I’m guessing the last loco to run Saluda was DC. Any idea how much better an AC loco would handle the profile?
The route from say Charleston to Cincinnati is a mess without the the Saluda link.
And I understand Charleston is upgrading its port facilities particularly for large container ships.
It is a great city with lots of historic buildings, including the 2nd oldest (and pre-Revolution) synagogue building in North America (the oldest in Newport, RI). And Amtrak does provide service three times a day each way. (Or is it down to twice now?)
It would be quite expensive for NS to wrestle container trains over Saluda so I don’t think that it’s going to happen anytime soon, even with AC power.
It looks like the OP fell into the folly of looking at the map without considering the realities of operating the route.
Can you review the actual grade and curfve situation and the condition the line?
The steep part of the climb averages 4.24% actual (i.e. not compensated for curves) for 2.6 miles. Sharpest curve is… around 11 degrees, maybe?
And the route from Charleston to Cincinnati is important why? Charleston to Atlanta is important because Atlanta is a major distribution center for the Southeast.
I would guess that Charleston to Cincinnati is important because:
-
Panama Canal widening opens up east coast ports to Asian containers.
-
Manufacturing and Distribution centers in: Louisville, Cincinnati, Columbus (huge DC), Cleveland, Detroit, Indianapolis, St. Louis, and Chicago.
-
Adding capacity to the national rail network will become more and more expensive. Thus, anything with rails should be retained.
Ed
If you do a Google search on “Saluda Grade” you will find it is one treacherous and tricky piece of railway that used to have ‘runaway tracks’. One is still in place and can be seen on Google Earth a few miles east of Saluda. The only advantage AC locomotives have is they can run at slower speeds for longer periods of time without toasting the traction motors. It doesn’t mean they could haul longer trains without helpers on that grade. I’m certain NS can find sufficient capacity elsewhere and will eventually abandon the Saluda line.
Pretty much everything about Saluda has been covered in this thread:
Is there anyway the line can be improved if the available traffic justified the expenditure?
Two words: Heartland Corridor.
No need for Charleston to Ohio when a better route from Norfolk to Ohio exists. (or even Savannah to Ohio)
Trains had an excellent article years ago. Would have been the 70s or 80s.
“Saluda - America’s steepest mainline grade”
by Clodfelter, Frank - from Trains, November 1984, p. 26
See also: “Selected railroad reading: The other side of Saluda - memories of Saluda Grade”
by McCall, Charles C., from Trains, May 1981, p. 31
This Southern Railway Saluda grade training video that is on You-Tube shows very clearly why it will probably never be used again.
The few engineers who were qualified to take a train down Saluda have no doubt all retired by now, and the availability of newer motive power is not going to make much difference in the difficulty of the line.
The video makes it appear that the locomotives were specially equipped for Saluda. I have never seen equipment where a push button was used to make a trainline brake reduction. Didn’t see the RFE use the regular ‘automatic’ brake valve at all. Also the locomotives had the ‘special key’ to keep the dynamics applied in case of a emergency brake application. I doubt that all SOU locomotives were equipped with this feature.
The route from Biltmore (just east of Asheville) to Barber (11 miles west of Salisbury) down to Charlotte and on to Belmont is about 50 miles longer than the route down Saluda to Hayne and then up to Belmont. I do not doubt that the railroad holds this longer route to be more economical than the route down Saluda. Two crews would be used in either case. It may be that the train goes on in to Salisbury and then south to Belmont.
Note that there was a caboose on the train in the video, and that the RFE unloaded while the train was in motion.
The “push button” air brake control was part of the early DPU equipment. I have a MILW 1977 Air Brake/Train Handling book and the pictures/diagrams of their DPU controls looks similar to those in the video.
Jeff
Sure. IIRC multiple spiral and or curved tunnels would do the trick. The costs just don’t make sense when considering the actual traffic volumes. Using the operations depicted in the training video would probably be the most economical even today. The only other option I came up with is a rack on the steep bits and a pinion equipped helper set. That’s still going to add another crew, and increase equipment and MoW costs.
Great video… Loved the shirt and tie.
A couple of thoughts … from a far outsider.
Current DPU Technology could allow for units to be placed in more places throughout the train as well as provide for more feedback in regards to performance and dynamic brake “health”. Could this also be used for a central dispatch to watch over and be able to set runaway sidings, etc?
Didn’t NS experiment with electric brakes on a unit coal train? Would that eliminate the need to stop and set/unset retainers.
How would a COFC load differ from a loaded coal train? Could single stacking the containers create a longer lighter train that could perform easier?
The 11 degree curve looks like something that should get addressed as well.
Thanks for sharing.
Robert