Ideas on railroad re-building

[Anonymous]

Abandonded Rock Island and Pennsylvania Railroad Lines that meet or almost meet have to be considered for rebuilding for some type of rail transportation: Heavy Freight, Heavy Commuter, Light Commuter, and Mono-Rail.

Andrew F.

[Anonymous]

I got good news for nobullchitbid. Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum in North Judson, IN HAS a C&O 2-8-4. It is Number 2789 and is in a stripped state in our engine house. We are SLOWLY working on it. In fact, alongside it is a ELCO S-1 that is being extensively repaired to bring it up to FRA standards. The diesel is 4 months older than its' steam stable mate.

If you are excited, US 30 to US 421 South to IN 10 East to North Judson. Museum is open all Saturdays, some members around Sundays.

[gapotter09]

I believe the North Creek Branch of the Delaware & Hudson from Saratoga Springs to Tahawus. What New York State has started, I hope it completes the entire distrance.

[Anonymous]

Sort of a new rail. The old New York Central from South Bend, IN to Streator, IL.

During the 50's Railroad Magazine had thought the NYC would double track that route in favor of the direct to Chicago. It saved 1 1/2 days getting a train from the Santa Fe to Elkhart, IN. I KNOW they can use that relief.

Unfortunately, if they did, our museum in North Judson could have a problem. The engine terminal in right on the old right of way. In Knox, the post office sits on it. Almost all the grade is still in, just some problems in the towns.

If you need rails east, the Pennsylvania is still in place through Indiana. When NS ran it, they found that even though it is dark territory and 40 MPH, trains from Ft. Wayne to Chicago beat the Nickle Plate route between the same points. The Nickle Plate is carded at 60 MPH, but runs south, then back north to meet up the the Pennsylvania in Valparaiso.

[nobullchitbids]

For those who remember the off-topic question:

The Chessie steam special may have used the Reading northern, but at one point it also used former Nickel Plate # 759 (so the original poster is correct).[;)] The S-3 Berkshire was employed because Chessie's Kanawha Berkshires essentially were S-3 knockoffs (as a matter of detail, one needs only to switch the sandbox and the dome).[oX)] Unfortunately, none of the Kanawhas were kept; [xx(] fortunately, several of the S-3s were.[:)] Give one a little paint job, engage in a little make-believe, and gadzooks! -- we're running a model railroad![4:-)][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D][8D]

Last S-3 I saw was the 755 at Conneaut, Ohio (is it still there?).[%-)] There was a Kanawha once stuffed at or near the Cleveland Zoo, but it was in horrid shape when I saw it and victim of much vandalization.[}:)] I wouldn't be surprised to learn it was long gone today.[V]

[Anonymous]

Since we're wishing here, is there anyone else who'd like to see the old UP/D&RGW Tennesee Pass Line open back up?

[Anonymous]

Just like in any business, nothing happens without it making economic sense. Railroads are land intensive. They have some real disincentives in reacquiring RoW that has been sold. Have you seen the price of property these days?
I'm nostalgic about the old Erie from Meadville through the Southern Tier of New York State, and all the branches heading North and South off of it, but that doesn't make it sensible to resurrect them--unfortunately.
But it is fun to dream....

[RKFarms]

Interesting topic- a few thoughts.
Chicago-Cincinnati: current AMTRAK route (Monon, P&E to Indy, C&O to Cincy) is underutilized and mostly in decent shape. Not exactly direct, but it is already built.
Toledo-St. Louis: old Cloverleaf is long gone in western Indiana. I live 3 miles from this line and remember it well when it was active. It has a lot of curves, goes through a lot of small towns and is EXTREMEMLY unlikely to be resurrected. I would love to see the old Monon get more traffic-I cross it every day on my way to work and rarely see a train or hear one on my radio.
Overall, I don't see the economic justification for any of these, but it's a nice dream.
Pat
WC Indiana

[Anonymous]

In S. Jersey we are relaying a small part of what was once the West Jersey & Seashore connection to the Reading's Cape May branch. We have dug up a lot of the old ties.This track was removed in the early 1970's. Th trees are 4-6 inches around. The track gang spent 2 weeks cutting trees. This will now become a team track to hold about 6 cars. Wish we could go all the way.
Ron Baile
Cape May Seashore Lines RR

[Anonymous]

Funny when you contemplate the concept of Nimbyism along side the discussion we've had here about lineside residential groups protesting train horn noise.

