CN transcon goes through Yellowhead pass (think thats the name) which is the lowest easy grade in Canada. Trains had an article a while back showing all of the grades in US and Canada. Van Horne's original route for his CP was through Yellowhead however this was rejected by the government. Ottawa was worried that if the line was built through Yellowhead the southern areas might leave the dominion and join the US. Thus CP was forced to build near the 49th parallel through the inferior Kicking Horse and Rogers pass.
The terminals are a problem as well? I thought it was mainly the lack of double-track or longer sidings east of El Paso, because perhaps the issues are more widespread. I never knew that from the discussions. Where are the specific terminal issues you are referring to (I have feeling West Colton may be one of them) and how would they factor into the longer train equation?
Your right about CN being a totally different railroad from UP, but I wasn't really comparing grades between the two in this case. I was more comparing fleet numbers and just surprised that UP has found themselves in this locomotive shortage mess, despite not reading on this until now. CN is facing a similar crisis, but it makes sense for them because they have not had anywhere near as many units as UP ever in their history and have not experienced this level of traffic growth.
I guess the more units the better for trains in grade situations, but instead of comparing CN and UP here, why not compare UP and CP? CP's traverses two very steep passes on its transcon in BC and Alberta and they don't use the same number of locomotives on their trains and there is less double-track to accomodate 10,000 foot. They do frequently runs trains of that length through Rogers and Kicking Horse. I don't think Beaumount could compare to Rogers or Kicking Horse.
ADRIAN BALLAM Additionally, UP runs many locomotives on their trains along the Sunset Route. Most have a minimum of 3 or 4. Here's an idea: why don't they reduce the number of locomotives on their trains and/or increase the length of their trains, combine them like CN does. Very few, if any, trains on the Sunset Route exceed 10,000 feet and while there may be constraints on making the trains that long each of El Paso, it is not impossible west of the city since apparently 83% of the line is double-tracked. Even that being said, if the sidings are so short on the lines east from El Paso to Kansas City, Dallas and Houston, they could still run a couple of trains and continue have the others at shorter lengths. In fact, UP does this on the line to Kansas City as I have seen videos of manifests exceeding 150 cars (close to 10,000 feet).
Additionally, UP runs many locomotives on their trains along the Sunset Route. Most have a minimum of 3 or 4. Here's an idea: why don't they reduce the number of locomotives on their trains and/or increase the length of their trains, combine them like CN does. Very few, if any, trains on the Sunset Route exceed 10,000 feet and while there may be constraints on making the trains that long each of El Paso, it is not impossible west of the city since apparently 83% of the line is double-tracked. Even that being said, if the sidings are so short on the lines east from El Paso to Kansas City, Dallas and Houston, they could still run a couple of trains and continue have the others at shorter lengths. In fact, UP does this on the line to Kansas City as I have seen videos of manifests exceeding 150 cars (close to 10,000 feet).
First, 10,000 foot trains are hell to get into and out of terminals not designed for them, and most are not.
Second, the Sunset Route is almost all on a grade, often exceeding 1%. UP needs power for reasonable speed on these grades and for Beaumont Hill between Colton and Yuma which is 1.7 and 1.8% average in some miles. It as a very different railroad from CN, and CN is the exception in that it has such gentle grades that it can run long trains. Whether or not that is a good idea in terms of service quality is a serious question.
Mac
This response here makes me laugh (not that I don't believe that is true). Watching trains very frequently in British Columbia, CP runs many trains (potash, grain, intermodal, manifest) these days with Union Pacific units, which I believe were bought by CP yet I am not 100% sure since they haven't been repainted nor the UP name and symbol been rubbed off like CN had done when they bought second-hand from UP, BNSF and most recently, CSXT. Yet, according to the above, UP has a locomotive shortage? This is ridiculous.
