:42 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy If you build a 5-mile siding every 5 miles, then eventually you can connect them, and 3 sections later, lo and behold, you've got 15 miles of new main line (just remove the switches) and double track. Or just a giant 15-mile siding. Don't just remove all of the switches after installing double track, upgrade to single or universal crossovers every ten to thirty miles or so (depending on what the railroad is willing to spend to move future traffic levels efficiently). Voila, sorting capability. Obviously, sorting is accomplished much quicker in CTC territory but still it can be done in ABS-DT territory. Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:47 AM The last is essentially what the BNSF is doing on the Transcon. In any case, a good dispatcher with excellent engineers can run a single track railroad with long sidings without stopping trains at sidings, "running meets", whereas short sidings add the additional operating expense and time of stopping and starting trains. Reply csxengineer98 Member sinceOctober 2002 From: US 2,358 posts Posted by csxengineer98 on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 4:21 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy If you build a 5-mile siding every 5 miles, then eventually you can connect them, and 3 sections later, lo and behold, you've got 15 miles of new main line (just remove the switches) and double track. Or just a giant 15-mile siding. that would be nice but you have to remember how railroads realy work...they will spend millions to put the sidings in...use them for a little while...never maintain anything in them other then the switches (and only after they bust) and 10 or 15 years down the road..when the traffic demographic shifts to where they dont need them anymore..they will just rip them rigth back up agin....also the railroad isnt going to invest the money needed to build a 5 mile long siding... if they are going to put out the capital to build something that long... odds are they will make it an additional main track..not a sideing... ..you wouldnt want to remove all your switches..crossovers are very nice things to have around in chunks of double track... when you get a dispatcher that can run trains...they will krisscross trains around one another if thier are any problems like a crew goes on the law... or the train just plain brakes down... stacking up trains behind a dead one with on way to get them around it will start a domino affect.... and then the dispatchers problems just multiplyed.... also... when railroads spend the money to build a siding.. since its not main track..it donst have to be up to the same specs as main track..thier for it will cost them less to maintain then a new main line track segment would.... just a few more thoughts on the subject csx engineer "I AM the higher source" Keep the wheels on steel Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:33 AM Sounds reasonable but what if the trains just keep getting longer & longer. I would guess even right now there is a hi % of trains being run that are over 7,500 feet. Maybe 10,000 to 12,000 feet would be better or have the RR shorten the consists. [:)][:p] Originally posted by railroadmike11 Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:35 AM Somewhere I read that to build 1 mile of track costs over 1M per mile! [:)][:I] Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:38 AM OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)] Originally posted by ValleyX [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply fuzzybroken Member sinceOctober 2002 From: Milwaukee, WI, US 1,384 posts Posted by fuzzybroken on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:14 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)] Yep, especially when they listen to that "rock and/or roll" music... [:o)] -Mark http://www.geocities.com/fuzzybroken -Fuzzy Fuzzy World 3 Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:26 AM Long sidings are better for my model railroad and simulated railroad anyways. Some of the trains exceed 10,000 feet including intermodal, ore and grain trains. I prefer short sidings in areas where alot of locals operate but the mainline traffic is minimal. CP has had to lengthen sidings for similar reasons on the Galt Sub in Ontario. BNSF seems to be doing that on one of their transcons and CN is doing it on the Stamford Sub at Fort Erie, ON. Andrew Reply chad thomas Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Ely, Nv. 6,312 posts Posted by chad thomas on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 10:03 AM If you were to judge things based on the Sunset route it would seem Frequent sidings are the key, not nessasaraly long sidings. I was very impressed with the ability of SPs dispachers in the SP times. I would say at times they could handle as many trains on there single track CTC line as the SF could handle on it's double track ABS line across the Mojave.[8D] Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 12:39 PM The advantage of running meets vs stopped is really, really low in the overall scheme of things. The 5x2 mile sidings will get you steadier flow of traffic in both directions, while the 2x5 mile sidings will cause traffic to flow in fleeted bunches as you'd have to accumulate several trains at the siding location before it was clear to let them out. Better for schedule keeping if you have more, shorter sidings. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply jchnhtfd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,537 posts Posted by jchnhtfd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:15 PM Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Jamie Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:22 PM Yeah, but the Sante Fe ran its trains a lot faster on the Transcon under ABS than the SP did with single track and CTC. Now, except for some gaps being plugged, the SF is double track and CTC. Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:48 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Now, if we could only get train operations to adhere to the schedules being fed the models, we'd have it made! -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » 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 More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Sounds very comon sense practical to me what you posted. [:p][:)][:o)][:I] Originally posted by csxengineer98 have to look at things from an opporational standpoint..... when you can think of the overall big picture it sometimes becomes a bit more clear csx engineer
QUOTE: Originally posted by ValleyX Oh my, you mean, you're telling me you've seen the big picture, csx? Oh, did your hair turn gray? I agree, give me some nicely spaced two mile sidings, seems to me like long running tracks would tend to bunch trains up.
