SD60MAC9500 greyhounds The Kansas City line had some freight, but it also still had 90 pound rail and had been beaten into the ground as the ICG ran unit coal trains over the 90 pound rail. The Alton Route then passed rapidly among owners, Union Pacific, B&O, GM&O, ICG, CM&W. The Chicago-St. Louis line is now back with the UP and once again, they don't seem to want it. SP getting all of the CM&W, would have certainly made avoiding St. Louis via Springfield a bonus. Upgrading the KC line could have gave ATSF, a run for its money. Today UP doesn't care to route LA-CHI IM traffic through TRRA, due to cost. So up the old Rock from KCMO, via Nevada IA, or ATSF, trackage rights has to do.
greyhounds The Kansas City line had some freight, but it also still had 90 pound rail and had been beaten into the ground as the ICG ran unit coal trains over the 90 pound rail. The Alton Route then passed rapidly among owners, Union Pacific, B&O, GM&O, ICG, CM&W. The Chicago-St. Louis line is now back with the UP and once again, they don't seem to want it.
SP getting all of the CM&W, would have certainly made avoiding St. Louis via Springfield a bonus. Upgrading the KC line could have gave ATSF, a run for its money. Today UP doesn't care to route LA-CHI IM traffic through TRRA, due to cost. So up the old Rock from KCMO, via Nevada IA, or ATSF, trackage rights has to do.
Most intermodals go via the exATSF.
Jeff
jeffhergert SD60MAC9500 greyhounds The Kansas City line had some freight, but it also still had 90 pound rail and had been beaten into the ground as the ICG ran unit coal trains over the 90 pound rail. The Alton Route then passed rapidly among owners, Union Pacific, B&O, GM&O, ICG, CM&W. The Chicago-St. Louis line is now back with the UP and once again, they don't seem to want it. SP getting all of the CM&W, would have certainly made avoiding St. Louis via Springfield a bonus. Upgrading the KC line could have gave ATSF, a run for its money. Today UP doesn't care to route LA-CHI IM traffic through TRRA, due to cost. So up the old Rock from KCMO, via Nevada IA, or ATSF, trackage rights has to do. The northbound intermodals go via the old MP via Omaha. The southbounds go via Des Moines. Currently there's only one pair of trains on these routes. Recently they were changed from I to Z status. Most intermodals go via the exATSF. Jeff
The northbound intermodals go via the old MP via Omaha. The southbounds go via Des Moines. Currently there's only one pair of trains on these routes. Recently they were changed from I to Z status.
Thanks Jeff, what's the impetus for sending EB north up the ex-MP, to Omaha? An WB south via Des Moines?
The CM&W was a complete wreck by the time it went under. And the KC line was the worst part of that very dilapidated railroad. The KC line trackage was so bad that the CM&W had to use trackage rights on the BN's Beardstown Sub to get between Springfield and Jacksonville via Girard, IL in order to maintain access to a large plastics plant in Jacksonville. The SP barely had the money to rehab the Joliet-Venice line, let alone take on the KC line too. And even rehabbed, that line never would have been competitive against the Transcon. Single track, short sidings, no CTC, two very slow river crossings, hill and dale profile - that line was never going to be a racetrack no matter how much ballast, ties, and 136 lb welded rail got plunked down by the SP. SP had their shot at it and decided to get trackage rights over the BN from KC into Chicago right after they spun up their new SPCSL subsidiary.
And as far as the UP Chicago-LA intermodal business goes, several lower priority stack trains run between Global 4, Santa Teresa, NM, and Long Beach via Springfield, St. Louis, and Kansas City. Here's a Youtube video filmed on the Jeff City Sub for proof: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enmq97Fif6s&list=PLLcO6u-Nv4WDtfNgMjk-iR69exCr3ag2y&index=1
SD60MAC9500 jeffhergert SD60MAC9500 greyhounds The Kansas City line had some freight, but it also still had 90 pound rail and had been beaten into the ground as the ICG ran unit coal trains over the 90 pound rail. The Alton Route then passed rapidly among owners, Union Pacific, B&O, GM&O, ICG, CM&W. The Chicago-St. Louis line is now back with the UP and once again, they don't seem to want it. SP getting all of the CM&W, would have certainly made avoiding St. Louis via Springfield a bonus. Upgrading the KC line could have gave ATSF, a run for its money. Today UP doesn't care to route LA-CHI IM traffic through TRRA, due to cost. So up the old Rock from KCMO, via Nevada IA, or ATSF, trackage rights has to do. The northbound intermodals go via the old MP via Omaha. The southbounds go via Des Moines. Currently there's only one pair of trains on these routes. Recently they were changed from I to Z status. Most intermodals go via the exATSF. Jeff Thanks Jeff, what's the impetus for sending EB north up the ex-MP, to Omaha? An WB south via Des Moines?
