Home Open Account Help 361 users online

Western Railroad Discussion > Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes


Date: 09/02/15 19:05
Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: 2ebright

Traffic levels on Union Pacific’s Shafter Sub. in western Utah and eastern Nevada are sure not what they used to be. Two full days here (Tues and Wed) yielded exactly 3 daylight trains that I was able to shoot, total, plus a couple of others that I was out of position to shoot. So five daylight trains for two days. Lest you think I jest, here are shots of all three. First a bit of a warning. My last trip to the Silver Zone Pass/Arnolds Loop area was end of May this year. Some time between then and now there was a big gully washer of a storm with flash flooding. All of the roads north of I80 towards Cliffside and Arnolds Loop have flood damage to some extent. There are major washouts that prevent you from accessing the area from the Shafter exit on I80 and one of the two access routes from the Pilot exit has some pretty bad washouts too. As of right now, any travel further north than Cliffside towards Arnolds Loop requires a high clearance 4WD. Be prepared to go real slow and find off road routes around some washed out gulleys. I was able to make it all the way to the loop today in my Jeep Cherokee, but it was real slow going over very rocky roads that used not to require 4WD. The run off just washed all the loose soil and sand from around the angular limestone rocks leaving the road paved with sharp edges. My Jeep was complaining and I was worried about flat tires. Send me a PM if you want more detailed info. Now to the pictures.
  1. UP 5663 West CWTNO9-30 (Coal-W. Thunder Mine-Dunphy, NV). Seen here from the upper level of the Silver Zone trackage looking more or less north up the Pilot Valley. 10,700' Pilot Peak on the right. This train was huge, 127 loads, 18,161 tons running in a 3x2 configuration. Running is an exaggeration, crawling was more like it. Do any of you know what there is at Dunphy, Nevada that would require 127 loads of coal?
  2. UP 6836 GSSOPX-28 (Grain-Sloan, IA-Pixley, CA) Seen passing the lime loader at Pilot, Nevada. Pilot is the second siding in Nevada on the Shafter Sub. and the site of a large limestone quarry. They ship by rail and truck. The Wendover Local serves this loader several times a week. Cool shots can be had here in the morning of UP SD40N’s against the large waste rock dumps.
  3. UP 7165, GSFGPX-31 (Grain-O'Fallons, NE-Pixley, CA) . Taken at Arnolds Loop with the train entering a deep rock cut.
 
Maybe my next trip out here will find that the UP has repaired the storm damage to their access roads, but then maybe they will just not do anything.
 
Dick Ebright
Roosevelt, Utah
 



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/25/15 20:05 by 2ebright.








Date: 09/02/15 19:14
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: MacBeau

2ebright Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
  •   Do any of
    > you know what there is at Dunphy, Nevada that
    > would require 127 loads of coal?

A coal fired power plant the EPA has not yet found.



Date: 09/02/15 19:47
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: 3rdswitch

Excellent trio, thanks for the effort.
JB



Date: 09/02/15 19:55
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: NS19K

MacBeau Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 2ebright Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>
  •   Do any of
    > > you know what there is at Dunphy, Nevada that
    > > would require 127 loads of coal?
    >
    >
    > A coal fired power plant the EPA has not yet
    > found.

    And surpisingly, a fairly new one, having come online in 2008.



Date: 09/02/15 21:20
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: P

Outstanding shots!



Date: 09/02/15 21:25
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: JDLX

Name of the power plant is TS Power, it is owned by Newmont Mining Company, who built it for the purpose of trying to cut their electricity bills at their massing gold mines located nearby.  It's construction caused a lot of gnashing of teeth and wailing from NV Energy, in as much as it would remove one of the utility's highest demand customers.  How much longer TS Power and the much older Valmy plant at the other end of the valley remain coal burning is an open question, as both have at least discussed converting over to natural gas, probably delivered from the massive Ruby Pipeline built a couple years ago not far north of these two plants. 

