Trains.com

Chicago & Northwestern Railroad

18711 views
130 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 6:47 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73

Union Pacific bought the C&NW for the line from Council Bluffs to Chicago. It was competing with ATSF for Chicago-California traffic and with BN for Pacific North West-Chicago traffic and it needed that line to be in top shape. UP was concerned C&NW would let the line degrade. UP had the morgage on the WRPI and would have gotten that one way or another. The rest of the C&NW was not that important to UP.



Other than a few busy lines, CNW & UP pretty much got rid of the rest.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Crozet, VA
  • 1,049 posts
Posted by bobwilcox on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 6:33 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

Can you elaborate on designing the services your customers required? If most was regulated, what could CNW do to differentiate it from other railroads, in order to keep from competing soley on price?


Often we would combine faster more reliable service with spot off line equipment supply when cars got tight. Using soda ash as an example we had enough volume between North Platte and Elkhart, IN to block trains in NP that ran straight through via UP-FREM-CNW-CHI-CR. In this way we could offer service that was at least a day faster than the BN or IC. In addition the service was very reliable. On top of this the UP was short of covered hoppers in Green River. They gave us and the MP the first crack at making up the shortage which we did with 200 cars each. The shippers were grateful for the help and shifted business to us from the BN and IC as a result. This approach let us increase our soda ash volume from 16% of the market to 75% of the market. At that time we the "profit" margin of soda ash was 100%.
Bob
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Nanaimo BC Canada
  • 4,117 posts
Posted by nanaimo73 on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 1:25 AM
Union Pacific bought the C&NW for the line from Council Bluffs to Chicago. It was competing with ATSF for Chicago-California traffic and with BN for Pacific North West-Chicago traffic and it needed that line to be in top shape. UP was concerned C&NW would let the line degrade. UP had the morgage on the WRPI and would have gotten that one way or another. The rest of the C&NW was not that important to UP.
Dale
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, September 26, 2005 10:41 PM
I have to agree the UP should have taken over the RI line at C.B. Iowa because it was right there at their own Yard. It would have been a very good connection for the UP.

As for the Cowboy line, What was happening to the Cowboy was happening to the E/W line too. Lack of Maintence was very quickly catching up to the Boone sub. Am I correct or am I wrong.

One quick Question.......Just why did the UPRR buy the CNW in the first place?
Allan.
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, September 26, 2005 8:29 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox

Each market manager at the C&NW was in charge of a group of commodities. I did chemicals while other people did grain, autos, coal, lumber,food, etc. It was our job to design the services our customers required, set the price for the service and then promote the C&NW's services to the customers. Most of the time I was doing this prior to the Staggers Act so the pricing part had serious limitations. However, we were able to get block shipments of potash and grain up and running prior to Staggers.

In addition the CNW in the 1970s had three basic strategies. We were to get the comuter service deficits off our back and on to the backs of the taxpayers in NE IL. We were to abandon the 60% of the mileage that only produced 4% of the revenue. We were to build a strong relationship with the UP after the CRIP fiasco when the UP and CNW were at each others throats. All of our market plans had to complement these three strategies.


Can you elaborate on designing the services your customers required? If most was regulated, what could CNW do to differentiate it from other railroads, in order to keep from competing soley on price?

Thanks

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Crozet, VA
  • 1,049 posts
Posted by bobwilcox on Monday, September 26, 2005 3:47 PM
Each market manager at the C&NW was in charge of a group of commodities. I did chemicals while other people did grain, autos, coal, lumber,food, etc. It was our job to design the services our customers required, set the price for the service and then promote the C&NW's services to the customers. Most of the time I was doing this prior to the Staggers Act so the pricing part had serious limitations. However, we were able to get block shipments of potash and grain up and running prior to Staggers.

