Western Railroad Discussion > Moffat Sub Research Question on this picture - contains AutoRacks

I continue to gather as must information as possible on the UP Moffat Subdivision and I came across this picture at Rollins which had some Autoracks.  I plan to model the line and orginally eliminated this type of car due to my current research and this picture has made me to possibly reconsider.  I was surprised to see this as I thought the tunnels did not permits these types of cars.  Any information on if in the past this was actually more common.  The photo was taken in 1998.  Thanks everyone.

---

autoracks will just barely squeeze through all the tunnels.

I have even seen stacked marine containers on BNSF trains.  Domestic containers must be singles.

Rob

The autoracks that had extended sides at the top, don't know the code for them, had to go via Tn Pass. Couldn't clear the Moffat Tunnel. Autoracks moved all the time during the DRGW and SP era



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/04/16 12:33 by WAF.

Moffat tunnel isn't the problem. It's the tunnels below (east) of the Moffat. The Moffat was built with the thought of electrification.
It's ceiling is 22' high, and 12 or 14' wide. Double stacks hit the corners and edges on the lower tunnels. Were as Tenn. pass
tunnel had the clearance for double stacks. I think in the 80's the Rio Grande ran some double stacks up the Moffat, with flags
attached to the containers. At Moffat tunnel all of the flags were either bent or missing, as well as scratch marks on the containers.
keith

Doublestacks NEVER ran on the Moffat in the 80s. There is a problem with certain autoracks in the Moffat as Train 129  in the late 1980s set off the high wide detector between Tolland and east Portal and when the crew checked their list, they saw a autorack that would not clear the Moffat hence why the high wide went off. They set the car out at East Portal and it was taken to Pueblo and sent west via  Tn Pass

The train I was referring to was test train. To test the clearance issue. only happen one time. Looks good on paper,
but in practice.. I think there were only two or three cars involved. May have been late 70's. I did not see the train,
but some employee's I knew, told me about it keith

Q Autoracks, International and Domestic stacks went via Tennessee Pass. Everything else could go thru the Moffat. I have never heard of International stacks on the Moffat either, there may have been a test though at some point as it would be close. ... All racks except Q cars would fit thru the Tunnel district.....

Posted from iPhone

I asked a friend what kind of restrictions were set for the Moffat Tunnel Subdivision, here's what was found and said in the timetable:

SI-13 TRAIN MAKE-UP RESTRICTIONS
Doublestack cars and multi-level autoracks (loaded or unloaded) in excess of 18 feet 0 inches above top of rail are prohibited from operating between C&S Jct. and Bond.
Doublestack cars and multi-level autoracks (loaded or unloaded) in excess of 20 feet 0 inches above top of rail are prohibited from operating between Stock Yards and UP Jct on Route to Beltline. 

 

John Crisanti
Longmont, CO

GJASM Eastbound at Blue Mtn. crossing in October, 1992 with empty Autoracks in the train.
This train was run over the Moffat instead of its usual route over Tennn. Pass

---

Thanks for all the information. The height restrictions John provided is the same I was able to find. Pictures are a 1000 words some racks are capable of being ran on the route and have. Probably a rare occurrence now but for some time periods might be right. Thanks everyone

Posted from Android

rdmstr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Moffat tunnel isn't the problem. It's the tunnels
> below (east) of the Moffat. The Moffat was built
> with the thought of electrification.
> It's ceiling is 22' high, and 12 or 14' wide.
> Double stacks hit the corners and edges on the
> lower tunnels. Were as Tenn. pass
> tunnel had the clearance for double stacks. I
> think in the 80's the Rio Grande ran some double
> stacks up the Moffat, with flags
> attached to the containers. At Moffat tunnel all
> of the flags were either bent or missing, as well
> as scratch marks on the containers.
> keith

Finally, someone confirming what I  had been told a long time ago, That the Moffat itself could handle tall cars, etc.  It was the approach tunnels that were skimpy on clearence..

Rob

OregonOldGuy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> rdmstr Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Moffat tunnel isn't the problem. It's the
> tunnels
> > below (east) of the Moffat. The Moffat was
> built
> > with the thought of electrification.
> > It's ceiling is 22' high, and 12 or 14' wide.
> > Double stacks hit the corners and edges on the
> > lower tunnels. Were as Tenn. pass
> > tunnel had the clearance for double stacks. I
> > think in the 80's the Rio Grande ran some
> double
> > stacks up the Moffat, with flags
> > attached to the containers. At Moffat tunnel
> all
> > of the flags were either bent or missing, as
> well
> > as scratch marks on the containers.
> > keith
>
> Finally, someone confirming what I  had been told
> a long time ago, That the Moffat itself could
> handle tall cars, etc.  It was the approach
> tunnels that were skimpy on clearence..
>
> Ro

Read Front Range's post again. They cannot handle cars over 18 feet on the Moffat