Western Railroad Discussion > Moffat Tunnel Sub Traffic Levels (Week 2)

Hello!

With all the discussion about the decrease in traffic levels on railroads in general, I thought some people might find this interesting. I've got some numbers for the UP Moffat Tunnel Sub. Our new house is not too far away from the tracks! These numbers are based on observations between Leyden and Rocky for the second week of 2016 (1/3 to 1/9).

Total Trains: 52
Total Westbounds: 28
Total Eastbounds: 24

Breakdown By Day:
1/3: 11 trains (5 west, 6 east) 
1/4: 4 trains (2 west, 2 east) 
1/5: 7 trains (4 west, 3 east) 
1/6: 9 trains (5 west, 4 east) 
1/7: 5 trains (2 west, 3 east) 
1/8: 8 trains (5 west, 3 east) 
1/9: 8 trains (5 west, 3 east)

Keep in mind that Amtrak accounts for two of those trains each day, one each way. I'll try to post some stats for each week as we move forward!

Kevin Morgan
Arvada, CO
ColoradoRailfan.com



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/16 07:21 by ColoradoRailfan.

Are these trains in daylight hours or 24 hours?  Hard to believe only one freight each way in 24 hours on 1/4.

stevelv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are these trains in daylight hours or 24 hours?
>  Hard to believe only one freight each way in 24
> hours on 1/4.

This is total train count. 24 hour period each day. On 1/4, here were the train times between Leyden and Rocky:
Westbounds: 06:03, 08:41 (Amtrak)
Eastbounds: 09:47, 18:51 (Amtrak)
The next train was a westbound at 01:18 on 1/5.

This week, there was an eastbound coal train that came down the front range on Sunday around 5pm. The next eastbound (not including Amtrak) was a manifest that came down the front range yesterday (Tuesday) around 11am!! That was roughly 42 hours without a non-Amtrak eastbound. I understand why it is hard to believe, but unfortunately, it is accurate. Also note that Mondays tend to be especially bad because Roper doesn't send an MRONY east on Sundays (which would arrive on Monday). BNSF often doesn't send a Provo-Denver east on Sundays either.

Kevin Morgan
Arvada, CO
ColoradoRailfan.com



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/16 07:21 by ColoradoRailfan.

How does this compare to years past, in your opinion... or even last summer?

This is speculation on my part, but it seems like it is probably a 20-25% reduction over last summer and probably a 60-70% reduction over five years ago.

Kevin Morgan
Arvada, CO
ColoradoRailfan.com

Interesting, THX for info...those old presidents of the D&SL & D&RGW are rolling in their graves!

Posted from Android

Thanks Kevin for the info. Very sobbering statistics to see. Before in left in 2013 it seemed I was guaranteed 5 to 6 trains a day in the daylight on the Moffat. These will at least give a picture of what the traffic is now when I visit in the Spring.

Posted from Android

Are you seeing/counting the Rocky Local? Can't imagine how we hit 11 trains one day ha!

T

And this is the reason BNSF run through crew district was restored between Grand Jct. and Denver.  For several years a crew change at Kremmling was necessary.  Nowadays a normal run from Grand Jct. to Denver is 7 to 10 hours.

At least it's seeing more trains that Tennessee Pass Right? :) 
I'm grateful this great line is still in use, especially by the BNSF. Who woulda guessed that years ago? 
 

It's sad to be a railfan in the Denver area these days, especially with the impending closure of Burnham Yard. Things are not looking good. I wonder if UP will eventually ditch the Moffat route alltogether? Perhaps BNSF will continue to run so the line won't become "freightless".

Damen Winslow



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/16 13:01 by cowxguy.

When we were hi-railing the Moffat in August 2005 shooting video tape for the Union Pacific Railroad Museum "cab ride" display I remember the operating folks telling me the line was handling some 30 trains a day.  Here's one of the meets we made westbound heading up to the Moffat Tunnel.
JB

---

cowxguy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's sad to be a railfan in the Denver area these
> days, especially with the impending closure of
> Burnham Yard. Things are not looking good. I
> wonder if UP will eventually ditch the Moffat
> route alltogether? Perhaps BNSF will continue to
> run so the line won't become "freightless".
>
> Damen Winslow

I think there will always be freight traffic. UP's & BNSF's freights over the Moffat are usually healthy lengths. 
The problem is the large decrease in coal traffic. Colorado mines are located in a hard position, as Utah mines can export loadings to the west coast much faster & cheaper. 
BNSF runs extra grains over the Moffat occasionally and the UP runs some oils trains (although with the price of oil, that may not happen again for awhile). 

While current traffic levels are low there is potential future big traffic on the line. We are likely heading into or are in a recession, when the world economy comes back, so will bulk commodities. There are still large deposits of Soda Ash and Potash along the line.  There is massive amounts of oil along the line, much of which is thick bitumen (black wax).  Black Wax cannot easily be moved by pipeline. The oil business is boom and bust, rite now we are in  a Major bust. When oil comes back so will fracking sand and drill pipe. The West slope and Craig can devour large amounts of sand when the wells are drilling.  Coal is also not dead yet.  Colorado coal is prized by industrial Portland Cement manufacturers and industrial kilns.  Hopefully the new owners of most of Colorado and Utah coal, Bowie, will start some heavy marketing towards industrial users.  Export coal will eventually come back as well, Colorado/Utah coal is some of the highest quality clean coal in the world. Export coal is always boom and bust.  