Directional running on almost all traffic. Almost all northbound traffic (intermodal, manifest, empty grain and ethanol) goes up the exMP. All southbound traffic (now loaded grain and ethanol, plus manifest and intermodal) goes down the exRI/CNW.
Kansas City crews bring trains to Omaha and then normally deadhead by van to Des Moines for rest. Once rested, they take trains south to KC. Trains going to Iowa, Minnesota and some Illinois destinations are handled by crews that have deadhead out of the Boone terminal for rest in Council Bluffs. The Clinton/Missouri Valley long pool usually cover the Z train that comes up from KC and then heads east.
jeffhergertDirectional running on almost all traffic.
That whole theory on the part of UP management just throws me for a loop. I understand they are trying to save the immense costs of double tracking an existing line on one hand.
On the other hand, I suspect the reason they hold onto the duplicate lines miles and miles apart is basically an anti-competitive move to maintain market dominance.
CMStPnP jeffhergert Directional running on almost all traffic. That whole theory on the part of UP management just throws me for a loop. I understand they are trying to save the immense costs of double tracking an existing line on one hand. On the other hand, I suspect the reason they hold onto the duplicate lines miles and miles apart is basically an anti-competitive move to maintain market dominance.
jeffhergert Directional running on almost all traffic.
Does the line fit seamlessly with BNSF's route structure? Why spend the capital to double track one line when you already possess another line that effectively creates a double track railroad between the O-D points. Not using the line would breach UP's fiduciary responsibility.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
ns145 SD60MAC9500 greyhounds The Kansas City line had some freight, but it also still had 90 pound rail and had been beaten into the ground as the ICG ran unit coal trains over the 90 pound rail. The Alton Route then passed rapidly among owners, Union Pacific, B&O, GM&O, ICG, CM&W. The Chicago-St. Louis line is now back with the UP and once again, they don't seem to want it. SP getting all of the CM&W, would have certainly made avoiding St. Louis via Springfield a bonus. Upgrading the KC line could have gave ATSF, a run for its money. Today UP doesn't care to route LA-CHI IM traffic through TRRA, due to cost. So up the old Rock from KCMO, via Nevada IA, or ATSF, trackage rights has to do. The CM&W was a complete wreck by the time it went under. And the KC line was the worst part of that very dilapidated railroad. The KC line trackage was so bad that the CM&W had to use trackage rights on the BN's Beardstown Sub to get between Springfield and Jacksonville via Girard, IL in order to maintain access to a large plastics plant in Jacksonville. The SP barely had the money to rehab the Joliet-Venice line, let alone take on the KC line too. And even rehabbed, that line never would have been competitive against the Transcon. Single track, short sidings, no CTC, two very slow river crossings, hill and dale profile - that line was never going to be a racetrack no matter how much ballast, ties, and 136 lb welded rail got plunked down by the SP. SP had their shot at it and decided to get trackage rights over the BN from KC into Chicago right after they spun up their new SPCSL subsidiary. And as far as the UP Chicago-LA intermodal business goes, several lower priority stack trains run between Global 4, Santa Teresa, NM, and Long Beach via Springfield, St. Louis, and Kansas City. Here's a Youtube video filmed on the Jeff City Sub for proof: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enmq97Fif6s&list=PLLcO6u-Nv4WDtfNgMjk-iR69exCr3ag2y&index=1
Yes UP, does send G4 traffic via STL, I misspoke. I meant to say premium IM traffic.