All the "cat call" invective faulting them for buying a house close to the tracks, if they didn't want horns blaring in their ears.....so here the table is turned, the residents living lineside are getting involved proactively BEFORE the potential problem resumes, and now the residents are faulted as "NIMBY's" ....

[dmitzel]

I understand why the Montana Gov is upset about BNSF's grain rates and lack of (rail) competition. Too bad it didn't need to be this way.

When the Milwaukee filed for bankruptcy in '78 (or was it '77) the trustee was looking for a buyer towards the end. However, only the State of South Dakota was really interested - they did eventually purchase the segment from Ortonville, MN to Terry, MT. Montana was somewhat interested, but chose to pass. Idaho was indifferent and Washington was definately not interested. Sort of hard to save the PCE when most of the states it traversed said "No, thanks."

I imagine that many of them wished they decided otherwise, but things were different in the '70s and '80s with too much rail capacity back then. If someone had a crystal ball back then and could have forseen the container explosion from Asia perhaps something could have been done, but that something would have likely been a Federal Government effort at railbanking since the industry didn't have the financial strength to do it alone.

Sure, it would be something for the UP to run Seattle/Tacoma to St. Paul on the old MILW and connect to the C&NW (former Omaha) line to Milwaukee and Chicago. Too bad that the Milwaukee trustee saw more $$$ from the scrapper than the Feds or UP ever offered. About all you could hope for is the BNSF re-laying the Ellensburg to Lind, WA segment, but I hear that most of the ROW in Ellensburg proper is occupied by a University - lots of NIMBYs in acadamia.

Speaking of re-laying abandoned ROWs and NIMBYs, one only has to see how long it has taken DM&E to get their Powder River extension off the ground (and through the court challenges) to see how hard this is, and they haven't even turned a shovel-full of dirt yet. Not to mention western S. Dak. and Wyoming are about the most lightly inhabited spots left in our country.

Food for though, anyway...

[Anonymous]

Thanx for the input everybody. Maybe someday if I'm in Indiana I'll go bike riding over the former C&O. I never realized how expensive railroads were to build or operate until recently. I suppose BNSF, UP and even DM&E will probably expand their lines to quadruple track before ever bringing back the Cowboy line or the Sheldon-Rapid City route. I still think that as long as the former Rock Island ROW from K.C. to St. Louis is still intact it would be great for passenger train service since the line is fairly straight as opposed to Gateway Western, NS or the former CB&Q between those cities.
Although it's hard to tell what new lines will be built or what potential ROW's will be re-built I do know this. In about 30 years there will be at least 100 million more Americans. I think the capacity issue will be more problematic in the West where the railroads were built at a time when so few lived there and little trade was coming in from Asia. Not to mention the more challenging landscape that would hinder building new lines. In any case I think it will be interesting to see how the railroads solve these problems in the future.

[SALfan]

Re # 6, the old SAL between Richmond and Jacksonville: as far as I am aware, the two big chunks that are abandoned are Petersburg, VA to Norlina, NC and between Savannah, GA and Jacksonville, FL (corrections welcome). Both areas are traffic deserts, and Petersburg-Norlina is crooked and hilly as well. Don't believe there would be major problems from NIMBY's about rebuilding them, because there aren't many people in those areas to be affected. My limited grasp of RR economics says CSX would be much better off to add track to the ex-ACL as needed.

