Home Open Account Help 267 users online

Western Railroad Discussion > BNSF 7778 by Mojave CA/ hill problems


Date: 07/23/05 12:41
BNSF 7778 by Mojave CA/ hill problems
Author: cajon

7778 North by Mojave Friday afternoon. The hill had all kinds of problem I know of Friday afternoon. A UP in emergancy at Cable and then A BNSF train both North got the high wide detector at mp 363.8. Heard the DS saying that all siding were blocked and crews dying on the main. A BNSF train was going to tie there train down at Samborn and get take a train off the hill. The last I heard the 7778 was still in downtown Tehachapi with trains ahead and someone was calling out and going for pizza.
The best the UP could do from WC was for a patch crew to catch up to the train at Denis.
Did not see any South train Friday afternoon as I had to leave a little after 8. Just North trains that just made it to Tehachapi.
The mountain is falling apart. There is a five mile section of track between tunnel 3 and tunnel 8 of 10 miles an hour due to massive sun kinks. This happen every year. Then another section of 10 mph between tunnel 14 and 16 for the same reason. Due to the massive amounts of trains on the district the computers in Omaha overload and crash. This is becoming a common thing now as the dispatcher makes an attempt to look at a black screen and try to flag trains in "DARK TERRITORY". The crossovers at Mojave are in such bad shape that they have a 10 mph thru the crossovers. An amendment to the timetable just came out that now the speed will be 15 mph forever. It is a true mess up there. 10 mph at Kern Jct on the number one track along with three sections of 25 mph thru Edision on the number one. It must be job security for the MofW crews because it has just about put the railorad into a total 10 mph from Kern to Mojave
I guess the steel gang will start up again theis week from just above Caliente. Look like the Tehachapi is a night time railrad again.
Dennis





Date: 07/23/05 16:04
Re: BNSF 7778 by Mojave CA/ hill problems
Author: StStephen

With a nod to the Abo Canyon thread below, what needs to happen here is a considerable investment in capacity enhancement. That means second main track over the entire hill, plus probably a few areas of sidings or third main track. And, again linking to the thread below, it should mean realignment to straighten out some of the curves. So the issues become: will UP do this when it helps BNSF out much more than them; does the ROI for either road justify this; and what would be the reaction of everyone living along the route? Imagine when UP/BNSF come up with a plan that cuts off several miles of route, decreases curvature, streamlines operations. It just means that the right-of-way gets relocated. And all that land around there is owned by someone. A lot of these people live up in these hills to be away from it all. Now they could have freights rumbling through at all hours a hundred feet away instead of several thousand. Fewer accidents, fewer dogcatches, less wear & tear, less fuel, less pollution, fewer trucks on I-5 and SR 58. It would take years to get approvals. And be costly. But what is the cost of not doing it?

All this may be moot, as UP does not seem to have the vision that BNSF does for streamlining. But if they ever do, there will be a fight...



Date: 07/23/05 16:22
Ideas
Author: metrolinkvalleysub

BruceDGillings Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And, again linking to the thread below, it should mean realignment to straighten out some of the curves.

Similar ideas:

1.) Straightening the ROW between Tehachapi and Mojave as much as possible.
2.) 2MT between Bena and Ilmon -- no excuses.
3.) Straighten out Sandcut -- Sandcut if beautiful, but it is an unnecessary curve between two tangents.
4.) 2MT CTC totally between South Mojave and Cable and later between Caliente and Saco (UP) and Shafter (BNSF)
5.) Save the searchlights and signal bridges.



Date: 07/23/05 18:00
Re: Ideas
Author: czuleget

The UP will not pay for the double tracking over the loop. The UP has the coast line to place trains on for over flow capacity. why spent the money if you don't need to.



Date: 07/23/05 19:08
Re: Ideas
Author: MojaveSubMP347

I see in the next 5 to 10 years The Mojave Sub Over the Tehachapi's Becoming a BNSF Owned and Operated Line, The segement Between Kern Jct and Mojave. The Tehachapi's right now are a major PROBLEM. To many trains over a single track Line. I am curious to see what happens in the next 5 or so years.



