Home Open Account Help 231 users online

Western Railroad Discussion > Then & Now on the SP now P&W


Date: 03/20/17 11:17
Then & Now on the SP now P&W
Author: lamta_jay

Having just been to Winterail I was inspired by a show I saw
​at the pizza Party Friday night by  nomosantase showing some
of the WES commuter route.

Hall/Nimbus station on the WES

#1.....in October of 1997 looking north. My daughter was living in Beaverton at the time.
​#2.....In 2010 at the same location
#3.....This is why I was there in 2010

Thanks for looking
​Jay









Date: 03/20/17 16:57
Re: Then & Now on the SP now P&W
Author: MarionLinn

Actually, it wasn't SP in 1997 when you took that first picture.  P&W took over the line on August 18, 1995 and about six weeks later, on October 1, 1995, P&W leased BN's branches west of Portland and the OE south to Perkins Street crossing south of Hopmere.  But your photo does record a significant event, which was the retirement of the CTC between Greton and St. Marys, a distance of 5 miles.  The first step was an application to the FRA to retire the system.  After getting the go-ahead, which took several months, the system was shut off and signal heads were turned perpendicular to the track as your photo shows.  Next, the signals were taken down and scrapped.  The CTC facilitated BN's joint use of SP's track between the points named, but once PNWR became the surrogate for both SP and BN the CTC was unnecessary.  Plus, in 1995, the SP dispatcher controlling the CTC was in Denver and he/she had bigger fish to fry than providing signal aspects to an irrelevant short line in Oregon.  Ironically, a little over 10 years later TriMet was putting it all back for WES, plus extending CTC to Wilsonville.  However, it wasn't an option circa 1996 for PNWR to keep the old CTC.  Aside from the inconvenience of having to contact a "foreign" train dispatcher every time they wanted to make a move in the territory, PNWR's lease included a condition that if it successfully negotiated a lease of the adjoining BN branches, it diligently would seek FRA's concurrence to retire the CTC. When SP wrote the lease it did not want to be indefinitely providing dispatching service to a short line and incurring the associated expenses, once the short line acquired BN's lines too. 



Date: 03/20/17 19:28
Re: Then & Now on the SP now P&W
Author: roustabout

Late '96 and part of '97 I worked a relief job out of McMinnville that included two days on the Mac Hauler over Rex Hill to Beburg or St Marys.  It was a matter of calling the then-UP dispatcher to get signals through there.  Can't remember exact dates that it was turned off but it was while I was on that job.  Interesting times! Some trips we'd set out at Cook or Bryant, some we would run up to Beburg or St Marys.

MarionLinn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually, it wasn't SP in 1997 when you took that
> first picture.  P&W took over the line on August
> 18, 1995 and about six weeks later, on October 1,
> 1995, P&W leased BN's branches west of Portland
> and the OE south to Perkins Street crossing south
> of Hopmere.  But your photo does record a
> significant event, which was the retirement of the
> CTC between Greton and St. Marys, a distance of 5
> miles.  The first step was an application to the
> FRA to retire the system.  After getting the
> go-ahead, which took several months, the system
> was shut off and signal heads were
> turned perpendicular to the track as your photo
> shows.  Next, the signals were taken down and
> scrapped.  The CTC facilitated BN's joint use of
> SP's track between the points named, but once PNWR
> became the surrogate for both SP and BN the CTC
> was unnecessary.  Plus, in 1995, the SP
> dispatcher controlling the CTC was in Denver and
> he/she had bigger fish to fry than providing
> signal aspects to an irrelevant short line in
> Oregon.  Ironically, a little over 10 years
> later TriMet was putting it all back for WES, plus
> extending CTC to Wilsonville.  However, it wasn't
> an option circa 1996 for PNWR to keep the old
> CTC.  Aside from the inconvenience of having to
> contact a "foreign" train dispatcher every time
> they wanted to make a move in the territory,
> PNWR's lease included a condition that if it
> successfully negotiated a lease of the adjoining
> BN branches, it diligently would seek FRA's
> concurrence to retire the CTC. When SP wrote the
> lease it did not want to be indefinitely providing
> dispatching service to a short line and incurring
> the associated expenses, once the short line
> acquired BN's lines too. 



[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.0642 seconds