[Modelcar]

...In all our discussion of the "used to be routes", I'm sure most of us would like to see them back in operation as viable rail routes needed to haul our merchandise, etc...even people across some of them. Reality is they were shut down becaue something caused them to be costing too much resources against what the route shipping was bringing in....With the trends of transportation in this country I don't see much hope to find hardly any of the routes reinstated. It really seems a shame to abandon such engineered routes because once that happens all kinds of changes occur to obliterate the routes and most can not be restored. The building of Trails on these routes at least preserves the basic ROW if, and it's a big if they would ever be needed as rail routes again. Guess we can hope, but that's about all I see towards seeing much rebuilding of any of the routes again. The depot in our city was derelict to a point it was a disgrace in appearance but now after the Trail was established the depot is a great sight again and useful building {as the Trail Head in our area}...and it still looks like a railroad station.

[MP173]

I moved to Northwest Indiana in 1977 and C&O was still running it's trains directly on the Cincinnati route into Hammond and then Chicago.

Sometime in the late 70's they abandoned the route from Malden (south of Valparaiso) to Hammond, possibly due to Erie Lackawanna's demise (not sure about that). Trains, including the Cardinal, were routed (from south) to the old Pere Marquette route at LaCrosse, In. north to Wellsboro. A loop track was in place to run the freights from a north direction to the east-west B&O line. It was a great place to be in the late 70's as there was an operator there that controlled the line to LaCrosse.

I got to know the operator there really well and would spend the day there watching the action...GTW running it's GP7/9's long hood forward, B&O mainline, the C&O trains plus the Cardinal coming off the B&O and heading down a welded rail branch line plus a local coming south out of Benton Harbor.

The second trick operator was a cute little freckled redhead...never built up enought courage to ask her out.

Good days.

ed

[Modelcar]

...And continues in the Muncie area with roughly 30 miles and about 7 mi. more under construcion on the south end......

[ValleyX]

The C&O of Indiana was lost due to grades and clearances, rather than improve it, CSX abandoned it. End of story.

The Erie was miles longer but what would have made the Erie appealing in today's world is their gracious clearances and rural territory. It went through few large cities, I believe the largest city was Akron, and I still think it would have made one heck of a intermodal route. Sadly, it didn't hang on long enough to see that happen.

It was also way behind the times, it was neat to see semaphores and towers everywhere but where other railroads were getting rid of them, the EL didn't have the funds to reach out for the future and update.

The bike trail in the Richmond area over the old C&O goes from north of the old C&O depot, essentially near old U. S. 40, under today's NS, across the Whitewater River gorge on the old C&O bridge, and on north about, I believe, seven miles.

[Modelcar]

W R....At least to satisfy a bit of your dreams....Drive west from Washington, Pa. on I-70 and at least at some places you can see some of your routes.....where they used to go.

[Anonymous]

Being the realist I do not think any of these will ever be reinstated. The costs plus propery taxes plus NIMBY plus etc etc would not get it done. It would be better to double track existing lines between the end points mentioned if more capacity is needed.

Look at the recent Newswire wherein the govenor of Montana is mad at BNSF for their exorbinate freight rates. Perhaps if the governor is mad enough the old Milw coulb be reserrected, however there are many miles in the states to the west through some rough terrain to build on if the desire was to get to Pacific ports.

Being a dreamer I would like to see the Clarksburg-Parkersbure portion of the former B&O St Louis line relaid. I am from West Virginia and have a soft spot in my heart of the state. It was shut down because all the traffic dried up (as senior VP of CSX told me this once).

Lets dream on. My wife is from Wheeling. I would like to see the PRR line from Wellsburg to Wheeling rebuilt and how about the B&O from Wheeling to Washington PA. While we are at it how about the B&O from Grafton to Wheeling, which was the original line to the Ohio River. Would serve as a good historical interpretative place. Dream on and replace the gap in the north-south B&O line between Charleston and Gauley Bridge. Then you could go from Charleston to Pittsburg in a very direct route, however, with many curves.

Dreaming really is fun.