In addition the CNW in the 1970s had three basic strategies. We were to get the comuter service deficits off our back and on to the backs of the taxpayers in NE IL. We were to abandon the 60% of the mileage that only produced 4% of the revenue. We were to build a strong relationship with the UP after the CRIP fiasco when the UP and CNW were at each others throats. All of our market plans had to complement these three strategies.
Bob
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, September 26, 2005 2:36 PM
The only run-throughs with Rock Island and Eastern carriers of which I am familiar are with Erie Lackawanna in Chicago and with Penn Central over the Kankakee Belt.
The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, September 26, 2005 2:31 PM
But the Rock was in an ideal position with respect to run-throughs with Eastern Railroads, better than anyone else.
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, September 26, 2005 12:52 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73

Union Pacific took out an option to buy the Iowa Interstate in May 1989 while Japonica Partners launched a hostile takeover bid for the C&NW. UP would have put in double track and CTC and certainly could have built a large yard away from Chicago, much as they have done at Rochelle. Perhaps they would have purchased the EJE east of Joliet and interchanged with NS, CSX and Conrail in Indiana.
The Rochelle webcam would have been at Wyanet.
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=13&Z=16&X=176&Y=2863&W


Deja-Vu! Makes you wonder why UP didn't jump right in and buy CNW at that time?

Since a hostile takeover bid was involved, UP management probably (and wisely) decided not to get involved in a bidding war with Japonica and wind up overpaying for the North Western.

RI had less than ideal connections in Chicago with eastern carriers, except maybe for NS (ex-NKP). It also connected with BRC from east of Clearing, so any unclassified interchange for an Eastern carrier would have to go over Clearing's hump twice. Anybody who has watched Iowa Interstate's interchange moves with IHB would appreciate the difficulty of interchange with CSX and NS (ex-NYC).
The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, September 26, 2005 12:21 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73

Union Pacific took out an option to buy the Iowa Interstate in May 1989 while Japonica Partners launched a hostile takeover bid for the C&NW. UP would have put in double track and CTC and certainly could have built a large yard away from Chicago, much as they have done at Rochelle. Perhaps they would have purchased the EJE east of Joliet and interchanged with NS, CSX and Conrail in Indiana.
The Rochelle webcam would have been at Wyanet.
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=13&Z=16&X=176&Y=2863&W


Deja-Vu! Makes you wonder why UP didn't jump right in and buy CNW at that time?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, September 26, 2005 12:14 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox

The C&NW recognized the potental in the PRB in the early 1970s but could not find a way to finance the project. During this time I was a Market Manager at the C&NW.

The BN initically announced they were going to object to the C&NW coming into the PRB. Robert Spafford, Chairman of the ICC, invited Larry Provo, CEO of the C&NW and Bob Dowding, CEO of the BN to a meeting in Washington. He pointed out to his guests that the US faced an energy crisis and the national interest required the C&NW coming into the PRB as soon as they could arrange financing and specifically without a long drawn out ICC case about the C&NW getting access. The two CEOs agreed with Mr Spafford's view.

bobwilcox: What is/was a Market Manager, at CNW?

Thanks

However, the C&NW was unable to finance the project via the Cowboy Line or a connection with the UP in NE. Therefore, the UP thought the C&NW should step aside and not object to the UP coming in from Nebraska via the North Platte River. The C&NW's counter proposal was that they set up a joint venture(Northwest Town Properties). The C&NW contributed their geographic position and the UP contributed their borrowing power to the new joint venture.






It seems I forgot how to use the quote feature[:I]. I was asking bobwilcox what a Market Manager was at CNW.
Thanks

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Nanaimo BC Canada
  • 4,117 posts
Posted by nanaimo73 on Monday, September 26, 2005 11:51 AM
Union Pacific took out an option to buy the Iowa Interstate in May 1989 while Japonica Partners launched a hostile takeover bid for the C&NW. UP would have put in double track and CTC and certainly could have built a large yard away from Chicago, much as they have done at Rochelle. Perhaps they would have purchased the EJE east of Joliet and interchanged with NS, CSX and Conrail in Indiana.
The Rochelle webcam would have been at Wyanet.
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=13&Z=16&X=176&Y=2863&W

This is a photograph of a CRI&P train ducking under the BN main.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=86468
Dale
  • Member since
    May 2004
  • From: Valparaiso, In
  • 5,921 posts
Posted by MP173 on Monday, September 26, 2005 11:08 AM
I would venture to say that in today's environment, a super charged Rock Island mainline from Omaha to Chciago would be superior to the current CNW routing for one reason...