I understand why CN has locomotive shortages right now because they never purchase units to the extent of UP or BNSF. Very few CN units are in storage now and they are so desparate for them, they need to lease more units to accomodate significant traffic growth and severe congestion. It boggles my mind UP is in this position now. Very surprising and sadly, laughable.
K. P. Harrier So, IF BNSF is taking units out of storage and returning them to service, is UP likewise returning their power by Marsh Station Road in Arizona back to service also? Does anyone out that way know?
So, IF BNSF is taking units out of storage and returning them to service, is UP likewise returning their power by Marsh Station Road in Arizona back to service also? Does anyone out that way know?
Well, I don't know if UP is resorting to taking some of those locomotives out of storage in Arizona, but with UP's congestion issues of late the railroad has been very strapped for locomotives on the far eastern part of their system (Texas and Louisiana) at the very least.
In Houston, I believe UP has pulled nearly every locomotive they have out of storage. Lots of SD60's and SD60M's running around, as well as some of the few remaining C40-8's, C40-8W's, C41-8W's. They've also been using a number of other railroad's locomotives as well. They've even gone to the point of stopping inbound trains in sidings outside of Houston and then running the power light into town to try and get trains out. It's a mess. But who knows, may they'll need some of those Arizona locomotives at point.
I want to say sometime in the last week there was a press release or something along those lines where a UP guy was quoted saying that UP was taking a couple hundred locomotives out of storage. Of course, I'd imagine they'd start by re-activating the easy ones to get to (ie, the ones stored in yards).
ChrisHouston, TX
Must apologize to everyone for going into a discussion of freeways and Quebec language laws. Got a little off the blog subject and will be back on it in the future. Hope that UP will soon resume filling the remaining gaps in the Sunset route soon.
K.P. was in the San Gabriel Trench area, most closely associated with San Gabriel, CA, on Sunday, March 18, 2018 and files this situation update:
The east end looking west from Walnut Grove Ave., with a low wall in construction with I-beams on right.:
The sidewalks on the new bridging over the trench at San Gabriel Blvd. seem to be in place now.
The west end from Ramona Street looking westbound:
It had been thought that things would be winding down there by now, but much construction is yet ahead, particularly on the western end of the trench, apparently because the multilayered side wall construction consumes much time in the construction process.
While the lack of two-tracking is probably because of the railroads’ focus on completing the installation of Positive Train Control, things seem to be getting better with the economy. In Arizona between Tucson and Benson, by the I-10 Freeway and Marsh Station Road, the now unused old Main 2 dead-end track had (“had”) reportedly somewhere around 200 engines stored on it.
View from March 31, 2016
In that light, K.P. while in the vicinity of the San Gabriel Trench also checked out the non-UP very small “Keller Yard” facility just south of Caesar Chavez Blvd. in the downtown Los Angeles area, with some of the commuter agency Metrolink’s sleek new F125 idled locomotives there, AND in the past red and silver BNSF store power in it similar to UP’s store power by Marsh Station Road in Arizona. The following link shows those BNSF stored units a number of months ago:
http://railpictures.net/photo/616037/
This was the situation at Keller Yard just a few days ago, with all the BNSF red and silver power gone.
If the economy gets too prosperous, will UP be tempted (“tempted”) to resume two-tracking, at least for short distances, maybe for a ten mile stretch? That is unlikely, but I guess that one should never say never. If two-tracking did happen, though, it would seem a Sunset Route stretch between Houston and San Antonio would be started before anything in Arizona, but time will tell
We should not, I suppose, be influenced by BNSF’s present triple-tracking west of Belen, NM and think UP might add another track somewhere, like in Arizona. That is possible, but the situation in New Mexico is very, very different than in Arizona. Eastbound BNSF trains approaching the crew change tracks in Belen often all back up, thus westbound trains out of Belen can’t get around a slower train. A third track there would alleviate that problem. The UP crew change place in Yuma, AZ on the Sunset Route has no near the volume of trains that the BNSF Transcon has. Plus, Yuma and Arizona may (“may”) have political complications with additional UP two-tracking.
