Western Railroad Discussion > PNW UP Question

I'm trying to figure out what the UP's reason is for cutting off the power and just leaving leave it's consist on the main and remaining gone for a couple of hours.  It has happened for a second time while I've been watching this on the Chehalis Virtual Railfan cam and it makes no sense.  Anybody have any idea why?

about what time did this happen?
 

Ted Curphey
Ontario, OR

Earlier today a southbound UP train stalled on the hill south of Chehalis heading up the Napavine Hill.  A subsequent southbound UP train was called upon to give the first train a push up the hill.  So the power on the second train disconnected from its cars & went up to push the first train up the hill.  It seems like it took quite a while before the power on the second train returned to reconnect to its cars and get rolling again southbound.  Trains sometimes stall going up the hill when they are required to reduce their speed at one or more crossovers close to the hill.  Basically, they can't achieve enough speed to pull the entire hill.  This seems to happen several times each week.  I hope this helps. 

The first UP train passed through Chehalis at 11:14 this morning.  The second UP train arrived in Chehalis at 13:45 this afternoon.  

skykomish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>  Basically, they can't achieve enough speed
> to pull the entire hill.  This seems to happen
> several times each week.  I hope this helps. 

I worked that territory for a decade and never had a train double Napavine Hill. That was in Olden Tymes when railroading didn't have so much Precision.

TAW

Thanks, it makes sense.  Is this mostly a UP problem?

As I understand it, UP doesn't go out of its way to provide much power to its trains, with the possible exception of its Z trains.  However, BNSF also encounters stalled trains at the same location.  As previously mentioned, it seems to happen most often when trains slow down at crossovers just before the Napavine Hill & can't regain sufficient speed to successfully climb the hill.  In essence, they need to make a run at the hill and can't do so.  Having wet rail doesn't help any.         

skykomish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As I understand it, UP doesn't go out of its way
> to provide much power to its trains, with the
> possible exception of its Z trains.  However,
> BNSF also encounters stalled trains at the same
> location.  As previously mentioned, it seems to
> happen most often when trains slow down at
> crossovers

35 mph!
same as they were in the decade I handled the territory with no trains doubling the hill.

>  Having wet rail doesn't
> help any.   

I know somebody could anticipate wet rail in Western WA...even without looking at the forecast...expecially there.

There is just too much Precision involved.

TAW    

As I write this, the UP has another train stalled out at the same location as the one from earlier today.  Very interesting.  It seems that the stalled train has 3 units up front but only the first one is online.  The other two have problems such that they were offline even before the train stalled out.

With regard to PSR, you can't fix stupid.

SooGuy64 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> With regard to PSR, you can't fix stupid.

Precisely.

TAW

It's not like BNSF hasn't had overloaded garbage trains stall on the hill on a regular basis. Wet leaves makes for fun times on Napavine Hill.

Ted Curphey
Ontario, OR

So what are you guys going to blame everything on when PSR goes away? Because you guys seem to blame PSR for just about everything that has gone wrong.
What's next, blame PSR for COVID-19?

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So what are you guys going to blame everything on
> when PSR goes away? Because you guys seem to blame
> PSR for just about everything that has gone
> wrong.
> What's next, blame PSR for COVID-19?

Running trains with less HP/T is a staple of PSR.  Thats whats really happening here. 

TAW, do you recall what the average freight over this line was scheduled for HP/T when you were dispatching?

BoostedFridge Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PHall Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So what are you guys going to blame everything
> on
> > when PSR goes away? Because you guys seem to
> blame
> > PSR for just about everything that has gone
> > wrong.
> > What's next, blame PSR for COVID-19?
>
> Running trains with less HP/T is a staple of
> PSR.  Thats whats really happening here. 
>
> TAW, do you recall what the average freight over
> this line was scheduled for HP/T when you were
> dispatching?

That's interesting, we're not allowed to run any trains under TPA out of Roseville. 

BoostedFridge Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Running trains with less HP/T is a staple of
> PSR.  Thats whats really happening here. 
>
> TAW, do you recall what the average freight over
> this line was scheduled for HP/T when you were
> dispatching?

The ruling grade is 1.1%. There was no specified minimum back then because common sense says that it takes the same HPT to maintain 50 mph track speed on the flat as it takes to get up Napavine (1 HPT/pct. grade = 1 HPT-->48 mph...both approximate). There is no common sense any more.

The whole trickery of wheel creep and AC units making HPT irrelevant is not exactly true. That trickery allows more tonnage before stalling...but at a lower speed. That is the fight between the capacity of a train and the capacity of the railroad.

TAW

On UP's Baird Sub I rarely see a train making "track speed" but, I do see L-O-N-G trains.

  In the old days we didn't waste diesel and engines by putting too many engines on trains. Sure it meant sometimes we had to get shoves or double the hill, but that made railroading interesting--not like the boring ES88ACs of today.  

subchief Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>   In the old days we didn't waste diesel and
> engines by putting too many engines on trains.
> Sure it meant sometimes we had to get shoves or
> double the hill, but that made railroading
> interesting--not like the boring ES88ACs of
> today.  

I s'pose that could be related to how busy the district was.

TAW

portlander Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BoostedFridge Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > PHall Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > So what are you guys going to blame
> everything
> > on
> > > when PSR goes away? Because you guys seem to
> > blame
> > > PSR for just about everything that has gone
> > > wrong.
> > > What's next, blame PSR for COVID-19?
> >
> > Running trains with less HP/T is a staple of
> > PSR.  Thats whats really happening here. 
> >
> > TAW, do you recall what the average freight
> over
> > this line was scheduled for HP/T when you were
> > dispatching?
>
> That's interesting, we're not allowed to run any
> trains under TPA out of Roseville. 

That don’t mean it’s that way EVERYWHERE on UP, believe me.

Posted from iPhone