The Rock enters Chicago on the south side and thus would bypass all the congestion of moving solid trains from Proviso to the NS, CSX, or CN connection.
The traffic could avoid the IHB routing thru Chicago.

However, yarded freight would probably be a challenge, as there is nothing on the Rock to match Proviso Yard.

Perhaps someday in the future, if the CNW route gets plugged from too much traffic, probably 10+ years in the future, UP will consider purchasing the Rock line and upgrading to handle thru trains, such as run thrus and coal trains moving around Chicago.

I am not that familiar with the connections with the Rock, but hey, it is only real estate!

ed
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, September 26, 2005 10:40 AM
As I mentioned in a response to a speculative question regarding RI+UP, RI had relatively poor terminal facilities and connections in Chicago when compared to C&NW. The same could probably be said for MILW in a C&NW vs. MILW comparison, although it would be a closer call. This may explain why C&NW kept so much overhead traffic from UP even when parts of the Omaha main were deteriorating.
The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Crozet, VA
  • 1,049 posts
Posted by bobwilcox on Monday, September 26, 2005 10:35 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by up829

UP rerouted much of it's traffic ..


The UP or any other railroad does not have traffic to reroute. The person paying the freight routes the traffic. There are no exceptions except for a emergency situation such as a derailment or a flood.
Bob
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, September 26, 2005 8:14 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

I seem to recall that the UP and CNW had been working together for a long time-as far back as when UP was built? I do know that CNW was a major partner in hauling UP trains from Fremont and Omaha on to Chicago. It would seem to me that CNW was not really in a position to ask any other railroad for help. UP, I'm sure would have agreed.[;)]


UP rerouted much of it's traffic off the CNW when defered maintainance caught up with the CNW line across Iowa, but I don't think UP was ever really happy with the Milw connection into Chicago. After the BN merger and the RI fiasco, I suspect it was in UP's best interest to make the CNW a viable partner, without having to go through the merger process.

BN didn't want CNW in the PRB, but they feared UP even more. I recall reading about a UP offer to build and operate into the PRB with the CNW getting royalty payments. I think UP's management was later quoted as saying it was a bluff to help a friend.
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, September 26, 2005 6:52 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox

The C&NW recognized the potental in the PRB in the early 1970s but could not find a way to finance the project. During this time I was a Market Manager at the C&NW.

The BN initically announced they were going to object to the C&NW coming into the PRB. Robert Spafford, Chairman of the ICC, invited Larry Provo, CEO of the C&NW and Bob Dowding, CEO of the BN to a meeting in Washington. He pointed out to his guests that the US faced an energy crisis and the national interest required the C&NW coming into the PRB as soon as they could arrange financing and specifically without a long drawn out ICC case about the C&NW getting access. The two CEOs agreed with Mr Spafford's view.

bobwilcox: What is/was a Market Manager, at CNW?

Thanks

However, the C&NW was unable to finance the project via the Cowboy Line or a connection with the UP in NE. Therefore, the UP thought the C&NW should step aside and not object to the UP coming in from Nebraska via the North Platte River. The C&NW's counter proposal was that they set up a joint venture(Northwest Town Properties). The C&NW contributed their geographic position and the UP contributed their borrowing power to the new joint venture.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Nanaimo BC Canada
  • 4,117 posts
Posted by nanaimo73 on Monday, September 26, 2005 12:07 AM
You mean I've cross-threaded ?[:)]