Right before UP started implementing PSR they were on the cusp of starting to run G4-West Coast stack trains between Joliet and Kansas City via Springfield and NS' ex-Wabash line. There were rumors that at least one pair of Z trains running on the Transcon were going to be moved to the new routing too. The primary drivers were reducing mileage to the West Coast, reducing dependance on arch-rival BNSF, and eliminating the fees for crossing the Mississippi at St. Louis via the TRRA. Traffic congestion on the ex-MP route was also a consideration, but with coal volumes dropping like a rock at the time that became less of a concern. After putting in all the effort to setup trackage rights and crew agreements, including an inspection trip by UP's OCS train, they pulled the plug on the whole project.
There's no real mystery about why UP holds onto lines that they aren't using very much (or not using at all). The reason is that, as a practical matter, once a line is gone, it's gone for good. If there's any reason to believe that a currently underutilized line might be valuable in the future, the correct strategy is to "discontinue service" but hold onto it, even if you have no current plans to operate it. If you dispose of a line and later try to reacquire and resurrect it, you run into a blizzard of envirnomental and other requirements that can easily defeat the project or make it enormously expensive. But, if you just discontinue service on it but hold onto it, you can resurrect it essentially at will, without jumping through any of these hoops.
UP adopted this strategy after service issues it exerienced in implementing the UP-SP merger. As I recall UP's past CEO (Lance Fritz) explained this at a "Sandhouse Gang" presentation at Northwestern University a few years ago. Tennessee Pass is probably the example that's most visible to the railfan community.
Falcon48 ... UP adopted this strategy after service issues it exerienced in implementing the UP-SP merger. As I recall UP's past CEO (Lance Fritz) explained this at a "Sandhouse Gang" presentation at Northwestern University a few years ago. Tennessee Pass is probably the example that's most visible to the railfan community.
...
Did Mr. Fritz explain why they sold off the ex-MP connection east of Pueblo to the A&K scrappers, pressuming UP wanted to save the Tennessee Pass line?
MidlandMike Falcon48 ... UP adopted this strategy after service issues it exerienced in implementing the UP-SP merger. As I recall UP's past CEO (Lance Fritz) explained this at a "Sandhouse Gang" presentation at Northwestern University a few years ago. Tennessee Pass is probably the example that's most visible to the railfan community. Did Mr. Fritz explain why they sold off the ex-MP connection east of Pueblo to the A&K scrappers, pressuming UP wanted to save the Tennessee Pass line?
If the Tennessee Pass line is ever reactivated (highly doubtful), traffic would be routed via the Joint Line to Denver and then east on the Kansas Pacific line. When UP rebuilt the KP, they made it abundantly clear that it was to allow the abandonment of the ex-MP line to Pueblo. Also, the KP routing was much more direct for Colorado coal that was moving east off the Moffat Tunnel line at the time of the UP/SP merger.
Unlike UP's other directional running territories, there was never enough traffic moving east-west across Kansas to ever justify such an arrangement, even in the early 2000's. Current traffic levels on the KP are ~5-7 MGT.
I used to board Amtrak regularly at the former GM&O station in Springfield, Illinois to reach Chicago. Loved that Michelangelo like painting on the ceiling of the station of the GM&O network with angels holding up the clouds around it.
As for the Alton route being a UP "contingency" route, they have 3 routes to Chicago today.....the Alton route to Joliet (Global IV), the C&EI route to Dolton, the CNW route via Nelson to reach Global III & Proviso.
UP also brings coal up on the Alton from the Monterrey and Crown Mines.
So I wouldn't call it a contingency much anymore.
As for maintain it, as noted by an earlier poster, Illinois has dumped millions upon millions to upgrade the line for HSR. They are dumping more to relocate the Alton line from downtown Springfield to align it with the NS.
The short lived CMNW then became the Gateway Western in 1990 that become the unofficial St.Louis entry for Santa Fe. I was working for Cargill at that time and our bulk flour shipping eastward listed as an all Santa Fe single freight bill Newton-St.Louis. Don't have details and not sure if this was in the CMNW or GWWR years, does anyone have knowledge of a deadly accident east of Kansas City where a train ran into an open siding switch at night, colliding with another train resulting in atleast two deaths, if not more?
ns145If the Tennessee Pass line is ever reactivated (highly doubtful), traffic would be routed via the Joint Line to Denver and then east on the Kansas Pacific line. ...