Date: 07/23/05 19:17
Re: Ideas
Author: espeeboy

metrolinkvalleysub Wrote:
>
> 1.) Straightening the ROW between Tehachapi and
> Mojave as much as possible.

maybe doable but there will have to be some massive fillwork

> 2.) 2MT between Bena and Ilmon -- no excuses.

doable

> 3.) Straighten out Sandcut -- Sandcut if
> beautiful, but it is an unnecessary curve between
> two tangents.

kinda hard to do with farmers owning land on both the landfill side and south side.

> 4.) 2MT CTC totally between South Mojave and Cable
> and later between Caliente and Saco (UP) and
> Shafter (BNSF)

No way on getting 2MT with some of those tunnels...


> 5.) Save the searchlights and signal bridges.

HAH! Not a prayer on this if all of that other work including CTC 2MT is done...



Date: 07/23/05 19:23
Re: Ideas
Author: metrolinkvalleysub

espeeboy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > 3.) Straighten out Sandcut -- Sandcut if
> > beautiful, but it is an unnecessary curve
> between
> > two tangents.
>
> kinda hard to do with farmers owning land on both
> the landfill side and south side.
>
> > 4.) 2MT CTC totally between South Mojave and
> Cable
> > and later between Caliente and Saco (UP) and
> > Shafter (BNSF)
>
> No way on getting 2MT with some of those
> tunnels...
>
> > 5.) Save the searchlights and signal
> bridges.
>
> HAH! Not a prayer on this if all of that other
> work including CTC 2MT is done...

Now that I think, you're right ab. #3. But if this Abo stuff is true, then UP can eminently domain this land.
I don't know much ab. #4 between Caliente and Ilmon. I don't see any DT between Cable and Caliente.
I can only hope for #5!



Date: 07/23/05 21:03
Re: Ideas
Author: boomer

MojaveSubMP347 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I see in the next 5 to 10 years The Mojave Sub
> Over the Tehachapi's Becoming a BNSF Owned and
> Operated Line, The segement Between Kern Jct and
> Mojave. The Tehachapi's right now are a major
> PROBLEM. To many trains over a single track Line.
> I am curious to see what happens in the next 5 or
> so years.

There ya go! You've hit the proverbial "nail on the head" with that statment, just as I have been saying on here for the past 5 years or so, I'm glad someone sees it the way I do. UP is just a 2nd class railroad on Tehachapi these days, and you will never see the traffic numbers from UP over the hill that the SP used to handle, so what's the debate - sell the damn line to the BNSF, count the money, and get the hell out of the way! Real simple! If UP was running 20-30 trains up there like the SP used to I might look at things differently, but their traffic numbers are miniscule nowadays compared to those of the SP back in the '90s. I don't see what the big dilemma is.

Besides, UP says they still don't have the capacity to run much more traffic by way of the I-5 Corridor - been hearing that talk for 2 years now - so I guess they will never have the capacity to do much more than what they have running now; besides, they have the coast line to bail them out in an emergency. And we all know how UP downgraded their LA-Portland/Seattle intermodal biz 2 years ago on that line, so what motive would they have to keep the Tehachapi line if the right offer came along. Plus I've yet to hear anything more from Uncle Pete as far as if/when they plan on doing the tunnel work in the Cascades to allow domestic double-stacks to get through, just like the planned work on Donner that was supposed to be done in order to run stacks up there as well - so much for those promises!

Bradleymckay mentioned something the other day as far as the BNSF possibly wanting to dispatch trains over Tehachapi, so maybe something to get things rolling is already happening in that direction.




Date: 07/23/05 22:14
Re: Ideas
Author: Railgoblin

UP Run the SP like a Real Railraod My $#@*&+? I remember when UP announced the SP takeover(Not a Merger) That things where going to be better! Yeah wright! One I can say for the Vilinious group from Omaha is alot of Arrogance and Stupidity! My whole family worked the SP! I will say there management had issues I do not dispute that, but Uncle Pi?? and there wonderful people have no clue how to run the SP! They cant even run Intermodal on the sunset let alone the Sunset limited on time. MR Davidson you and your corporation have proven and have written the book on how not to run a railroad. UP claims they can handle it PROVE IT! This will be Like the Ma Bell bustup in the late seventies and early eighties. Some Goverment official will get a belly full and ask for some kind of hearings about the anti-competiveness of railroad mergers and what they do!




