Western Railroad Discussion > Union Pacific's last Denver to Roper train

As Kevin (ColoradoRailfan) posted here a couple of days ago, Union Pacific has decided to eliminate the Denver to Salt Lake City manifest train as part of its "pruning down" due to the implementation of Precision Railroading. For now the plan is to run a MNYGJ/MGJNY manifest train between Grand Jct. and Denver and also to run a Manifest train between Helper and Roper/Ogden. Thus for now, the stretch of track West of Grand Junction to Helper will be devoid of any Union Pacific manifest trains. Save for the Friday only Potash local that runs out to Brendal.
It is interesting to note that all of the tank cars and covered hoppers (most loaded with salt from Potash) originated at Grand Jct. and are heading for customers in Utah. So with this new plan, these cars will have to travel East to Denver, North up to Cheyenne, West over to Ogden and then back South to Salt Lake City. How this could be more cost effective than just traveling between Grand Jct. and Salt Lake City, I'll never know!!

So on the afternoon of December 6th, I ventured out into Utah to record the last MNYRO on this line segment. Somewhat fitting for this somber occasion, the weather was very dark and gloomy:{

1) UP #7770 pulls out of the Colorado River bottom West of Westwater. 

2) Right ahead of the MNYRO was a coal train that had loaded at the West Elk Mine on the North Fork Branch and was heading to Long Beach, CA for export.

3) Going away, the rear DP's. How long these trains will continue to run from the last coal mine in Western Colorado is anyone's guess.
Unfortunately just more sad news for another old Rio Grande line:{

---

---

---

I guess obviously we do not see the "Big" picture, hahaha!
Thanks for the photos.

Bob Krieger
Cheyenne, WY

Nice capture out in the "elements". Looks far far away from any paved road

Have BNSF haul the westbound Potash traffic to Salt Lake City.

Awesome! I am really glad you were able to get the last MNYRO. I was worried nobody would get the chance to get any shots of it since it left Denver at oh-dark-thirty.

Kevin Morgan
Arvada, CO
ColoradoRailfan.com

BNSF can handle the stuff west of G Jct

How many trains in a 24 hour period is BNSF running over the ex-DRGW?  

There's been so many discussions here about whether or not the Royal Gorge line is going to re-open.  Now we have to start wondering about the long term future of the Moffat Route!  

I would not be surprised if Burlington Northern Santa Fe completely takes over the Denver & Rio Grande Western between Denver and Provo sometime in the not to distant future. We will see.

SantaFeRuss

Posted from Android

I wouldnt mind if they took a few former SP routes too.
The UP had mostly given up on most of the old SP customers 
On many of the SP routes

SantaFeRuss Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would not be surprised if Burlington Northern
> Santa Fe completely takes over the Denver & Rio
> Grande Western between Denver and Provo sometime
> in the not to distant future. We will see.
>
> SantaFeRuss
>
> Posted from Android

Jerry Martin
Los Angeles, CA
Central Coast Railroad Festival

It's hard to figure out what the UP is thinking and why they do as they do.  I've never been able to   But at the same time, you captured a historic shot (somber as it may be) if that turns out to be it's final run.

I have in part, the requirements from the STB in the PSR thread below

We may see BNSF buy ex-D&RGW and ex-WP Denver - Salt Lake - Stockton.  Amtrak clould recreate the original CZ.  Gerry

GPutz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We may see BNSF buy ex-D&RGW and ex-WP Denver -
> Salt Lake - Stockton.  Amtrak clould recreate the
> original CZ.  Gerry
Gerry, I doubt the UP will give up the old WP route as the Lucin Cutoff is a problem every time they have high water in the lake and the WP was raised very hagh after the last time so it will remain open. Plus the maintenance on the Lucin on the trestles can be costly too.

Bob Krieger
Cheyenne, WY

I guess this is bad news for Tennessee Pass. 😎

OliveHeights Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I guess this is bad news for Tennessee Pass. 😎

There is not ever going to be any good news for Tennessee Pass. In fact, The Moffat Route may be the next Tennessee Pass.

Art House

aehouse Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OliveHeights Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I guess this is bad news for Tennessee Pass.
> 😎
>
> There is not ever going to be any good news for
> Tennessee Pass. In fact, The Moffat Route may be
> the next Tennessee Pass.
>
> Art House

I sure hope you are wrong about that.

the state should provide passenger service on these routes perhaps
 

Very nice..!!

SP8595 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> It is interesting to note that all of the tank
> cars and covered hoppers (most loaded with salt
> from Potash) originated at Grand Jct. and are
> heading for customers in Utah. So with this new
> plan, these cars will have to travel East to
> Denver, North up to Cheyenne, West over to Ogden
> and then back South to Salt Lake City. How this
> could be more cost effective than just traveling
> between Grand Jct. and Salt Lake City, I'll never
> know!!

Railroading has some "unique" economics that are really quite simple, but also quite foriegn to many people.  Failure to understand these "unique" economics has lead to many bad decisions by various entities that include the US Supreme Court.

I don't know how many cars from Grand Jct move to Utah.  But adding those cars to an existing freight train through Wyoming will have an actual added cost that is very low.  Compare that with the savings produced by not operating the train west of Grand Jct. and the decision can be made.  Railroads, and their trains, thrive on volume.  If they've got a route that only sees two manifest per day and they have an available alternative that is, in fact, less costly despite added miles, the freight is going through Wyoming. 

Miles count, but they are only one of several things that must be considered.  And generally, miles for cars added to existing service are really cheap miles.
 

Greyhounds Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SP8595 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > It is interesting to note that all of the tank
> > cars and covered hoppers (most loaded with salt
> > from Potash) originated at Grand Jct. and are
> > heading for customers in Utah. So with this new
> > plan, these cars will have to travel East to
> > Denver, North up to Cheyenne, West over to
> Ogden
> > and then back South to Salt Lake City. How this
> > could be more cost effective than just
> traveling
> > between Grand Jct. and Salt Lake City, I'll
> never
> > know!!
>
> Railroading has some "unique" economics that are
> really quite simple, but also quite foriegn to
> many people.  Failure to understand these
> "unique" economics has lead to many bad decisions
> by various entities that include the US Supreme
> Court.
>
> I don't know how many cars from Grand Jct move to
> Utah.  But adding those cars to an existing
> freight train through Wyoming will have an actual
> added cost that is very low.  Compare that with
> the savings produced by not operating the train
> west of Grand Jct. and the decision can be made. 
> Railroads, and their trains, thrive on volume. 
> If they've got a route that only sees two manifest
> per day and they have an available alternative
> that is, in fact, less costly despite added miles,
> the freight is going through Wyoming. 
>
> Miles count, but they are only one of several
> things that must be considered.  And generally,
> miles for cars added to existing service are
> really cheap miles.
>  

What you say is probably very true in UP's mind.  Unfortunately, these cars are probably of low value as far as the rate UP gets, so time doesn't matter to UP either.  However, I wonder if anyone has added in the extra switching costs of handling these cars via Wyoming, as I assume they will have to be switched at least in Cheyenne, and maybe even Green River too (oh, and with UP's new plan, in Ogden as well!).  Guessing the route would be MNYCY-MCYGR-MGROG??