[Modelcar]

2101....Hmmm....I can still remember how surprised I was at the sound of the whistle...it was kinda shrill and squeaky like....Also I saw that engine over in Lock Haven, Pa. when the Freedom Train of 76 was in action....{Again relying on memory, but believe that's correct}. The Cardinal passenger train that traversed through here on C&O was an interest to me...Met it at the depot many, many times. That line was built on the general terrain of Indiana across the countryside....with gentle slopes and dips....Kinda followed the contour of the land but it wasn't that bad as it is generally flat across the area. Some down grades on the way to Richmond from Muncie. At least we had a passenger train stopping in Muncie for several years in the 70's, etc..... And over on the big 4 line...{now CSX}, we had 3 or 4 passenger trains east and west.....and all that ended when Amtrak started in 1971.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CShaveRR

Back to the original question:

I'm not sure that resurrecting any of these lines, for the purpose of re-establishing lost railroad capacity that will probably need to be restored, is practical. In most cases, there is a railroad currently running from Point A to Point B. Are we suggesting that a competitor come in and build a new line over the old right-of-way (which, as been pointed out, is often no longer available for use in many areas)?

An example: Who would want to run the old MILW route from Savanna (which is in Illinois, by the way) to Omaha? At Omaha, you have two railroads that go west out of town: UP and BNSF. UP has its own line from western Illinois to Omaha; so does BNSF. What company would want to build essentially a new line to go from the Mississippi River to Omaha? You've got four railroads in the Chicago-to-Omaha corridor already. Would a fifth one be necessary to take traffic from somewhere in Illinois to be handed over to UP or BNSF? Nope--the four railroads that do it today are down from six (seven, if you count Wabash!) for a reason. And neither UP nor BNSF needs a new choice for giving away some of their business from the west--


I'm not familiar with all of the suggestions made here. One--the old C&O of Indiana--might have some justification if traffic between Chicago and Cincinnati took a big swing upward. There is no real direct route any more between those two points. But here, the C&O right-of-way wasn't very direct, either. If a railroad desperately needed to be built between Chicago and Cincinnati, wouldn't it make more sense to strike out on a completely new, more direct route (perhaps cobbling portions of existing lines together to make said route)? Keep in mind that building a new track would not be a cheap propostion, and you couldn't get away with building an unsignaled single track for low-speed operation. A "vision" is no longer enough--you'd need hard facts to get the money, and the least expensive railroad-building technology (from a labor standpoint) would build you a railroad that would have to be supported by plenty of traffic, requiring at least a single-track CTC operation with plenty of second track along the way, and track that could handle gross rail loads well beyond what the abandoned track was designed for (the 286K issue). Again, no "third" company would do that--it'd have to be one or the other of CSX and NS.

I think you have it ENTIRELY correct.

After first reading this thread I concluded that there are 2 ways of looking at the subject.

One, from the aspect of driving by abandoned grades and thinking "Wouldn't it be nice to see trains come through here again?" More of a romantic, railfan perspective.

And the other, a more analytical, "business sense" perspective as you outline, which is the one I suspect the RR's employed when deciding to abandon what they did.

In this latter vein, I don't know all the routes mentioned either, but of the ones I do, my first response was geared more towards looking at whether the surviving entity needs more capacity than they currently have between the listed points A and B.

Of those I know:

7. Does NS REALLY need more capacity between Toledo and Saint Louis? One can drive through all those little towns once served by the Cloverleaf, and see that for the most part the line side industry that once was, is no longer along this route. And NS seems to be getting along nicely with the old Wabash, a superior route. If NS needed additional capacity between the two endpoint cities , their best value would be towards doubling up some of the old Wabash's single track segments


8. What can one say about the old Erie that is not properly described with the one memory that among the major routes from New York to Chicago, the Erie was miles longer than all the rest? Do either of the Conrail surviving entities need more capacity between the two? Well, NS has the former Waterlevel route AND the former Nickle Plate, the latter of which is greatly underutilized, and CSX decided that it had so much need in that segment that it leased out the former PRR main to Chicago Ft Wayne & Eastern...so it's not like CSX is strapped for capacity through Ohio.