Wow, a Denver-Dotsero detour via Pueblo would add 170 miles and include 3% grades. I guess UP is glad they haven't needed to reopen it.
SFbrkmn The short lived CMNW then became the Gateway Western in 1990 that become the unofficial St.Louis entry for Santa Fe. I was working for Cargill at that time and our bulk flour shipping eastward listed as an all Santa Fe single freight bill Newton-St.Louis. Don't have details and not sure if this was in the CMNW or GWWR years, does anyone have knowledge of a deadly accident east of Kansas City where a train ran into an open siding switch at night, colliding with another train resulting in atleast two deaths, if not more?
That would have been the Gateway Western. If the Santa Fe had made the same traffic arrangement and track investments in the CM&W, it probably wouldn't have went belly up.
Here's a link with info on the wreck at Pleasant Hill, IL: https://www.jonroma.net/media/rail/accident/usa/ntsb/RAB9810.pdf
MidlandMike ns145 If the Tennessee Pass line is ever reactivated (highly doubtful), traffic would be routed via the Joint Line to Denver and then east on the Kansas Pacific line. ... Wow, a Denver-Dotsero detour via Pueblo would add 170 miles and include 3% grades. I guess UP is glad they haven't needed to reopen it.
ns145 If the Tennessee Pass line is ever reactivated (highly doubtful), traffic would be routed via the Joint Line to Denver and then east on the Kansas Pacific line. ...
UP railbanking the Tennessee Pass line was a savvy political move to shut certain interests up, while they moved all of SP's Midwest-Bay Area overhead traffic over to the Overland Route. No one at the time ever thought that there would ever be an actual necessity to to reopen Tennessee Pass.
I have worked w/a few GW workers, but none that go back to the brief CMNW days of the late 80s. One of them told me computer systems many times confused the marks of CMNW and CNW which created billing drama. Several yrs ago, it was relayed to me a former ICG/CMNW/GW and KCS fellow was attemtping to do a book project centered mainly on GW history that would have included coverage of the two carriers prior to GW being created. I have not heard anything further on this but do hope somethig can be put together. This is a rail corridor w/an interesting past and a story that is worth being told.
As I recall, SP could have acquired the entire CMW, but didn't want the Kansas City line. I no longer have a copy (or, more likely, can't find the copy I used to have) but there was a verified statement by Michael Ongerth filed with STB on behalf of UP in the CN-IC merger proceeding discussing the CMW-SP transaction and its aftermath in considerable detail. Mr. Ongerth was a senior SP official involved in the CMW transaction.
Perhaps someone more computer savy than me can find and circulate this statement. It just might still be available on the STB website as part of a UP filing in the CN-IC merger proceeding.
STB digital archives start in 1996 and come forward. (and the early stuff is not that great...scanned images were not in favor at the time and it took a while to get rid of the micro-film/microfiche mafia luddites... even worse was STB's steadfast refusal to scan in color.)
The STB library for film copies or RG-134 at National Archives would be needed to recover that data.