The death of a Cowboy.
The Cowboy line of the Chicago and North Western was built by subsidiary Fremont, Elkhorn and Missouri Valley. Beginning in Fremont in 1869 the FE&MV reached Rapid City South Dakota in 1886 and Lander Wyoming in 1906. Plans to connect with the Central Pacific in Ogden were shelved and the Rapid City line stopped at Colony in 1948. During 1944 86 miles from Illco to Shobon were pulled up for the war effort and trackage rights over the CB&Q were used. The last 23 miles from Riverton to Lander were pulled up in 1972. The 1984 system timetable starts with mile 0 in Fremont and the West Point subdivision runs to Norfolk at mile 81.8. The Norfolk subdivision then runs to Long Pine at mile 213.6. Next is the Long Pine sub to Chadron at mile 406.3. Finally is the Casper subdivision to Riverton at mile 724.7. During 1984 the line from Fremont to Norfolk was abandoned and the Fremont, West Point and Pacific took over the first 17 miles. 1988 saw the sale of the Shobon to Riverton section to Bonneville Transloaders. During 1989 another 69 miles from Orin Junction to Casper was removed. The 55 miles from Merriman to Chadron became the Nebkota Railroad during March of 1994 and the Chadron to Crawford section went to DME in 1996. DME also acquired the line through Rapid City to Colony at this time. Union Pacific is operating the section from Crandall to Fisher Junction.
Fremont-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=13&Z=14&X=443&Y=2867&W
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=72257
Fremont and Elkhorn Valley-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=35008
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Hills/4184/fevr.html
Norfolk-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=12&Z=14&X=787&Y=5815&W
Long Pine-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=11&Z=14&X=1105&Y=11772&W
Merriman-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=12&Z=14&X=349&Y=5943&W
Chadron-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=12&Z=13&X=829&Y=5929&W
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=112097
Dakota Junction-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=11&Z=13&X=1639&Y=11867&W
Crawford-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=11&Z=13&X=1574&Y=11818&W
Crandall-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=12&Z=13&X=710&Y=5906&W
Lusk-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=17392
Lost Springs-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=17399
Shawnee-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=12&Z=13&X=622&Y=5914&W
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=14962
Fisher Junction-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=11&Z=13&X=1224&Y=11815&W
Shobon-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=12&Z=12&X=922&Y=5992&W
Shoshoni-
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=193263
Riverton-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=12&Z=12&X=891&Y=5959&W
Lander-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=11&Z=12&X=1714&Y=11861&W
During 1962 United States Steel opened a 77 mile line from a Union Pacific junction at Winton to their Atlantic City mine. This line came within 21 miles of Lander but was abandoned in 1983. The crossing of South Pass was at 7,550’ and the line continued to climb to the mine at 8,430’. Lander is at 5.355’.
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=12&Z=12&X=855&Y=5888&W
South Pass
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=11&Z=12&X=1684&Y=11724&W
Dale
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Sunday, September 25, 2005 10:02 PM
You're on the wrong thread![:-,]. If I'm looking at that correctly, the tunnel has been daylighted?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Nanaimo BC Canada
  • 4,117 posts
Posted by nanaimo73 on Sunday, September 25, 2005 9:57 PM
C&NW
Wood, Mosher, Witten, Winner, Colome, Dallas, Gregory, Burke, Herrick, St. Charles, Bonsteel, Fairfax, Mission Hill, Volin, Wakonda, Centerville, Hooker, Hurley, Monroe, Canistota, Salem, Unityville, Canova, Vilas, Argonne, Carthage, Esmond, Astoria, Bruce, Estelline, Dempster, Castlewood, Appleby, Gary, Moritz, Altamont, Goodwin, Kratzburg, Kampeska, Henry, Elrod, Clark, Raymond, Doland, Turton, Conde, Verdon, Ferney, Frankfort, Zell, Rockham, Miranda, Faulkton, Burkmere, Seneca, Lebanon, Gettysburg, Gorman, Agar, Broadland, Hitchcock, Crandon, Rudolph, Ordway, Columbia, Houghton
CSPM&O
Valley Springs, Branson, Hartford, Humboldt, Montrose, Spencer, Farmer, Fulton, Riverside
M&SL
Revillo, Strandburg, Troy, Waverly, Florence, Wallace, Bradley, Crocker, Crandell, Adelaide, Stratford, Nahon, Richmond, Wetonka, Leola