Date: 07/23/05 23:27
Re: Ideas
Author: Detector

metrolinkvalleysub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BruceDGillings Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > And, again linking to the thread below, it
> should mean realignment to straighten out some of
> the curves.
>
> Similar ideas:
>
> 1.) Straightening the ROW between Tehachapi and
> Mojave as much as possible.
> 2.) 2MT between Bena and Ilmon -- no excuses.
> 3.) Straighten out Sandcut -- Sandcut if
> beautiful, but it is an unnecessary curve between
> two tangents.
> 4.) 2MT CTC totally between South Mojave and Cable
> and later between Caliente and Saco (UP) and
> Shafter (BNSF)
> 5.) Save the searchlights and signal bridges.

How about this 2MT CTC from Bakersfield to Bealville(If they can afford the cost of daylighting tunnels 1 and 2 but if they can't have it be 2MT CTC from Bakersfield to Caliente.) and extend Cliff Siding in both Directions to Tunnel 7 and put it on the 1952 earthquake shoofly to Tunnel 3. 2MT CTC from Tunnel 8 to 9. Extend Marcel Siding from Tunnel 10 to Tunnel 14 2MT CTC from South Mojave to Cable. It Really all depends if UP and BNSF can afford the cost of these projects or if they are interested in these projects. Thank you for your post. Detector out



Date: 07/24/05 00:26
Re: Ideas
Author: Detector

boomer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MojaveSubMP347 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I see in the next 5 to 10 years The Mojave
> Sub
> > Over the Tehachapi's Becoming a BNSF Owned
> and
> > Operated Line, The segement Between Kern Jct
> and
> > Mojave. The Tehachapi's right now are a
> major
> > PROBLEM. To many trains over a single track
> Line.
> > I am curious to see what happens in the next
> 5 or
> > so years.
>
> There ya go! You've hit the proverbial "nail on
> the head" with that statment, just as I have been
> saying on here for the past 5 years or so, I'm
> glad someone sees it the way I do. UP is just a
> 2nd class railroad on Tehachapi these days, and
> you will never see the traffic numbers from UP
> over the hill that the SP used to handle, so
> what's the debate - sell the damn line to the
> BNSF, count the money, and get the hell out of the
> way! Real simple! If UP was running 20-30 trains
> up there like the SP used to I might look at
> things differently, but their traffic numbers are
> miniscule nowadays compared to those of the SP
> back in the '90s. I don't see what the big dilemma
> is.
>
> Besides, UP says they still don't have the
> capacity to run much more traffic by way of the
> I-5 Corridor - been hearing that talk for 2 years
> now - so I guess they will never have the capacity
> to do much more than what they have running now;
> besides, they have the coast line to bail them out
> in an emergency. And we all know how UP downgraded
> their LA-Portland/Seattle intermodal biz 2 years
> ago on that line, so what motive would they have
> to keep the Tehachapi line if the right offer came
> along. Plus I've yet to hear anything more from
> Uncle Pete as far as if/when they plan on doing
> the tunnel work in the Cascades to allow domestic
> double-stacks to get through, just like the
> planned work on Donner that was supposed to be
> done in order to run stacks up there as well - so
> much for those promises!
>
> Bradleymckay mentioned something the other day as
> far as the BNSF possibly wanting to dispatch
> trains over Tehachapi, so maybe something to get
> things rolling is already happening in that
> direction.
Ok think of it this way UP is Double tracking the Sunset Route from WC to El Paso. They are installing CTC on the Coast Line and on the Overland Route. They are rebulinding the Golden State Route and the Texas And Pacific. They rebulit the Kansas and Pacific Route and the Cal P line. They Triple tracked 108 miles of the Overland Route in Nebraska. They double tracked the Marysville line to Kansas City. They reopeaned the Hump at Roseville. They installed crossovers in Pomona,Sacrmento,Binney Jct,Silverwood in Cajon Pass, a new siding at Whitewater Colorado, a new yard in San Antonio, a double track cutoff in Denver,taken out the WP main from Stockton to El Penal, and a longer Yard lead in Fresno. The reason why UP doesn't run as many trains over Tehachapi like the SP did is probobly because BNSF bought the UP portion of the Inside Gateway and it sees 18 trains a day compared to the 17-20 that go through Dunsmuir. The UP probobly didn't want to increase track clearences afterall in Donner and the ex SP route through the Casecades because they wern't interested or saw that they could'nt afford its cost. They probobly were disappointed at their resaults of the ZSELC-ZLCSE because they were not making the money as they thought they would when they started that service just like how the Santa Fe downgraded the 79 MPH Super C pig train in 1976 because its traffic levels were disappointing infact in the late 60's and early 70's the pig train had one car between the locomotive and the cabbose. Plus UPS canceled its mail contract for the Super C and that may have happiened with the ZLCSE-ZSELC. I think UP will always operate Tehachapi and they will be the great class 1 railroad before some of you guys realize it and UP just like all railroads and other Buisnesses are doing things that they think would help them succeed but sometimes they don't work but that is how buisness goes. They are not trying to do things to have it not work. All those projects I mentioned above cost money. However I think it would be interesting if they increased track clearences in Donner and the Casecades of Oregon. Or if they double tracked the main from Klamath Falls to Chemult. Thank you for your post. Detector out