9.An interesting one, for sure. Seemingly one of the more direct routes, between the 2 cities, crossing a mostly level state of indiana. And, the competition (NS) has grown business like gang busters between these cities utilizing portions of a former PRR routing and part of the old Nickle Plate New Castle District (cobbling together old routes, just as you mention) Having grown up next to that line in the 60's, and then living back in the same spot these last 3 years, I can say the difference is like night and day. 10 times the volume, easy. So, why doesn't CSX reinstate the old C&O and compete for that business ? Good question. I've heard that the old "cheviot hill" routing out of Cincinnati was a deadful slope to have to climb, which was probably why the route was abandoned in favor of superior former B&O routes... Instead of spending a fortune re installing this whole line, I'd think CSX would be better off enhancing their Indianapolis to Chicago route, and sending it all over that way


Though I'd like to see 7 and 9 reinstalled, that is just the old romantic in me. All the old romantic railroads went out of business.

[CShaveRR]

Quentin, it was the ex-RDG 2101 that headed the Steam Special.

I rode that line when the Amtrak trains went through there, on more than one occasion. I don't know how they did it with "Pooches" for power, because that line was always the poor stepchild of the C&O, and I'm pretty sure that siz-axle units were banned from it after one particular derailment involving a trestle or something. Even if they were to take away the bike path (don't do it before I git my chance at it!), relaying the track and signal systems--and strengthening the bridges for today's equipment--would be an expensive proposition.

[Modelcar]

A G: In Muncie at the Trail Head..{depot}, on the trail just 1/4 mi. north the Trail crosses White River along with 2 other railroad bridges....All within a couple hundred feet of each other. One, the abandoned 2 section through bridge that remains of the old line that went north to Matthews...Pennsylvania RR, and the present route of north / south NS line the Triple Crown travels through here on...All right together. Believe the Pennsylvania had trackage rights from Anderson to get here in Muncie to it. Years ago, that Pennsylvania line came right down the middle of busy Madison St until sometime in the mid to late '50's.

[Modelcar]

...One important fact relating to the mention of the Chicago to Cinn. route is that the ROW is probably more preserved than many that have been abandoned. The Trail I speak of above has the ROW just about remaining in place as it was when in use. Including bridges. It's been abandoned since about '94 when the rails were pulled up.....Have pictures of that operation. Of course it was a single track line. Amtrak used it with the Cardinal for quite a few years before it's abandonment. Years ago I witnessed the Chessie Steam Special {believe that's what it was called}, come through on that line....Does 759 engine sound right....Thinking that was the power on it....{Or was it 769}...???

[Modelcar]

A G: Yes, the NYC, Penn Central, Conrail and now CSX line you ask about is an active line....Double track. Can't tell you the most active times of day but it for sure is an active main though here east and west. Downtown the big old depot is gone but this line goes right through downtown Muncie too....

[CShaveRR]

Back to the original question:

I'm not sure that resurrecting any of these lines, for the purpose of re-establishing lost railroad capacity that will probably need to be restored, is practical. In most cases, there is a railroad currently running from Point A to Point B. Are we suggesting that a competitor come in and build a new line over the old right-of-way (which, as been pointed out, is often no longer available for use in many areas)?

An example: Who would want to run the old MILW route from Savanna (which is in Illinois, by the way) to Omaha? At Omaha, you have two railroads that go west out of town: UP and BNSF. UP has its own line from western Illinois to Omaha; so does BNSF. What company would want to build essentially a new line to go from the Mississippi River to Omaha? You've got four railroads in the Chicago-to-Omaha corridor already. Would a fifth one be necessary to take traffic from somewhere in Illinois to be handed over to UP or BNSF? Nope--the four railroads that do it today are down from six (seven, if you count Wabash!) for a reason. And neither UP nor BNSF needs a new choice for giving away some of their business from the west--they already have lines into Chicago that wouldn't involve handing the business to yet another railroad at the river. Would ICE rebuild the line? Probably not--it was a predecessor of theirs that couldn't keep it going.

