Western Railroad Discussion > FRA Inspection Train, Tehachapi Pass

There was an FRA inspection train on Tehachapi Pass yesterday. I managed to catch up with it at Caliente and Sandcut in the late afternoon. I assume this run was associated with the cutting-in of the new signal system on the east side of the hill?

Kit Courter
Menefee, CA
LunarLight Photography

---

---

---

Interesting, I would have thought that as UP owns the track they would have used UP power to pull the train, also that the BNSF feels that it needs two locomotives to handle one car.

Andre

The BNSF units could be a requirement of the agreement between the Espee and the Santa Fe decades ago . . . Certain expenses for non revenue moves to be made by the Santa Fe . . . Just a thought.
The 2 units may be a result of a need to go the opposite direction at some point. So the power just runs around and couples on the opposite end of the car and BNSF has a minimum axle rule for movements to go track speed.
Just thoughts . . . Been awhile!

Could be for braking as well.

Mike Massee
Tehachapi, CA
Photography, Railroading and more..

Nice catches, I think second unit was strictly to meet axle minumum.
JB

Nice catch. "look Bobbie. Railroad tracks!!".

It might also have something to do with where the car came from or is going to. If it started on BNSF and finished on BNSF, I don't see a need to switch engines just because it is on "foreign" rails.

Jim Montague
IRVINE, CA
Train and Nature photo Art

Lets hope it all means more trains....

Nice catch, Kit. Especially with no swoosh in sight!

Lance

Andre Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting, I would have thought that as UP owns
> the track they would have used UP power to pull
> the train, also that the BNSF feels that it needs
> two locomotives to handle one car.
>

Under the deal, BNSF and the State of California pay all costs for the capacity upgrades on Tehachapi, UP pays zero. I suspect BNSF chooses to run the train itself rather than pay a bill from UP stating its costs to run the FRA train.

Best regards,

Rob L.

No, no, no---even the Feds came to see the sad pile of twisted steel @ MMP 377 where the signal bridge once stood...

rob_l Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Andre Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Interesting, I would have thought that as UP
> owns
> > the track they would have used UP power to pull
> > the train, also that the BNSF feels that it
> needs
> > two locomotives to handle one car.
> >
>
> Under the deal, BNSF and the State of California
> pay all costs for the capacity upgrades on
> Tehachapi, UP pays zero. I suspect BNSF chooses to
> run the train itself rather than pay a bill from
> UP stating its costs to run the FRA train.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rob L.


I think you hit the nail on the head, Rob.



V

SLOCONDR

It was probably just on its way to check more BNSF track in the valley...

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

Two locos would be one way to alleviate the less than 12-axle restriction/requirement when approaching grade crossings. This FRA equipment also has addiotional rules/requirements for absolute protection, train dispatcher flagging and shunt protection, etc. that can be partially met by using two locomotive instead of one, or adding another railcar to the train, which FRA probably doesn't want. (UP had been doing this a lot lately with their EC car(s) by only using one locomotive and a company material flat car).

Posted from iPhone

Train is sitting in the UP Roseville yard this morning.

Posted from Android

Ron Butts
Lincoln, CA