Here is you tunnel-
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=11&Z=13&X=1587&Y=11781&W
Dale
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Sunday, September 25, 2005 8:57 PM
Big John hopper cars: Something interesting I read, that really hit home- In his book, "Merging Lines", Richard Saunders explains that the 100-ton-capacity covered hoppers changed the face of the prairie forever. They replaced 40-foot boxcars that could carry barely 25 tons of grain. "The jumbo cars did not necessarily need heavy rail, but they needed good track with.....sound...bridges". This meant that granger branches......... would die. >>>"... the co-op elevators,the little towns around them,and the little businesses in those towns would vanish"<<<<<. That pretty much describes 100 little towns within 100 miles of my home. CNW sure had it's share of branch lines that wilted and vanished,just like the small towns that are vanishing.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Sunday, September 25, 2005 3:27 PM
I seem to recall that the UP and CNW had been working together for a long time-as far back as when UP was built? I do know that CNW was a major partner in hauling UP trains from Fremont and Omaha on to Chicago. It would seem to me that CNW was not really in a position to ask any other railroad for help. UP, I'm sure would have agreed.[;)]

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, September 25, 2005 3:08 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by cnw8835

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan.

I wi***hat the CNW Railway was still around today. I realy also wanted to see the CNW run Coal Trains on the Cowboy Line. But when the CNW "GAVE" them selves to the UPRR.....that ended it right there. It was realy sad that the cowboy no longer runs Trains anymore. There was some hope for the cowboy line but not anymore. As for the Coal Trains. Well time will tell......Allan.


Wouldn't that have required a ga-zillion dollars in ROW rebuild to run heavy coal trains over the Cowboy Line?



Yes, it would have cost a whole lot to rebuild the Cowboy Line. Its was 519 miles from Fremont to Shawnee Jct with 90-100 lbs rail with very little ballast. There were 417 bridges, almost all of which would have to have been rebuilt. At best it would have cost 1 million a mile to get the line to the point where a coal train could even safely travel over it. In the mid 70's when rebuilding the Cowboy was first proposed, C&NW was in no shape to spend at least a half billion dollars just on the Cowboy and then another half billion on their portion of the Joint Line. C&NW couldn't have managed that even in the best of times.


Once CNW's Pacific ambitions ended, the Cowboy line no longer mattered in the larger scheme of things. For all intents and purposes, it became a Granger branch. In the 1970's there was a lot of overbuilt capacity, and it made sense to use UP's available capacity rather than spend a lot of money on a superfluous single commodity line. Today it might be different, as capacity is maxed and any new business is going to require added tracks.

Thus, we have the DM&E taking on what CNW couldn't pull off. If CNW had somehow managed to keep it all on the home rails sans UP's involvement, would that have forestalled the UP takeover of CNW?



Yes, it is possible that C&NW getting into the PRB by itself may have delayed the UP takeover. Any definate answer about that would be nothing more than speculation. We will never know for sure.
As for DME's project, in my mind it is even more ambitious than C&NW rebuilding the Cowboy Line. DM&E is not only rebuilding the former C&NW "Alco Line" but is also building 150ish miles of brand new rail line. Granted if C&NW had rebuilt the Cowboy line virtually nothing other than the ROW would have been kept (which is what happened from Shawnee Jct to Crandall Jct) so it basically would have been a new line, DM&E is working with completely new ROW. More power to you DM&E.
  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Somewhere near the tracks
  • 927 posts
Posted by railfan619 on Sunday, September 25, 2005 2:07 PM
I think that CN&W was one of the best RR's around and I was pretty [:(] to see it fall to the UP but aleast I still see some of the CN&W cars and even loco around from time to time.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, September 25, 2005 1:52 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by cnw8835

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan.

I wi***hat the CNW Railway was still around today. I realy also wanted to see the CNW run Coal Trains on the Cowboy Line. But when the CNW "GAVE" them selves to the UPRR.....that ended it right there. It was realy sad that the cowboy no longer runs Trains anymore. There was some hope for the cowboy line but not anymore. As for the Coal Trains. Well time will tell......Allan.


Wouldn't that have required a ga-zillion dollars in ROW rebuild to run heavy coal trains over the Cowboy Line?