Date: 07/24/05 01:52
Re: Ideas
Author: Nbetween

First off , They need to put a HI wide detector on the BNSF ( desert ) and the UP ( desert ) and take the one at 363.8 out. That damn thing gets everything it seems like. So if you have a problem it is down the hill and away from the mess up top.

Bena to Ilmon is a no brainer - Get it done , no excuses other than the Carrot fed cows will need to give back some dirt.

The problemed area's mentioned in this thread are'nt that big of problemed area's in my book. Sandcut needs nothing but a test of train handling skills everytime you go over it. Not a problem area , besides where else is Uncle Pete gonna park.

I think they need to put back in the 3rd track at moniloth and CTC with crossovers going in both directions from Mojave to Cable. I mean whats the point of the great ISLAND of cameron ? . A one way crossover that just backs trains up when they switch the plant. Put a line or siding up there so they can work and trains can still run.

The land isnt the issue , it's gonna be the tree huggers that prevent improvements. So the BNSF needs to sell or give the land they own south of tehachapi to the conservationists in lue of doble tracking the mtn. The Santa Fe bought the land to build there own line and they still own it , But UP told them if they so much as break ground they wont let them run on there line anymore , a way to keep the maintenance dollars flowing.



Date: 07/24/05 11:19
Re: Ideas
Author: MojaveSubMP347

BNSF Can Afford to make the Tehachapi's what they want it to be. Its getting the UP to eather give that Portion of the Line Up, Or Make BNSF Pay for the work that needs to be done. I think in the next few years we will see some change's. I dont think between tunnel's 7 and 8 will ever see a second main track. Tunnels 14-17 Maby. What I see taking place is Like when Santa Fe wanted to run double Stacks, SP Made them Pay for it, look what SP did, started to run stacks, same with the Adding a second main track, I bet we see more UP traffic. With the Constent Up keep of the line, I see Tehachapi always as a operating nightmare, even with more double track.



Date: 07/24/05 22:54
Re: Ideas
Author: MojaveBill

Regarding the Mojave Crossovers, MoW crews are building a new one alongside the existing one - have been at it for a couple months - unknown when it will be installed.



Date: 07/24/05 23:51
New switch's at mojave
Author: cajon

They have 3 build up new switch's at the North end for sometime. They just started on #4 a week or so and are about done. They also now have 12 panel tracks there. Look like they are getting close as all the equipment around now. The switch's at the south end need replacing the one going over to the BNSF as they have the slow order on them.
One new switch going to the branch.
2 switch's crossing over from 1 to 2
1 switch going from #1 to the yard.

Dennis



[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.123 seconds