futuremodal wrote:Makes sense. Railroad-wise, GN needed the CB&Q more than it needed NP. So if NP the railroad loses it's non rail assets, what would GN want with it? (BTW - wasn't that the point I made a while back that raised the ire of BN fans? JJ Hill only wanted NP for the land grant acreage, and that acreage ended up saving Hill's hide!)Perhaps the NP may have ended up divvied up - GN gets the Sandpoint-Spokane trackage, Milwaukee gets the St. Regis-Lombard trackage, UP gets the Stampede Pass line Auburn to Pasco - something like that. The rest is branchlined or embargoed.
Makes sense. Railroad-wise, GN needed the CB&Q more than it needed NP. So if NP the railroad loses it's non rail assets, what would GN want with it? (BTW - wasn't that the point I made a while back that raised the ire of BN fans? JJ Hill only wanted NP for the land grant acreage, and that acreage ended up saving Hill's hide!)
Perhaps the NP may have ended up divvied up - GN gets the Sandpoint-Spokane trackage, Milwaukee gets the St. Regis-Lombard trackage, UP gets the Stampede Pass line Auburn to Pasco - something like that. The rest is branchlined or embargoed.
You forgot NP's biggest asset ca 1970 - Colstrip. NP was running coal trains in 1969, by 1971 there were two active mines on the Colstrip branch and the Sarpy Creek line was opened up ca 1973.
erikem wrote: futuremodal wrote: Makes sense. Railroad-wise, GN needed the CB&Q more than it needed NP. So if NP the railroad loses it's non rail assets, what would GN want with it? (BTW - wasn't that the point I made a while back that raised the ire of BN fans? JJ Hill only wanted NP for the land grant acreage, and that acreage ended up saving Hill's hide!)Perhaps the NP may have ended up divvied up - GN gets the Sandpoint-Spokane trackage, Milwaukee gets the St. Regis-Lombard trackage, UP gets the Stampede Pass line Auburn to Pasco - something like that. The rest is branchlined or embargoed.You forgot NP's biggest asset ca 1970 - Colstrip. NP was running coal trains in 1969, by 1971 there were two active mines on the Colstrip branch and the Sarpy Creek line was opened up ca 1973.
futuremodal wrote: Makes sense. Railroad-wise, GN needed the CB&Q more than it needed NP. So if NP the railroad loses it's non rail assets, what would GN want with it? (BTW - wasn't that the point I made a while back that raised the ire of BN fans? JJ Hill only wanted NP for the land grant acreage, and that acreage ended up saving Hill's hide!)Perhaps the NP may have ended up divvied up - GN gets the Sandpoint-Spokane trackage, Milwaukee gets the St. Regis-Lombard trackage, UP gets the Stampede Pass line Auburn to Pasco - something like that. The rest is branchlined or embargoed.
So it's kept as a branch from Colstrip to Billings by GN or CB&Q. Like I said, I believe the "usable" parts of the NP would have been doled out, and the rest scrapped west of Terry MT. East if Terry would probably have been "DM&E'd".
futuremodal wrote: I still think CNW and Milwaukee merge, and we end up with the "Milwaukee & Northwestern".I like how that name just rolls off the tongue......
I still think CNW and Milwaukee merge, and we end up with the "Milwaukee & Northwestern".
I like how that name just rolls off the tongue......
Indeed, it DOES have a nice ring to it.
So what made the C&NW any different in the late 70's/early 80's from BN in the early 70's just after the merger?C&NW didn't have the resources to extend into the basin and upgrade the 'cowboy line' as BN didn't have the resources to upgrade the CB&Q lines and build into the basin AND be able to combine facilities,upgrade equipment,upgrade track,and maintain operations at the same time.C&NW could have divested itself of a lot of property that was just a drain on it's capital and then could have financed it's coal project.Forget gobbling up it's neighbors and concentrate on where the money really was.
Milwaukee Road could have done a lot better as a Chicago to Tacoma/Seattle railroad divested of the midwest lines.
The Hill Lines would have been better off as a Great Northern operating on Hill's philosiphy of growing the region instead of just the railroad AND create management from the inside rather than from without.
And who really needed the Rock Island?Just another bankrupt midwestern granger crying for taxpayer dollars,crippled by a government agency who(like a lot of railroad execs of the 80's and 90's)had no idea what railroading was all about or it's importance to the national economy.
Have a good one.
