QUOTE: Originally posted by AMTK200 QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal - Foss Maritime, one of the four competing barge lines that use the Columbia-Snake River waterway system, is in favor of more rail to barge transloading, since capacity on the river is nowhere near the congestion point, while rail capacity in the Gorge is at the breaking point for both UP and BNSF. "Rail capacity near the breaking point for both UP and BNSF," sounds like something I suggested earlier. I feel if the Government would be willing to pay for the USA Rail Improvments.
QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal - Foss Maritime, one of the four competing barge lines that use the Columbia-Snake River waterway system, is in favor of more rail to barge transloading, since capacity on the river is nowhere near the congestion point, while rail capacity in the Gorge is at the breaking point for both UP and BNSF. "Rail capacity near the breaking point for both UP and BNSF," sounds like something I suggested earlier.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal - Foss Maritime, one of the four competing barge lines that use the Columbia-Snake River waterway system, is in favor of more rail to barge transloading, since capacity on the river is nowhere near the congestion point, while rail capacity in the Gorge is at the breaking point for both UP and BNSF.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Tom, it's real simple (regarding operations through Cascade Tunnel). An empty heading eastbound through the tunnel (the 1.7% upgrade direction) will not need as much horsepower as a fully loaded double stack, thus the engines are not working as hard, thus there is less emissions to be cleared out, thus the tunnel is ready in much less time for the next train. That's why the Quincy dedicated intermodal train would leave such a small footprinto on current BNSF operations via Stevens Pass. For the record, most eastbounds are loads (usually double stacks of Asian imports), so if it takes a hour to clear the tunnel after each loaded double stack, adding more eastbound loads will be difficult. But westbounds, regardless of tonnage, are effectively just drifting downgrade, so the tunnel is usually available for the next train shortly thereafter. The only type of eastbound that wouldn't require the usual 40 minutes would be one that's not working so hard going upgrade, e.g. an empty.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal As opposed to a set amout of time irregardless of train type?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.