QUOTE: Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy If you build a 5-mile siding every 5 miles, then eventually you can connect them, and 3 sections later, lo and behold, you've got 15 miles of new main line (just remove the switches) and double track. Or just a giant 15-mile siding.
Originally posted by railroadmike11 Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:35 AM Somewhere I read that to build 1 mile of track costs over 1M per mile! [:)][:I] Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:38 AM OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)] Originally posted by ValleyX [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply fuzzybroken Member sinceOctober 2002 From: Milwaukee, WI, US 1,384 posts Posted by fuzzybroken on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:14 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)] Yep, especially when they listen to that "rock and/or roll" music... [:o)] -Mark http://www.geocities.com/fuzzybroken -Fuzzy Fuzzy World 3 Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:26 AM Long sidings are better for my model railroad and simulated railroad anyways. Some of the trains exceed 10,000 feet including intermodal, ore and grain trains. I prefer short sidings in areas where alot of locals operate but the mainline traffic is minimal. CP has had to lengthen sidings for similar reasons on the Galt Sub in Ontario. BNSF seems to be doing that on one of their transcons and CN is doing it on the Stamford Sub at Fort Erie, ON. Andrew Reply chad thomas Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Ely, Nv. 6,312 posts Posted by chad thomas on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 10:03 AM If you were to judge things based on the Sunset route it would seem Frequent sidings are the key, not nessasaraly long sidings. I was very impressed with the ability of SPs dispachers in the SP times. I would say at times they could handle as many trains on there single track CTC line as the SF could handle on it's double track ABS line across the Mojave.[8D] Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 12:39 PM The advantage of running meets vs stopped is really, really low in the overall scheme of things. The 5x2 mile sidings will get you steadier flow of traffic in both directions, while the 2x5 mile sidings will cause traffic to flow in fleeted bunches as you'd have to accumulate several trains at the siding location before it was clear to let them out. Better for schedule keeping if you have more, shorter sidings. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply jchnhtfd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,537 posts Posted by jchnhtfd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:15 PM Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Jamie Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:22 PM Yeah, but the Sante Fe ran its trains a lot faster on the Transcon under ABS than the SP did with single track and CTC. Now, except for some gaps being plugged, the SF is double track and CTC. Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:48 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Now, if we could only get train operations to adhere to the schedules being fed the models, we'd have it made! -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » 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 More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:38 AM OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)] Originally posted by ValleyX [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply fuzzybroken Member sinceOctober 2002 From: Milwaukee, WI, US 1,384 posts Posted by fuzzybroken on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:14 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)] Yep, especially when they listen to that "rock and/or roll" music... [:o)] -Mark http://www.geocities.com/fuzzybroken -Fuzzy Fuzzy World 3 Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:26 AM Long sidings are better for my model railroad and simulated railroad anyways. Some of the trains exceed 10,000 feet including intermodal, ore and grain trains. I prefer short sidings in areas where alot of locals operate but the mainline traffic is minimal. CP has had to lengthen sidings for similar reasons on the Galt Sub in Ontario. BNSF seems to be doing that on one of their transcons and CN is doing it on the Stamford Sub at Fort Erie, ON. Andrew Reply chad thomas Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Ely, Nv. 6,312 posts Posted by chad thomas on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 10:03 AM If you were to judge things based on the Sunset route it would seem Frequent sidings are the key, not nessasaraly long sidings. I was very impressed with the ability of SPs dispachers in the SP times. I would say at times they could handle as many trains on there single track CTC line as the SF could handle on it's double track ABS line across the Mojave.