So, we'd have to have either BNSF or UP build this line to alleviate some of the capacity constraints of existing lines across Iowa. Yes, those traffic problems exist. But what good would an entire new right-of-way be for either of those railroads? More taxes to pay, no business along the line that can't already be handled by existing lines, and a new batch of NIMBYs who would fight the move at every turn. The capacity issue would probably better be addressed by adding a track to an existing right-of-way (or those of both railroads, if necessary) than by building something completely separate. In fact, UP is buying the steel from MILW's old Des Moines River bridge for an eventual replacement of its own Kate Shelley Bridge (which would be retained and provide a third track across the river, last I heard).

I'm not familiar with all of the suggestions made here. One--the old C&O of Indiana--might have some justification if traffic between Chicago and Cincinnati took a big swing upward. There is no real direct route any more between those two points. But here, the C&O right-of-way wasn't very direct, either. If a railroad desperately needed to be built between Chicago and Cincinnati, wouldn't it make more sense to strike out on a completely new, more direct route (perhaps cobbling portions of existing lines together to make said route)? Keep in mind that building a new track would not be a cheap propostion, and you couldn't get away with building an unsignaled single track for low-speed operation. A "vision" is no longer enough--you'd need hard facts to get the money, and the least expensive railroad-building technology (from a labor standpoint) would build you a railroad that would have to be supported by plenty of traffic, requiring at least a single-track CTC operation with plenty of second track along the way, and track that could handle gross rail loads well beyond what the abandoned track was designed for (the 286K issue). Again, no "third" company would do that--it'd have to be one or the other of CSX and NS.

So, yes, additional capacity may be needed sometime down the road, whether it's in a few years or next month. But the railroads that already have these routes would be better off spending their money expanding existing rights-of-way. And even if some delusional lottery-winner wanted to break into the game with a startup line of any importance, he'd still have to get the approval--or at least the grudging acceptance--of his future competitors and everybody else that would be affected.

[blhanel]

QUOTE: Originally posted by blhanel

#3 will never happen, especially on the original ROW. There's already a four-lane divided highway running down it through the north side of Cedar Rapids, and they're in the process of erecting a commercial building on the ROW across from where I work.

Being it was such a nice day today, I got out and did some railfanning and also (remembering this thread) took the opportunity to get some shots of what's left of the MILW through here.

Illustrating my point above, here's the end of the rails on what is now a CNIC industrial spur.


The same spot looking west.



Here's another shot showing how the MILW line has been realigned to curve south and join the CNIC. The old alignment used to go straight, crossing what is now the CNIC on a bridge and continuing to the horizon where Highway 100 can now be seen.



Just thought I'd share...

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Modelcar

A G.....Not knowing if you are familiar with Muncie...I'll guide you right to the "Depot". Get off I-69 at the Muncie exit that puts you on Rt. 332. Turn east and follow it into northern Muncie where it becomes McGalliard...Continue from I-69 east into Muncie for about 9 or 10 miles and you will finally pass our Muncie Mall....and cross a railroad. The NS. Turn right on Broadway and head south for almost 2 miles....you will cross that railroad again and the Trail....Now you have the depot on your right...Turn in and check it all out.

Cool, thanks.


Just from curiousity, that old PennCentral line out of Muncie, south west. The one that goes through Daleville.

Is that still an active line?

[Modelcar]

A G.....Not knowing if you are familiar with Muncie...I'll guide you right to the "Depot". Get off I-69 at the Muncie exit that puts you on Rt. 332. Turn east and follow it into northern Muncie where it becomes McGalliard...Continue from I-69 east into Muncie for about 9 or 10 miles and you will finally pass our Muncie Mall....and cross a railroad. The NS. Turn right on Broadway and head south for almost 2 miles....you will cross that railroad again and the Trail....Now you have the depot on your right...Turn in and check it all out.

[Anonymous]

ModelCar,

Thanks, sounds nice, may have to try that.

I'd like to "ride" it just because it is the former C&O...good enough reason for me.

BUT, my bike riding buddies are not railfans, so If I just say I want to go ride an "old railroad" path their eyes will glaze over and they will just say "no" because They know how I am.

So, i've gotta become a salesman, and 'sell' them on a roadtrip.....and If I can say "scenic"...I might have some luck

Just have to see, I guess.