This will end the posting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.
Did a quick check on Google and found that the streetview of the Marsh Station area shows the stored locomotives.
Electroliner 1935-- That experience you relate is long before the draconium language laws came in.
Thankfully as bad as it is you would still be somewhat OK in Montreal but that's due to the folks, not government policy however once outside of that forget it.
Perhaps it is somewhat OK along the US border towns in the Southern Counties. Maybe.
I have been to the Quebec area three times and dispite speaking zero french, had welcome experiences with the people. My first visit was at Expo 67 and on our last day, my two year old daughter came down with Chicken Pox. We had parked on a residential street near the end of their Subway and my wife decided to separate and let my son and I stay at Expo while she returned to the trailer. When she got to where she thought the car was, she couldn't find it. There was a Branch of a Bank at the end of the street which had closed. But she was able to get their attention, they opened up and let her in, called the gendarmes who then drove her up the streets until they found our car. All were very friendly and helpful. What could have been a terrible experience turned out to be great. They wanted visiters to be treated well and their citizens sure rose to the occasion.
Two types of subway. French rubber tired and regular steel wheeled. Michelin made out on selling tires. Liked both.
A few years ago Quebec wanted to leave Canada and be their own country. They wanted independance but wanted Ottawa to continue the subsidies. Financial annalysts said Quebec could not make it on their own unless they doubled or triple their taxes. In northern Quebec most of the residents are not French and were against leaving.
I also noted that in the maratime provinces on the east coast have very few French signs.
Getting back to railroads part of the reason for Canadian Pacific moved their corporate office from Montrael to Calgary was the potential Quebec problem. This might have contributed CP selling their lines east of Montrael although I think the main reason was lack of profitable traffic.
Ahhh..I see. Quebecs language and signage laws are draconian, and English is banned from sign usage. They have police enforcing this.
It's to protect their culture, no one in Ottawa would even dare touch that.
c'est la vie
In my prior life before retirement I saw Yum Brands all over the world. Yes, they are doing well. What I was referring to was the desecration foisted on KFC by the citizens of Quebec. No where else does this happen. Even in China it says KFC not some hyroglific.
ccltrains Been to all parts of Canada. Canada is a bilingual country and all signs, forme etc. are in English and French. I think there are about two French speaking people in British Columbia but everythung is bilingual. Then you get to Quebec and the English disappears. So much for the bilingual country. How about some Kentucky Poulet Frits? Bet Colonial Sanders is turning over in his grave.
Been to all parts of Canada. Canada is a bilingual country and all signs, forme etc. are in English and French. I think there are about two French speaking people in British Columbia but everythung is bilingual. Then you get to Quebec and the English disappears. So much for the bilingual country. How about some Kentucky Poulet Frits? Bet Colonial Sanders is turning over in his grave.
Not at all, Yum brands has a huge worldwide presence and KFC is very popular in China and just about everywhere else. The cash registers are ringing with glee, not turning over in the grave. Smiling.
Worst on ramp experience I ever had was in 1967 in Montreal. I had a 65 ford and was pulling a rented trailer to go to Expo 67. Coming up a ramp onto what I think is the 640, the ramp ended in a rectangular area just lomg enough to contain the auto and the trailer. Tnere was no way to merge so I had to sit and wait (feeling some guilt for the poor souls behind me) until a gap appeared that I felt was long enough for me to accelerate into. I think it was about five minutes before I was able to get into the stream of traffic. I was sweating because with a rented trailer, and the family, the last thing I wanted was to have an accident in Canada and in Quebec. All Street signs were in French. Back then there was no GPS. Got to the camp ground and felt a big weight off my shoulders. If it was just a car, it might have been ok to swing into traffic but pulling a trailer, I couldn't chance it.
Chuck- I stand corrected. I-5 is two lanes. Guess my feeble mind is failing me. After all I have been away from southern California for 40 years. Texas is slowly getting rid of the 100 foot on ramps but a few still exist. Nothing is more scary than using one of the short onramps and finding someone stopped at the end waiting for a break in traffic.