Lets hope the world economy rebounds quickly....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/16 14:56 by jc76.

ColoradoRailfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> stevelv Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Are these trains in daylight hours or 24 hours?

> This is total train count. 24 hour period each
> day.

OK, but is this the TOTAL train count from uninterrupted 24-hour observation (or ATCS/reliable lineups), or just the ones you saw? If those are true numbers, then yes this is a very sad time for the Moffat Route. Colorado lines pretty much go nowhere except for localized traffic.

JG

My own opinion from the East, but with ties to Colorado and Denver, is that the Moffat could be on borrowed time. After the UP took over the SP/DRGW, the primary advantage to UP was the coal traffic on the Craig Line, almost all of which wanted to go to Mid-West destinations. There was additional coal traffic from the branches SE of Grand Junction that also could use the shorter route. (Basic railroad costing is rather crude, and often insensitive to a shorter route being more expensive to operate than a longer route). Most RRs have their own cost systems which can be more sensitive but still essentially mileage based for very long hauls. So, as long as the coal traffic held out the Moffat and the old DRGW still had sufficient traffic base to also run the BNSF trackage rights train, AMTK, and a Salt Lake to Denver UP thru freight. But, there is essentially no volume on line business on the entire route from Denver to Grand Junction. Heavier on line business is west of Grand Junction but at that point if it wants to go east routing to SLC and Ogden is not that much further than the direct DRGW to Denver. In 20 years BNSF has not added much if any traffic, and the Utah Railway does their local service in Utah.

So if Craig and Grand Junction based coal is way down, then the line has to be supported by only UP's thru freight (which could be re-routed via their busy Wyoming main) and the BNSF trackage rights train. It is a lot of railroad to keep for just two 50-80 car carload freight trains each way, and not every day of the week. If most of the on-line UP coal does not return, and UP wanted to shed the line, it is unlikely (IMHO) that BNSF would want to acquire or even lease the line for itself and the AMTK train. But, for about 20 years, UP has kept the Tennessee Pass line, and maybe would elect to do so with the Moffat if other arrangements could be made for the BNSF and AMTK overhead trains. Should that happen, let's hope the State of Colorado would have the foresight to obtain or otherwise preserve the Moffat. Had Montana, South Dakota, and Idaho had such foresight when the MILW Pacific Extension was abandoned about 1980, then today UP would have a northern route from the upper Mid-West to the PNW. Not much on-line traffic, but the very presence of the 'other' Western railroad in this territory would have provided enough rate pressure on BNSF's monopoly of those states that some rate cases before the ICC/STB would have been unnecessary, and the re-vitalized MILW would have several UP thru trans each way today. But it is not a straight comparison for Denver to Salt Lake service. The long haul ex-GN, NP, and MILW lines were all relatively similar in operational challenges. In fact the MILW until improvements were made in the other routes had much better clearances for high loads (ie Stacks).

But UP from Denver to SLC/Ogden clearly has a much easier to operate line on the old UP thru Wyoming than the DRGW Moffat and west.

It is also true from my observations that the only essential mailine in Colorado is BNSF's Brush Sub, its connection to the PRB, then the Joint Line south to Trinidad and the directional running into Texas from there. But yet again this route is 75% dependent on PRB coal. North of Denver to Wyoming neither BNSF or UP is busy, with UP having the much better route. Not sure there which has the best local business base. Almost all of Denver's RR business appears to be on the UP's KP line. It is good to have for Craig and Grand Jct origin coal and as a relief route for the main lines to the north. But sans the coal traffic it might become just a grain feeder in the future.

UP and many other railroads keep rail lines open with the same amount of traffic the Moffat has. 6-9 trains avg. is a good amount of traffic.

6-9 isn't the worst but when over half the trains are BNSF and Amtrak; I wonder how UP feels about maintaining all that railroad for them if coal is gone? Maybe worth if for UP just to keep BNSF off the Overland mainline?

T

mpaul101,

i hope you are right. But CSX has closed the Clinchfield as a thru route when, due to the loss of coal traffic, it could have 6-9 thru trains a day with the remaining coal; keeping the manifest trains the same, grain & mtys, and re-routing  one manifest train from other routes to free them up for intermodal double stack service. Also note that only about 25 miles of the Clinchfield will see no trains under the new plan, and that the rest of the Clinchfield has a lot more local business on the rest of the route. IMHO you cannot keep one of the most difficult to operate mainlines in the country, the Moffat, with steep grades and CTC and hardly any on-line local business very long if Craig coal does not revive.

jgilmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OK, but is this the TOTAL train count from
> uninterrupted 24-hour observation (or
> ATCS/reliable lineups), or just the ones you saw?
> If those are true numbers, then yes this is a very
> sad time for the Moffat Route. Colorado lines
> pretty much go nowhere except for localized
> traffic.
>
> JG

This is uninterrupted 24-hour observation (via ATCS). So these are indeed the true numbers.

Kevin Morgan
Arvada, CO
ColoradoRailfan.com