The BNSF has two main lines within 10 miles of each other before crossing the Mississippi, i.e. Lomax, IL. One is the old ATSF to Kansas City and beyond. The other is the old CB&Q to Omaha and beyond.
Both brdiges are old. Both brdiges are swing spans. The Army Crops of Engineers wants the swing span in Burlington, IA replaced with a lift span. On the west bank, there is a single track line connecting both major lines.
If you are the BNSF, do you maintain and rehab two old bridges, or build a new, multi track bridge elevated over river traffic with major routes diverging on the west bank? The existing west bank connection will require capacity upgrades.
Assuming a new bridge is built, do you maintain both routes, roughly 40 miles each, from Galesburg, IL to the Mississippi? Do you consolidate with one route even if it means serious capacity enhancements?
As a wild card, how much is the US government willing to contribute for “improving navigation” by removing two swing spans?
Does the terrain in that vicinity allow for a new higher bridge to be built with clearance for river traffic, as was done at Quincy? WikiMapiaJohnweeks.QuincyWikipedia
Around Lomax, IL, you enter the flood plain. Both sides of the river have broad flood plains to build an approach upon.
If you continue an embankment and reroute over the bluff on the west bank, your costs go up greatly. You end up not using the current connection between Burlington and Ft. Madison.
Doing so offers the ability to by-pass Burlington and Ft. Madison as well as avoid flood issues that effected both major routes in 1993. The cost is probably prohibitive.
Who cares? The members of a railroad forum, made up mostly of railfans, who find interest in railroad related subjects. What better place for the Walter Middys of the world like me, to be able to learn about railroad things from those in the business, and those a lot more knowledgable than me?
Consider how much the average person thinks about work, the economy, family, bills,gas prices, inflation, politics, insurance, etc…At some point, don’t we all need a little break from reality? Here’s a chance to talk and learn about a bridge that I’ll probably never see; one that won’t make a difference in my world. Yet, it does sound interesting.
Me, too. I’ve been over the Q bridge several times whilst traveling between Denver and Naperville, so the happenings on that line are above and beyond my normal railroad curiosity.
I don’t know. I still think it’s an interesting topic. It may not interest all parties, but as I mentioned, the topic has personal significance to me. If all else fails, it beats all the Trainfinder posts by a long shot.
Those two routes are both very busy lines now, especially the ex ATSF through Ft. Madison. The two lines connect at a point just east of Cameron. using a double wye connection. To consolidate the 2 lines with one bridge (at Fort Madison) would lengthen the CB&Q about 30 miles, & would mean abandoning the 2 main track from Burlington to Cameron. The link between Burlington & Ft Madison would need double tracking also and that link does not turn onto the existing bridge at Fort Madison. Building approaches to tall RR bridges in these areas boggle my mind.
The Corps have a master plan to open up the river north of St. Louis for larger barge lashups. It is just a wish list. (My personal opinion) The Corps does not have a budget to protect New Orleans. There are many swing bridges & locks to be replaced. Dale has a list of all the Mississippi bridges.
Increasing barge sizes would be a good thing & free up railroad capacity. Futurmodal had some thoughts on this as I recall.
Go west from Lomax, IL. Split the lines near Wever, IA. Abandon the line from Lomax to Ft. Madison.
Perhaps go north from Wever and by pass Burlington. Avoid slowing down. Route miles to Omaha should not be as great as through Ft. Madison. Miles to Kansas City should not change much.
Assuming Burlington is by passed, it is doubtful. The only way would be for a short line to take the old route and keep two connections. One west of Burlington and one south to Wever. If a short line did take over serving local industry, one connection is all they would probably maintain.
Perhaps a station near the divergence point would be in order with no stop in Burlington, nor Ft. Madison. It would be less than 15 miles from either town.
Did not the City of Burlington try suing the BNSF a while back over moving some railroad shops? I vaugely remember reading something about a law suit. If so, perhaps Burlington could try suing Amtrak for moving out.
The lawsuit was strange. BNSF had changed the wording of the lease agreement a few years prior, and the city attorney did not realize it. The city lost. BNSF said, “If you agree not to appeal, we will not bill you for our legal fees.”
If the Corps proceeds with their plan, I’m wondering about the KJRY bridge at Keokuk. With your plan, they could reroute over the new bridge at Lomax. Except for the rock quarry at Hamilton,IL I can’t think of other local customers between the river and La Harpe.
The answer is, “which ever is cheapest to do”. Fortunately for railroads most bridges were built in an era of steam engines and have a Cooper rating far in excess of todays weights. No way if they replace it will it be as photogenic or massive. Whatever they do it will be the cheapest solution. Funny that way about companies that have to show a profit.