On to the general subject of this Blog. The Sunset route is a few miles south of Dallas (San Antonio) but we do have the Texas Eagle. Also have a great commuter line between Dallas and Fort Worth, the Trinity Railway Express (TRE). Rode in the cab many times as I was on the Board of DART and their rep for the TRE. DART has a great light rail system with one line being the longest in the US. Not as many trains here as in Chicago or New York but my pay check was here and had to do with what we have.
ChuckCobleighSome of those "Don Garlitts" onramps seemed to still be in use,
Of course, all three lanes carried traffic.
This was really a problem in the elevated section where you had to run uphill to gather speed to merge and couldn't see the oncoming traffic.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
ccltrainsWhile residing in Bakersfield saw the building of I-5 with four lanes each way. Same over the grapevine.
Had to refresh my memory using Google Earth, but I-5 from the split just north of the Grapevine to Stockton seems still to be mostly two lanes in each direction. I had to use G-E for the most of the refreshing because my last few years of travel up the Valley has been on the 99 north from Bakersfield, which route has been seeing a lot of construction this decade, including some realignments and relocations of the route, such that it now has a lot of three- and four-lane segments in both directions. As I recall, some of I-5 between Sacramento and Stockton is still two lanes in each direction.
It seems that most of the freeways in the DFW area had construction going on last summer when we were there a few days. It seemed like the concrete suppliers were doing pretty well, financially anyway. Some of those "Don Garlitts" onramps seemed to still be in use, though, at least in Fort Worth. (BTW, my Garmin GPS did a good job of steering me away from the toll roads, but some of the routings were pretty bizarre.)
K.P.,
Hope you are well. Thank you for the picture updates.
Oh the freeways. We lived in southern California from 1966 through 1978 then moved to Texas. My what cultural shock. California was making all freeways 4 lanes each way even then. While residing in Bakersfield saw the building of I-5 with four lanes each way. Same over the grapevine. In Texas they were still building 2 lane freeways with acceleration ramps only 100 feet long. Almost caused cardiac arrest getting on. TXDOT finally wised up and is rebuilding I-35 but only with 3 lanes each way. The road will be obsolete before it opens. When we got to Texas they still had blue laws. For example on Sunday you could buy nails but not a hammer. Guess you had to use your fist to drive the nail. Fortunately the blue laws are almost gone. You still cannot buy hard liquor on Sunday. Being retired Sunday is the same as Thursday. The only way I know it is Sunday is that the liquor stores are closed.
eolesen and desertdog (Both 3-13):
Great reading a reply from you, eolesen, about Arizona from your ‘cold country’ in Illinois, and desertdog it is likewise good to get your input too on Fred M. Cain’s posts.
Undoubtedly the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Arizona Department of Transportation (AZDOT) are on very similar wavelengths, and likely have much the same policies and methods. The same is true with municipalities and county boards. In regard to the Colton Flyover that replaced the Colton Crossing, the Environment Impact Report (EIR) looked at SIX options, one of which included leaving the Colton Crossing as it was, the ‘No Build’ option.
The powers that be selected the least costly option, which was the Sunset Route ‘flying over’ the BNSF Transcon.
November 25, 2013
Personally, I originally favored the Sunset Route going under the BNSF, but the EIR showed that option as way more expensive. Ultimately, as stated above, the Sunset Route flying over the BNSF was chosen as most cost effective and least costly.
Getting back to Arizona and the reroute by Marsh Station Road, undoubtedly AZDOT, or whoever, looked at the options and what would be best for Arizona’s taxpayers, and chose building a new UP track as the best and / or most cost effective plan of a number of possibilities.