greyhoundsI knew several ex-ICG management types that went to the CM&W when it was spun off. They never had a chance. The bank(s) that financed the deal really took a bath. I was at a conference on short line financing when I tried to politely ask a banker how such a mistake could occur - he replied "You mean, how could anybody be that stupid?" At a time when Latin America was defaulting on loans left and right, he said the deal was known in banking circles as "Brazil North". The ICG retained the line south to the Joliet refineries. Basically, that was the only real freight on the Chicago-St. Louis line. The CM&W was left to try to make money running intermodal trains between those two points. At less than 300 miles this was a very dubious proposition. The Kansas City line had some freight, but it also still had 90 pound rail and had been beaten into the ground as the ICG ran unit coal trains over the 90 pound rail. I guess the lack of freight on the line harks back to a guy named Blackstone who headed the Alton for years. (source: "The Chicago & Alton Railroad" by Gene V. Glendinning) Blackstone didn't like interchange traffic. He concentrated the railroad on local business. This worked until the trucks took the local business because of its short length of haul. The Alton Route then passed rapidly among owners, Union Pacific, B&O, GM&O, ICG, CM&W. The Chicago-St. Louis line is now back with the UP and once again, they don't seem to want it. Correct me if I am in error. I believe there were four pool turns on the Kansas City boards when the CMNW passed the torch to Gateway. Sam
greyhoundsI knew several ex-ICG management types that went to the CM&W when it was spun off. They never had a chance. The bank(s) that financed the deal really took a bath. I was at a conference on short line financing when I tried to politely ask a banker how such a mistake could occur - he replied "You mean, how could anybody be that stupid?" At a time when Latin America was defaulting on loans left and right, he said the deal was known in banking circles as "Brazil North". The ICG retained the line south to the Joliet refineries. Basically, that was the only real freight on the Chicago-St. Louis line. The CM&W was left to try to make money running intermodal trains between those two points. At less than 300 miles this was a very dubious proposition. The Kansas City line had some freight, but it also still had 90 pound rail and had been beaten into the ground as the ICG ran unit coal trains over the 90 pound rail. I guess the lack of freight on the line harks back to a guy named Blackstone who headed the Alton for years. (source: "The Chicago & Alton Railroad" by Gene V. Glendinning) Blackstone didn't like interchange traffic. He concentrated the railroad on local business. This worked until the trucks took the local business because of its short length of haul. The Alton Route then passed rapidly among owners, Union Pacific, B&O, GM&O, ICG, CM&W. The Chicago-St. Louis line is now back with the UP and once again, they don't seem to want it. Regarding the Kansas City traffic, correct me if in error. I believe there were four turns on the pool boards there when the cmnw folded becoming the Gateway. Sam
Regarding the Kansas City traffic levels, I believe there were four turns on the pool boards there upon the CMNW folding away in early 1990. If I am in error of this and any additional info can be shared, let me know
Sam
AnonymousBack in the 1980's when I was working in flour milling, we received a CMNW boxcr for sacked loading. We mistakenly took it for a CNW car, wrote CNW on all the paperwork. Talk about starting a billing error mess. Actually this was quite common w/shippers as they were doing the same. I never knew what this CMNW was until readinga issue of Trains a few yrs back. Where did you work at in the milling industry? I put 17 yrs in Cargill 1981-1998 and wrote a book about it. Sam
SFbrkmn greyhounds I knew several ex-ICG management types that went to the CM&W when it was spun off. They never had a chance. The bank(s) that financed the deal really took a bath. I was at a conference on short line financing when I tried to politely ask a banker how such a mistake could occur - he replied "You mean, how could anybody be that stupid?" At a time when Latin America was defaulting on loans left and right, he said the deal was known in banking circles as "Brazil North". The ICG retained the line south to the Joliet refineries. Basically, that was the only real freight on the Chicago-St. Louis line. The CM&W was left to try to make money running intermodal trains between those two points. At less than 300 miles this was a very dubious proposition. The Kansas City line had some freight, but it also still had 90 pound rail and had been beaten into the ground as the ICG ran unit coal trains over the 90 pound rail. I guess the lack of freight on the line harks back to a guy named Blackstone who headed the Alton for years. (source: "The Chicago & Alton Railroad" by Gene V. Glendinning) Blackstone didn't like interchange traffic. He concentrated the railroad on local business. This worked until the trucks took the local business because of its short length of haul. The Alton Route then passed rapidly among owners, Union Pacific, B&O, GM&O, ICG, CM&W. The Chicago-St. Louis line is now back with the UP and once again, they don't seem to want it. Regarding the Kansas City traffic, correct me if in error. I believe there were four turns on the pool boards there when the cmnw folded becoming the Gateway. Sam