Yes, it would have cost a whole lot to rebuild the Cowboy Line. Its was 519 miles from Fremont to Shawnee Jct with 90-100 lbs rail with very little ballast. There were 417 bridges, almost all of which would have to have been rebuilt. At best it would have cost 1 million a mile to get the line to the point where a coal train could even safely travel over it. In the mid 70's when rebuilding the Cowboy was first proposed, C&NW was in no shape to spend at least a half billion dollars just on the Cowboy and then another half billion on their portion of the Joint Line. C&NW couldn't have managed that even in the best of times.


Once CNW's Pacific ambitions ended, the Cowboy line no longer mattered in the larger scheme of things. For all intents and purposes, it became a Granger branch. In the 1970's there was a lot of overbuilt capacity, and it made sense to use UP's available capacity rather than spend a lot of money on a superfluous single commodity line. Today it might be different, as capacity is maxed and any new business is going to require added tracks.

Thus, we have the DM&E taking on what CNW couldn't pull off. If CNW had somehow managed to keep it all on the home rails sans UP's involvement, would that have forestalled the UP takeover of CNW?
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, September 25, 2005 11:02 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan.

I wi***hat the CNW Railway was still around today. I realy also wanted to see the CNW run Coal Trains on the Cowboy Line. But when the CNW "GAVE" them selves to the UPRR.....that ended it right there. It was realy sad that the cowboy no longer runs Trains anymore. There was some hope for the cowboy line but not anymore. As for the Coal Trains. Well time will tell......Allan.


Wouldn't that have required a ga-zillion dollars in ROW rebuild to run heavy coal trains over the Cowboy Line?



Yes, it would have cost a whole lot to rebuild the Cowboy Line. Its was 519 miles from Fremont to Shawnee Jct with 90-100 lbs rail with very little ballast. There were 417 bridges, almost all of which would have to have been rebuilt. At best it would have cost 1 million a mile to get the line to the point where a coal train could even safely travel over it. In the mid 70's when rebuilding the Cowboy was first proposed, C&NW was in no shape to spend at least a half billion dollars just on the Cowboy and then another half billion on their portion of the Joint Line. C&NW couldn't have managed that even in the best of times.
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Sunday, September 25, 2005 9:12 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan.

I wi***hat the CNW Railway was still around today. I realy also wanted to see the CNW run Coal Trains on the Cowboy Line. But when the CNW "GAVE" them selves to the UPRR.....that ended it right there. It was realy sad that the cowboy no longer runs Trains anymore. There was some hope for the cowboy line but not anymore. As for the Coal Trains. Well time will tell......Allan.


Wouldn't that have required a ga-zillion dollars in ROW rebuild to run heavy coal trains over the Cowboy Line?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, September 25, 2005 8:33 AM
I wi***hat the CNW Railway was still around today. I realy also wanted to see the CNW run Coal Trains on the Cowboy Line. But when the CNW "GAVE" them selves to the UPRR.....that ended it right there. It was realy sad that the cowboy no longer runs Trains anymore. There was some hope for the cowboy line but not anymore. As for the Coal Trains. Well time will tell......Allan.
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Crozet, VA
  • 1,049 posts
Posted by bobwilcox on Sunday, September 25, 2005 6:18 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by MP173

Just imagine what kinda bad financial position CNW was in NOT to get financial backing for the biggest opportunity in the 20th century for railroads.

Bob, it must have been bleak.

Today, DME seemingly can get backing, with rates considerably lower (adjusted for inflation) than back in the 70's.

CNW was sitting on a black gold mine and couldnt pull the trigger. How frustrating.

As I understand it, CNW "built" down to the UP, perhaps thru trackage rights and then handed the coal over to UP and then received it back at Fremont, or Omaha.

ed



It wasn't all that bleak when I saw what friends at the CRIP and MILW were going through. Measuring sucess was simple, were you still running trains?

Also, the UP and CNW had a routing agreement on coal the CNW could handle. It had to move CNW-UP-Fremont-CNW as you mentioned.
Bob
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, September 25, 2005 4:24 AM
Wow, what a lot of information. thanks!

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