June 3, 2013
One thing very important about Arizona’s choice of the UP reroute in lieu of lowering the I-10 Freeway is that removing the railroad bridge would allow for future widening of the freeway. As with Interstates, two lanes each way are sufficient in most cases. But, there is always the possibility that a housing boom could take place somewhere in the Marsh Station Road area, and 20,000 houses would suddenly appear! (I saw something similar where I once lived over 40 years ago here in Southern California!) With the UP railroad completely out of the way, a third freeway lane could easily be put in in each direction.
And freeways get more traffic. About 1965 the highway across from what is now West Colton Yard in the Rialto-Bloomington area of California was two-lanes in each direction. As a teenager I got to travel that highway at the ungodly hour of 5 A.M. in the morning, and the freeway was absolutely deserted. Not for a minute, but for many minutes. What an impression that made on me! Now, on that same stretch at 5 A.M., the now four lanes on each side on the freeway is jammed packed with commuters and speeding like crazy. Might the Marsh Station Road area of Arizona become like that someday?
Just something to ponder,
K.P.
Fred M Cain K. P. Harrier I doubt the ‘horseshoe curve’ had anything to do with inspiring the reroute in the Cienega Creek area of Arizona. What did, though, was the LOW railroad bridge over the I-10 Freeway in the old (not the new) Marsh Station Road area, that caused high trucks to detour for miles and miles. THAT was the inspiration for the reroute. K.P. I dunno. Somehow I can't help feel that this can't be the complete explanation for the bypass. After all, most trucks had no problem negotiating the underpass and for the few that did, it would seem like an easy fix to simply lower the roadbed of the highway by a couple of feet. Since it was a divided highway, one side could've been done at a time. So, I agree that it is a partial explanation but I'm not sure it is the complete story. I first read about this a few years ago in Railroads Illustrated back when it was still a monthly publication and I thought they mentioned the curve. It would be interesting to hear the UP's explanation for why they did this. By the way, it really was quite a curve. I rode over the line for the first time in December of 1965 when we rode from Tucson to Houston and back. Regards, Fred M. Cain
K. P. Harrier I doubt the ‘horseshoe curve’ had anything to do with inspiring the reroute in the Cienega Creek area of Arizona. What did, though, was the LOW railroad bridge over the I-10 Freeway in the old (not the new) Marsh Station Road area, that caused high trucks to detour for miles and miles. THAT was the inspiration for the reroute. K.P.
I doubt the ‘horseshoe curve’ had anything to do with inspiring the reroute in the Cienega Creek area of Arizona. What did, though, was the LOW railroad bridge over the I-10 Freeway in the old (not the new) Marsh Station Road area, that caused high trucks to detour for miles and miles. THAT was the inspiration for the reroute.
I dunno. Somehow I can't help feel that this can't be the complete explanation for the bypass. After all, most trucks had no problem negotiating the underpass and for the few that did, it would seem like an easy fix to simply lower the roadbed of the highway by a couple of feet. Since it was a divided highway, one side could've been done at a time.
So, I agree that it is a partial explanation but I'm not sure it is the complete story. I first read about this a few years ago in Railroads Illustrated back when it was still a monthly publication and I thought they mentioned the curve. It would be interesting to hear the UP's explanation for why they did this.
By the way, it really was quite a curve. I rode over the line for the first time in December of 1965 when we rode from Tucson to Houston and back.
Regards,
Fred M. Cain
I'm sure ADOT looked at the option of lowering the highway, but there may have been drainage considerations. Although rain is sparse most of the year in that area, when it rains, it comes all at once.
