Railroaders' Nostalgia > Mad Dog Chronicle #170 Suisun Sinks 1905 - 1915 and 198

If you are acquainted with the portion of the UP's Martinez Subdivision between Bahia and Suisun known as the Cal P, you probably also know that this stretch of the railroad was once also known as the Suisun Sinks. The photos are from January, 1983. The write up is from the Western Division Superintendents files, describing the troubles of a much earlier era. It is long but interesting.

First photo looks North (railroad east)curve to left is just west of MP 39, curve to right (near top of photo) is just past MP 40 (old Pierce)

Second photo looks toward Southwest (railroad west) the railroad crosses the slough just west of the dark triangle that is old Teal MP 43.2.

Arial photos by Ted Schroder.

---

---

Track chart pages

---

---

---

Text pages 1,2

---

---

Text pp 3,4,5.

---

---

---

Text pp 6,7,8.

---

---

---

Thanks, Mike.
We of the engineering department are but temporary custodians of these lines of railroad that if the fortunes are right go back 120 years and should go forward another 100+ years. We try to carry on our daily struggles to keep them together, and if we think a few moments we realize how much work has been done before we were ever on the scene. Every inch of a railroad is the product of a lot of sweat, toil, and sometimes tears. Never take it for granted.

Mike,
This was great. really shows what goes on. Thank you. I don't suppose you have the mess on Elkhorne (Air Hose) Slough? Just east of Wat Jct. I was told by the old heads the following:

They used lava rock from the Shasta area and of course it sank. It crushed like sand under the weight of trains.

It was the same thing as you had for the Cal P.

Any idea?

Nudge

Somewhere I think that there is a similar write up on the Elkhorn Slough area. I must have it somewhere. I dug out the description of the Suisun Sink problems while I was looking for some other files. The same with the true description of the Superintendent. Now, Road Foremen are a whole other story.

mdo

Any idea what era the track charts are from? I don't see the moveable bridge at Teal on the chart - am I not looking in the right place?

Something I've wondered about for a while is the practice of "filling in trestlework." It sounds like SP physically removed the trestle and cribbing timbers when they performed the final broad-bank filling of the Suisun Sinks. In old black and white photos I've seen of trestle filling at other places, where the terra is presumably firma, it appears that the timbers are left in place, with air dump cars simply pouring fill material around the them. In such cases, does the new fill material actually become load-bearing, and if so, how? And if not, if the old, buried timbers are doing the work, what is the advantage of filling?

The Movable Bridge is located at Cygness, MP 42.11 where the railroad crosses Cordelia Slough. I admit that the 1980 era track chart is quite faded. I have scanned the same page from my 1996 revision. This page should be much clearer.

As to the practice of removing timbers, I do not have enough information to properly answer your question. Perhaps one of our resident track and bridge experts can give you a good answer.

JLY are you following this thread?

mdo

---

I love the detail on the charts. How often were they updated?

"Cygnus" is Latin for "swan", and the drawbridge is still there (MP 42).

The quarry for the "lava stuff" up by Mt. Shasta was probably Kegg Pit on the Natron Cutoff (and very near Mt. Hebron--the "mountain" itself, not the siding). It was a large hill which has been mostly carted off for fill (closed about 10-12 years ago). From the various layers of different colored ash in the vertical face of what's left standing, I counted about 10 or 20 different eruptions.

I'm not at all familiar with California geography so pardon me some ignorant questions:
1) why did the tracks have to take such an unstable route? Wasn't there another way to get to where they had to go?
2) What was the traffic level that justified such extraordinary efforts? What was at the end of the line?
3) I gather this had something to do with a boat/ship. What was that all about?
4) Did it ever settle down to a routine level of engineering maintenance?
5) Are they still using this line today, given all the mergers and the cost of operating this line?
Clarence

Clarence Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm not at all familiar with California geography
> so pardon me some ignorant questions:
> 1) why did the tracks have to take such an
> unstable route? Wasn't there another way to get
> to where they had to go?
> 2) What was the traffic level that justified such
> extraordinary efforts? What was at the end of the
> line?
> 3) I gather this had something to do with a
> boat/ship. What was that all about?
> 4) Did it ever settle down to a routine level of
> engineering maintenance?
> 5) Are they still using this line today, given all
> the mergers and the cost of operating this line?
> Clarence


I can't answer the questions concerning engineering because I've never worked for the SP or otherwise been involved with it (other than as a passenger and onlooker). However, (1) this is the Cal-P, the main line from Sacramento to Oakland that takes the general route of what is now I-80. It follows the Sacramento River (which by this point includes the water from the San Joaquin) into Suisan Bay, which is really an arm of San Francisco Bay. Because of the hills immediately north of the river, the tracks at that time had to go over the low lands that are described in the engineering summaries that MDO posted. (2) It carried (and carries) the primary traffic from the east and north heading to Oakland (and, thus, to the entire San Francisco Bay area). The alternative route, over Altamont Pass, was longer and had less capacity; the SP track no longer exists there, though the UP runs on the old WP line. (3) The boat/ship was the ferry across the Carquinez Straits, which connect Suisan Bay with San Pablo Bay to the west. The tracks ran to the edge of the straits, and the ferry then took the trains across (engine, cars, and all). Until the SP built the bridge to Martinez in the late 1930s the ferry was essential to the operation of the line. At the time the bridge was built a new line was built that raised part of the railroad above the last portion of the sinks so that it could get up to the bridge. However, the original line (or much of it) still exists as an industrial line. You can see it from Amtrak if you look down to the left right before getting on the bridge (going west) or to the right immediately after getting off (going east). (4) I can't comment on this point. (5) The line is very much in use, both for freight and for Amtrak (the Starlate, the Zephyr, and the Capitols). It remains the primary UP rail route into the Bay Area.

Ok Bob--
A little historical correction is in order, Sir--

The SP opened the new Suisun--Benica Bridge over the Carquinez Straits on November 1, 1930...

KRK

KeyRouteKen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok Bob--
> A little historical correction is in order,
> Sir--
>
> The SP opened the new Suisun--Benica Bridge over
> the Carquinez Straits on November 1, 1930...
>
> KRK


Thanks for the correction; I was going by memory. I had a feeling that I'd seen a picture of the City of San Francisco on the ferry (which would have been late 30s), but I guess I was wrong.

If the first photo went a little higher you'd see where I grew up and the second photo is too blury in the distance but my dad works at the oil refinery there in Benicia. This stretch of tracks and the line in Cordelia was my "home" railroad. Funny to see all the water, I remember our street flooding a couple of times in the 80s.

On the Suisun Sink, when I went to Armijo High School this gentelmen's spoke to us about his grandfather who worked for the SP and was riding on a train about this time of year over the Sink. He said his grandfather had a really rough ride and they thought it was the Sink. Turns out it was April 8th, 1906 and they had ridden through the earthquake. Kinda a funny to think about that as it's the 100th anniversary this weekend.

Nathan

railstiesballast Wrote:

> We of the engineering department are but temporary
> custodians of these lines of railroad that if the
> fortunes are right go back 120 years and should go
> forward another 100+ years. [...]

Oceanfront property isn't a great long term investment.

(Nor are Central Valley subdivisions behind highly subsidized levees.)

http://www.geo.arizona.edu/dgesl/research/other/climate_change_and_sea_level/sea_level_rise/sea_level_rise.htm