greyhounds I knew several ex-ICG management types that went to the CM&W when it was spun off. They never had a chance. The bank(s) that financed the deal really took a bath. I was at a conference on short line financing when I tried to politely ask a banker how such a mistake could occur - he replied "You mean, how could anybody be that stupid?" At a time when Latin America was defaulting on loans left and right, he said the deal was known in banking circles as "Brazil North". The ICG retained the line south to the Joliet refineries. Basically, that was the only real freight on the Chicago-St. Louis line. The CM&W was left to try to make money running intermodal trains between those two points. At less than 300 miles this was a very dubious proposition. The Kansas City line had some freight, but it also still had 90 pound rail and had been beaten into the ground as the ICG ran unit coal trains over the 90 pound rail. I guess the lack of freight on the line harks back to a guy named Blackstone who headed the Alton for years. (source: "The Chicago & Alton Railroad" by Gene V. Glendinning) Blackstone didn't like interchange traffic. He concentrated the railroad on local business. This worked until the trucks took the local business because of its short length of haul. The Alton Route then passed rapidly among owners, Union Pacific, B&O, GM&O, ICG, CM&W. The Chicago-St. Louis line is now back with the UP and once again, they don't seem to want it. Regarding the Kansas City traffic, correct me if in error. I believe there were four turns on the pool boards there when the cmnw folded becoming the Gateway. Sam
There is much more to making money in railroads than just having a line between A and Z. There has to be business opportunities on the line to generate the traffic the company can generate revenue from hauling. That is the one thing 'foamers' tend to forget when they see rail lines drawn on a map. If line segments don't generate revenues in today's world they become history.
When was the auto assembly plant built in Bloomington? Did the former Peoria and Eastern take the lion's share of that traffic?
I believe that the Bloomington assembly plant opened in the mid-1980's and was originally a Mitsubishi plant.
MidlandMike Falcon48... UP adopted this strategy after service issues it exerienced in implementing the UP-SP merger. As I recall UP's past CEO (Lance Fritz) explained this at a "Sandhouse Gang" presentation at Northwestern University a few years ago. Tennessee Pass is probably the example that's most visible to the railfan community. Did Mr. Fritz explain why they sold off the ex-MP connection east of Pueblo to the A&K scrappers, pressuming UP wanted to save the Tennessee Pass line?
Falcon48... UP adopted this strategy after service issues it exerienced in implementing the UP-SP merger. As I recall UP's past CEO (Lance Fritz) explained this at a "Sandhouse Gang" presentation at Northwestern University a few years ago. Tennessee Pass is probably the example that's most visible to the railfan community.
They sold off the MoP because they had two lines from the front range that met at Salina KS (ironically, since the coal slump, the KP is also on the market)
Fortunately, the MoP was saved by the surveyors that caught A&K in a huge lie that stalled A&K's abandonment effort long enough for the Soloviev's to step in and buy the line to support their Ag business.
Anyone from ethically challenged A&K setting foot in Colorado ought to be thrown in jail mui-pronto. The MoP line is far from the only case of malfeasance that they have been involved in - in Colorado.... but also in other states as well.
One other thing about the directional traffic north of KC. On the exRI route UP is at the mercy of CPKC between Polo Missouri and KC. While that joint track is CTC two main track, it seems to still be a bottleneck.
GrampWhen was the auto assembly plant built in Bloomington? Did the former Peoria and Eastern take the lion's share of that traffic?
Today's newspaper item on the car-b-que outside the Rivian plant says the plant started -up as Diamond Star [Mitsubishi/Chrysler joint venture] in 1988 and then Chrysler dropped out in 1993.
Fire Outside Rivian Plant Torches 50+ Electric SUVs and Pickups (thedrive.com)
Falcon48 As I recall, SP could have acquired the entire CMW, but didn't want the Kansas City line. I no longer have a copy (or, more likely, can't find the copy I used to have) but there was a verified statement by Michael Ongerth filed with STB on behalf of UP in the CN-IC merger proceeding discussing the CMW-SP transaction and its aftermath in considerable detail. Mr. Ongerth was a senior SP official involved in the CMW transaction. Perhaps someone more computer savy than me can find and circulate this statement. It just might still be available on the STB website as part of a UP filing in the CN-IC merger proceeding.
I found a hard copy of the Ongerth statement. Problem is that I'm not very computer savy, and I can't figure out a way to attach a copy to a post.
Any suggestions?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.