John Timm
Hi guys... I love it when we talk Tucson.... especially on a freezing day in Chicago. ;) KP's right that the removal of the Marsh Station Road bridge was predicated on the low clearances, but it was also part of a much larger project involving that two mile stretch of road and the Cienega Creek bridges. This was a project that ADOT funded and was completed in 2014. The UP bridge over I-10 was demolished in March 2013.https://azdot.gov/docs/projects/i-10-marsh-station-area-improvement-fact-sheet.pdf?sfvrsn=0
From the 2011 AZ State Rail Plan:
"Marsh Station Project (ADOT): The Marsh Station project will include a realignment of the UPRR Sunset Route, which traverses an I-10 overpass, and the realignment of Marsh Station Road. The existing railroad overpass on I-10 does not have adequate clearance, resulting in frequent truck accidents that can shut down train traffic during an incident. The realignment of the UPRR line would allow removal of the overpass and increase speed along the rail line. The realigned Marsh Station Road will need to cross over the railroad line in order to interchange with I-10 east of the existing location. A grade-separated railroad crossing will be constructed on the new Marsh Station Road."
M.P. 947,
Thanks !
Fred M Cain Anybody know when the semaphores were taken out? I know there were a few in New Mexico on the former Rio Grande sub that survived up until the UP takeover so those might've been the very last ones. (The semaphores in Oregon had been turned over to CORP by then and are also now all gone).
Anybody know when the semaphores were taken out? I know there were a few in New Mexico on the former Rio Grande sub that survived up until the UP takeover so those might've been the very last ones. (The semaphores in Oregon had been turned over to CORP by then and are also now all gone).
The eastbound semaphores between Vail and Mescal were replaced at the same time that Southern Pacific double tracked between Mescal and Dragoon (plus a section west of Lordsburg). This was in 1995. These were not the last semaphores on the SP. The semaphores between El Paso and Tucumcari in New Mexico remained until 1999 before the UP replaced them with CTC.
Power Stored
NorthWest (in samfp1943’s thread ‘UPRR in Arizona—Three Miles of Parked Power’ in the Locomotives forum) replied …
NorthWest Many of them have probably been cleared out recently. Most of the Dash-8s have been sold back to GE and many are now on lease, most of the Dash-9s are probably back in service, and many of the SD60Ms as well. I've been seeing a lot more of them lately, and even managed to find a standard cab SD60.
Many of them have probably been cleared out recently. Most of the Dash-8s have been sold back to GE and many are now on lease, most of the Dash-9s are probably back in service, and many of the SD60Ms as well. I've been seeing a lot more of them lately, and even managed to find a standard cab SD60.
That makes one wonder just how many of those stored units have been returned to service, or pulled from the line and retired. Did K.P. miss the boat by not spending an extra day in Arizona and photo-checking out that long line of power by Marsh Station Road? Anybody been out that way very recently?
Milepost 947 (3-11):
Ah, your post popped out of thin air … and late too, way after you submitted it
If AZDOT someday rebuilds the Empirita Road layout on the east end of that line relocation, making it level would mean AZDOT would have to buy that three miles or so dead-end track! I think UP likes it as it is, and AZDOT would likely rebuild the freeway at present grade separation levels. After all, aerial mapping show dirt roads lead to that freeway access.
Turnouts … and Visions of the Future!
All the tracks in the Fortuna-Wellton, AZ area seems to have wooden ties. Hence, the future 40 M.P.H. switch at CP SP771 WELLTON likely will have wooden ties as well! And, wooden ties seem to be an indication of temporary installations. But, it could be five, ten, or twenty years before two-tracking will come to the area.
It is difficult to speculate what UP may do here. BNSF, on the other hand, is going gun-ho on triple-tracking about 10 miles the section west of Belen, NM. TRAINS money guy, Fred Frailey, really needs to do a piece on the Sunset Route and what is (or will be) going on.
My copy of the SPV atlas has a copyright date of 1995--and I do not recall seeing a later edition advertised. It shows a relocation of track two between Mescal and Amole--which relocation introduced two curves; one is longer than the other.
Johnny
Big P.S. here. Here is an interesting YouTube scene from 2012 that shows the track in action and speculated that it might've been shot around 1990. The presence of double stacks indicates it had to be from the late SP period (post 1985 or so). One guy posted a response that he thought the semaphores lasted 'til "the late '90s" which would've been post UP takeover.
Again, does anybody Know for sure?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P76fKsx_HBw
-FMC
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.