[8D] Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 12:39 PM The advantage of running meets vs stopped is really, really low in the overall scheme of things. The 5x2 mile sidings will get you steadier flow of traffic in both directions, while the 2x5 mile sidings will cause traffic to flow in fleeted bunches as you'd have to accumulate several trains at the siding location before it was clear to let them out. Better for schedule keeping if you have more, shorter sidings. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply jchnhtfd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,537 posts Posted by jchnhtfd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:15 PM Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Jamie Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:22 PM Yeah, but the Sante Fe ran its trains a lot faster on the Transcon under ABS than the SP did with single track and CTC. Now, except for some gaps being plugged, the SF is double track and CTC. Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:48 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Now, if we could only get train operations to adhere to the schedules being fed the models, we'd have it made! -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » 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 More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by ValleyX [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply fuzzybroken Member sinceOctober 2002 From: Milwaukee, WI, US 1,384 posts Posted by fuzzybroken on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:14 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)] Yep, especially when they listen to that "rock and/or roll" music... [:o)] -Mark http://www.geocities.com/fuzzybroken -Fuzzy Fuzzy World 3 Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:26 AM Long sidings are better for my model railroad and simulated railroad anyways. Some of the trains exceed 10,000 feet including intermodal, ore and grain trains. I prefer short sidings in areas where alot of locals operate but the mainline traffic is minimal. CP has had to lengthen sidings for similar reasons on the Galt Sub in Ontario. BNSF seems to be doing that on one of their transcons and CN is doing it on the Stamford Sub at Fort Erie, ON. Andrew Reply chad thomas Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Ely, Nv. 6,312 posts Posted by chad thomas on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 10:03 AM If you were to judge things based on the Sunset route it would seem Frequent sidings are the key, not nessasaraly long sidings. I was very impressed with the ability of SPs dispachers in the SP times. I would say at times they could handle as many trains on there single track CTC line as the SF could handle on it's double track ABS line across the Mojave.[8D] Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 12:39 PM The advantage of running meets vs stopped is really, really low in the overall scheme of things. The 5x2 mile sidings will get you steadier flow of traffic in both directions, while the 2x5 mile sidings will cause traffic to flow in fleeted bunches as you'd have to accumulate several trains at the siding location before it was clear to let them out. Better for schedule keeping if you have more, shorter sidings. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply jchnhtfd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,537 posts Posted by jchnhtfd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:15 PM Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Jamie Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:22 PM Yeah, but the Sante Fe ran its trains a lot faster on the Transcon under ABS than the SP did with single track and CTC. Now, except for some gaps being plugged, the SF is double track and CTC. Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:48 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...) Now, if we could only get train operations to adhere to the schedules being fed the models, we'd have it made! -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » 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 More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed OK thanks. Being a outsider it sure sounds to me that there is a heck of a lot of head banging between union & management. [:p][:)]
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd Believe it or not, there are several really good computer simulations (not for GP) which are being used, particularly by BNSF and CN (and CP -- studying the old D&H line from Rouses Point to Binghamton, which is going to get a LOT more traffic) to optimize where to put sidings and figure how long they should be -- you can run 'what if' studies on them based on traffic projections, and running costs and so on. And then try and get the best cost/benefit ratio out of the thing. And hope that the projections are at least sort of right... the planning folks really do try to have a 'big picture', but that nasty outside world keeps changing the rules! (not so sure about the bean counters, though...)
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.