Bill B
MichaelSol wrote: most readers and not looking for real-life case histories, they simply want a good story -- and that's all that most historians are capable of writing.
most readers and not looking for real-life case histories, they simply want a good story -- and that's all that most historians are capable of writing.
With regards "what historians are capable of writing," I could not disagree with you more, Mr. Sol. There are many excellent colleges full of incredibly bright people who are capable of the kind of critical thinking you claim is lacking in "most" history. I think your claim is outlandish and wrong.
signal overlap wrote: MichaelSol wrote:most readers and not looking for real-life case histories, they simply want a good story -- and that's all that most historians are capable of writing. With regards "what historians are capable of writing," I could not disagree with you more, Mr. Sol. There are many excellent colleges full of incredibly bright people who are capable of the kind of critical thinking you claim is lacking in "most" history. I think your claim is outlandish and wrong.
MichaelSol wrote:most readers and not looking for real-life case histories, they simply want a good story -- and that's all that most historians are capable of writing.
And what is the basis for your statements?
Odd that you would just show up challenging a statement on another thread "2006 - the Year of Re-Regulation of the Railroads?", a thread over a year old, and then come to this thread and pick this statement out of thousands on these forums, just to dissent, without offering any basis....
Interesting that your first two posts on Trains forums would be so .... specific ....
MichaelSol wrote: signal overlap wrote: MichaelSol wrote:most readers and not looking for real-life case histories, they simply want a good story -- and that's all that most historians are capable of writing. With regards "what historians are capable of writing," I could not disagree with you more, Mr. Sol. There are many excellent colleges full of incredibly bright people who are capable of the kind of critical thinking you claim is lacking in "most" history. I think your claim is outlandish and wrong.And what is the basis for your statements?Odd that you would just show up challenging a statement on another thread "2006 - the Year of Re-Regulation of the Railroads?", a thread over a year old, and then come to this thread and pick this statement out of thousands on these forums, just to dissent, without offering any basis....Interesting that your first two posts on Trains forums would be so .... specific ....
Michael, remember the last temporary troll "Character"? He's baaaaaccckkkk!
futuremodal wrote: MichaelSol wrote: signal overlap wrote: MichaelSol wrote:most readers and not looking for real-life case histories, they simply want a good story -- and that's all that most historians are capable of writing. With regards "what historians are capable of writing," I could not disagree with you more, Mr. Sol. There are many excellent colleges full of incredibly bright people who are capable of the kind of critical thinking you claim is lacking in "most" history. I think your claim is outlandish and wrong.And what is the basis for your statements?Odd that you would just show up challenging a statement on another thread "2006 - the Year of Re-Regulation of the Railroads?", a thread over a year old, and then come to this thread and pick this statement out of thousands on these forums, just to dissent, without offering any basis....Interesting that your first two posts on Trains forums would be so .... specific ....Michael, remember the last temporary troll "Character"? He's baaaaaccckkkk!
Like when you went around as Futermodel?
Bert
An "expensive model collector"
n012944 wrote: futuremodal wrote: MichaelSol wrote: signal overlap wrote: MichaelSol wrote:most readers and not looking for real-life case histories, they simply want a good story -- and that's all that most historians are capable of writing. With regards "what historians are capable of writing," I could not disagree with you more, Mr. Sol. There are many excellent colleges full of incredibly bright people who are capable of the kind of critical thinking you claim is lacking in "most" history. I think your claim is outlandish and wrong.And what is the basis for your statements?Odd that you would just show up challenging a statement on another thread "2006 - the Year of Re-Regulation of the Railroads?", a thread over a year old, and then come to this thread and pick this statement out of thousands on these forums, just to dissent, without offering any basis....Interesting that your first two posts on Trains forums would be so .... specific ....Michael, remember the last temporary troll "Character"? He's baaaaaccckkkk!Like when you went around as Futermodel? Bert
You're clueless as usual. It is likely that it's all the same person - "Character", "Futermodel", "signal overlap" etc.- one of the Ilk Trolls trying to bypass Bergie's oversight. Also, probably the same person who has written letters to the editor of certain Montana newspapers under my forum name "Futuremodal".
Michaelsol makes an excellent point about distorting the past to achieve political goals. It reminds me of Winston Smith slaving away rewriting History at the "Ministry of Truth." How ironic that 60 years ago, Orwell based his future on Stalin's Soviet Union while the FBI was watching Lowenthal as a suspected Soviet agent.