As for the washouts, this part of Nevada has had some amazing torrential rainfalls over the last couple years that have inflicted significant damage to a lot of the dirt road network.  Especially in highly erosive soils like those around Silver Zone.  A lot of it happens when we get the big monsoonal moisture pushes up from the south, which has been happening a lot...

Thanks for the pics...hoping to run into you out there one of these days...

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV



Date: 09/02/15 21:38
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: PCX

The Shafter Sub is being hurt by slumping unit train numbers as of late. The wb grain business has fallen off sharply the past couple of weeks, along with the export coal business to Stockton/Richmond. Add those two together and you don't have much of anything else in the way of through freights operating west on the ex-WP out of SLC - just the MRORVs 6 times weekly, the BNSF trackage rights trains every other day and the occasional ethanol unit train. Also very little eb traffic on the Shafter Sub as the MRVROs now route to Ogden on the former SP, so just the empty coal trains and the three weekly BNSF trains headed to SLC.

 



Date: 09/02/15 21:50
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: DynamicBrake

Nice trio, especially that first shot.  Thanks for sharing and the effort taken.

Kent in CArmel Valley



Date: 09/02/15 21:50
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: PCX

JDLX Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How much longer TS Power and the much
> older Valmy plant at the other end of the valley
> remain coal burning is an open question, as both
> have at least discussed converting over to natural
> gas, probably delivered from the massive Ruby
> Pipeline built a couple years ago not far north of
> these two plants. 

The Valmy plant will shut down one of its units in 2020, with the other unit scheduled to be shut down in 2025. That will be the end of the life cycle for the plant unless they decide to convert to natural gas. In 2020 the Valmy plant will have been in operation 40 years. Newmont has talked about going to natural gas but nothing more has come of it, at least for the time being.



Date: 09/03/15 00:28
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: coach

Well, I'm not surprised about the low train counts.  After reading Fred Frailey's account of what's going on with the big RR's car handling, it's no wonder it's slow.  UP hasn't helped their case with carload traffic--switches pulled out, reduced service times, reduced switching service, etc.  All that equals less (manifest) trains.

 



Date: 09/03/15 03:06
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: speederman01

I agree, disappointing that you had few trains but look at the quality of your shots.  Excellent!

~Dave



Date: 09/03/15 05:56
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: AaronJ

In case you missed the last 20 years, this has much more to do with traffic being routed over the ex SP than some recent trend in carload traffic change. The ex WP west out of SLC has been dead for over a decade.

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, I'm not surprised about the low train
> counts.  After reading Fred Frailey's account of
> what's going on with the big RR's car handling,
> it's no wonder it's slow.  UP hasn't helped their
> case with carload traffic--switches pulled out,
> reduced service times, reduced switching service,
> etc.  All that equals less (manifest) trains.
>
>  

Posted from Android



Date: 09/03/15 06:06
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: 2ebright

I haven't missed the past 20 years; I've been rail fanning the Shafter Sub (nee Western Pacific's 7th sub) since the early 80's. I actually think UP's scheme of running the slow, heavy commodity trains like coal and grain on the Shafter sub and freeing up the Lakeside sub for the faster, lighter stack trains, autos and the like makes sense. It's just that commodity prices are so low, that not as much of that stuff is being shipped now. UP is still spending money on the ex. WP route for good reason; that causway across the lake can be very fragile and the Shafter sub is a well built, stable bypass of the Great Salt Lake and actually has quite a bit of on-line rail business.

Dick Ebright
Roosevelt, Utah



Date: 09/03/15 09:06
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: SP8595

Great Trio! The UP 7165 was leading the GSFGPX-31 (Grain-Ofallons, NE-Pixley, CA)



Date: 09/03/15 14:01
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: WAF

rantoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is there any salt traffic left between the San
> Francisco Bay area and Salt Lake processing
> plants, traffic routed over this route?

Single cars perhaps, no unit trains



Date: 09/03/15 14:55
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: ns1000

Nice pics!! I REALLY like Pic 3!!



Date: 09/03/15 16:22
Re: Union Pacific Shafter Sub woes
Author: dan

1 is assume, like seeing whole valley



[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.1006 seconds