He who controls the past charts the future.
Your friendly neighborhood CNW fan.
I saw the CNW operation lifesaver loco in Gibbons NE & while I do not know I would suspect it is still running in CNW colors somewhere on the UPRR system. Some months ago in Austin I passed under the former MPRR underpass & on top of me was a lead CNW loco still in CNW colors (about 4 months ago) Since I was driving I could not get a pix or the loco #
Lord Atmo wrote:i miss CNW....i wish there was still true CNW motive power left still in active service
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
Nope for sure I know the difference between UPRR & CNWRR since I used to give both RRs lots of traffic so you are totally incorrect with your post at least to what I saw
If you go to my web site listed in my signature & then go to the Nebraska gallery & look up Gibbon 05/10/05 & look for the pix created on May 14, 2005 10:48:45 AM you will see her in CNWRR colors lead by a UPRR followed by the CNWRR then 2 NSRR locos
Lord Atmo wrote:hmmm operation lifesaver? i think you saw UP 6730, ex CNW 8828. it's been patched with UP numbers over the CNW logo
spbed wrote: Nope for sure I know the difference between UPRR & CNWRR since I used to give both RRs lots of traffic so you are totally incorrect with your post at least to what I saw If you go to my web site listed in my signature & then go to the Nebraska gallery & look up Gibbon 05/10/05 & look for the pix created on May 14, 2005 10:48:45 AM you will see her in CNWRR colors lead by a UPRR followed by the CNWRR then 2 NSRR locos Also if it means anything to you if you look at my avatar the hat is CNWRR with a "employee owned" patch Lord Atmo wrote:hmmm operation lifesaver? i think you saw UP 6730, ex CNW 8828. it's been patched with UP numbers over the CNW logo
Also if it means anything to you if you look at my avatar the hat is CNWRR with a "employee owned" patch
i see the picture. and unfortunately that IS a patched AC4400CW. it's still in CNW paint, but with a UP patch, which is another method UP uses to renumber their locomotives. they stick a yellow rectangle over the CNW logo and slap its UP number on that with the usual red UP numbers. then they paint out all other CNW logos and stick UP shields over them. the number boards are swapped out. lastly, the CNW numbers on the long hood are painted over in yellow i can see the red numbers under the cab where the CNW logo is supposed to be
another thing too is how the number boards on the nose are black with white numbers. those are UP boards. CNW's were white with black numbers
What about the CNW 8646 and CNW 8701? Saw the 8646 a few weeks ago sitting behind the depot at Fremont, NE.
Jeff
i dont like those 2.....they dont have spartan cabs. i grew up watching the EMDs and wasnt there to see those final GEs between purchase and buy-out. i caught 8701 idling on a siding in altoona once and it wasnt doing it for the "awesome! i'm looking at a CNW!" feeling or giving me the same feeling i got as a child
i apologize. i should have phrase my original post as "i wish the stuff i saw when i was 4 was still around." terribly sorry
i disagree. and to be honest, i want them patched
for me, CNW died with 8575
Did you get this months Trains magazine? I would guess not since otherwise you would have seen CNW 8803 unpatched in there. It is on page #48. Then on page 63 there is another one. There is still another one on page 72. I would suggest you hurry out to buy the issue before it is all sold out if you really are such a big CNW fan as you claim you are!
Lord Atmo wrote: i dont like those 2.....they dont have spartan cabs. i grew up watching the EMDs and wasnt there to see those final GEs between purchase and buy-out. i caught 8701 idling on a siding in altoona once and it wasnt doing it for the "awesome! i'm looking at a CNW!" feeling or giving me the same feeling i got as a child i apologize. i should have phrase my original post as "i wish the stuff i saw when i was 4 was still around." terribly sorry
i dont have the money for the subscription unfortunately. and i have more bad news. you mentioned it has a picture of CNW 8803. i did a quick search on rrpicturearchives.net, and the results are most saddening
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/locoPicture.aspx?id=9032
that's UP 6705. you can tell which UP AC4400CWs are ex CNW by number alone. all 67XX units for one thing. but to figure out a CNW AC4400CW's UP renumber, replace the 88 with a 67 and then add 2 to the last digit. hence CNW 8803 has become UP 6705. and unfortunately repainted. at least it has wings on the nose and a lightning stripe too though. so it still retains some CNW in that stripe. i only wish it also got the flag.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.