Filling the Single-Track Gap at Vaughn, New Mexico
Part II (of I-V)
An impressive CP on the west side of town (east of the new bridging over UP’s Golden State Route) has a look more impressive than it really is. It is only to a north side siding / yard track that is connected into by an un-signaled interchange track between the UP and BNSF.
Continued in Part III
Filling the Single-Track Gap at Vaughn, New Mexico
Part III (of I-V)
In the downtown Vaughn area, there is a universal crossovers situation with that north siding-like track splicing into Main 1 between the two crossovers.
While the Santa Fe Super Chief and a lot of its colleagues went via Raton Pass, the Oakland-Chicago train was routed through Vaughn. It is unknown if the Vaughn station was a stop or not back then, but high level cars were routed through here.
Continued in Part IV
Filling the Single-Track Gap at Vaughn, New Mexico
Part IV (of I-V)
So, EAST of the UP Golden State Route track (that the BNSF bridges over) a north side siding exists, and WEST of that Golden State Route a south side siding exists.
.
BNSF SOUTHERN TRANSCON
VAUGHN, NEW MEXICO
EAST OF THE UP
GOLDEN STATE ROUTE
/
/
/ --------------------
/ \
Filling the Single-Track Gap at Vaughn, New Mexico
Part V (of I-V)
West of the UP Golden State Route is a south side siding, the west end of such is shown here west to east:
All the above photos, aerials, and information was an effort to convey to the forum the new two-tracking in the Vaughn area that took place last year.
A stop was made in Winslow, AZ this trip, and a brief review of that area will be posted in a few days, as well as a comparison in signaling here in the Vaughn area in contrast to the far western part of the southern Transcon will be made.
Mike,
As of 2005 trackage on the funnel was as follows, from east to west with MP 0 at the former NP division point of Kootenai.
MP 2.9 ca. 1972 connection to former GN main line, trailing point westward.
MP 3.1 Sandpoint depot.
MP 0.0 to 5.0 East Algoma single track. Includes long bridge over Pend Orielle River.
MP 5.0 East Algoma to MP 14.1 West Algoma 2MT
MP 14.1 West Algoma to MP 16.5 Cocolalla Single track
MP 16.5 to MP 33.5 Athol 2MT with universal crossovers at CP 223 at MP 22.3.
MP 33.5 to MP 36.7 East Ramsey, Single track.
MP 36.7 to MP 38.8 West Ramsey, 2 MT.
MP 38.8 to MP 44.5 Rathdrum Single track.
MP 44.5 to MP 53.9 Otis Orchards 2MT. This segment includes Hauser Yard and Hauser fuel facility MP 45.6 to 49.9.
MP 53.9 to MP 63.0 Irvin single track.
MP 63.0 to MP 71.5 Spokane Depot 2MT. Includes Yardley Yard, Parkwater mechanical facilities, and Erie Street yards with old main between Yardley and Erie Street. Connection to former GN main line to Dean near east end of Erie Street.
2 MT track continues west of depot to single track Latah Creek bridge which connects with the former GN to Wenatchee and the former SP&S to Lakeside Jct (about 10 miles of SP&S). The NP and SP&S lines comprise 2MT, each on a separate right of way.
As to the UP, the local politicans want UP on BNSF through the Spokane Valley. I am unaware that the railroads have any interest in that, but since I do not live in the area I have no idea what anyone is up to. UP has rights on GN from near the east end of Erie Street Yard and over the former SP&S to their connection which is just east of Lakeside Jct.
Mac
Thanks Mac. I started following the line on Google Earth from Sandpoint south. I see the long single track bridge across Pend Orielle (it looks like ther is a swing span near the south end, is that still active?) and the single track along the small lake between West Algoma and Cocolalla. However, the 2 mile single track between Athol and East Ramsey seems to be over flat open country, although I recall that one of the other posters indicated that this area thru Rathdrum was planned for double track.
Midland,
Everything west of Athol is relatively open so adding a second main would not involve the major earthworks required east of Athol in the ca. 1965 line change that eliminated about three miles of slow crooked track, and when put second main through in the late 1990’s. Deep fills and cuts were required as part of both projects.
Mike F90 on 4-16-16 in this thread said BNSF doing second main between Rathdrum and Athol. That is 11 miles less 2 between East Ramsey and West Ramsey. I did not check BNSF website. BNSF tends to do earth work first summer, let it sit over the winter, and lay track the next summer.
Bruce Kelly lives in the area and I would rate his reports as highly reliable, should he comment.
Mac
KhsP, thanks for update pics and info. I have been to summit at night with the light field. Spent several days there during triple tracking. Liked the area off RT66 ai a little stream where locals wIould cool off. UP is just uphill from BNSF there, good photo ops. On the day those runaway freight cars rolled thru Pomona and crashed in Industry, I arrived at the Pomona station 10 min after they went thru, for photo shoot. Its great how free I was to get upclose for pics with no hassle. In Jersey they have fences everywhere to block access. THANX AGAIN, STEVEL
Of the roughly 70 miles which comprise BNSF’s “Funnel” between Sandpoint Jct., ID, and Sunset Jct. (Spokane), WA, less than 18 miles are currently single track. No work is currently under way to add second main track at any of these gaps, though plans exist.
Grading through a heavily-wooded area for the 2nd main between Rathdrum and West Ramsey, ID, was begun a year or two ago, but further work there has been suspended. Roadbed is pretty much in place for 2nd main between East Ramsey and Athol, but no current work there either.
Sources have told me that adding a second main along Lake Cocolalla would require the relocation of U.S. Highway 95 to higher ground away from the current rail line and lake shore. Between the difficulty of permitting and actual construction (translation: time), and the fact that it’s only a 2.3-mile gap, don’t expect to see BNSF bother with that one any time soon.
The gap between Otis Orchards and Irvin, WA, would require massive fill work and construction of a second bridge over the Spokane River. But it would be a very welcome place for having a second main. It’s not uncommon to see trains depart Hauser Yard westbound, only to stack up three or four deep from Otis Orchards clear back to the WA/ID state line, waiting for their turn across the Spokane River and through the Parkwater/Yardley terminal area. Not to mention the cloggage that happens when an intermodal train stops on either main at Parkwater to pick up or set out cars at the ramp, backing up traffic for miles in both directions.
Some years ago, the pipe dream among local officials and a few folks in the rail biz was this thing called the Bridging the Valley Project. Details with interactive map here:
A few of BTV’s goals have been accomplished in the form of overpasses and crossing closures on BNSF. But the grand idea of closing much of the UP line between Spokane and At
Apparently, BNSF doesn’t see a Complication …
… as a Complication
Winslow, AZ … and a Thought about up North
Part “A” (of A-D)
On the southern Transcon at Winslows, AZ is a crew relief point. It is a bit more of a complicated relief point than most in that biases reverse there. To the east normal train operations is left running, but to the west it is right running, though because of CTC any track can be used at any time.
The below diagram is a simplified, key tracks only presentation, with arrows showing the general biases.
.
--------------------------->
/ /
/ /
<--------------------------------------<
\ / /
\ / &nbs
Apparently, BNSF doesn’t see a Complication …
… as a Complication
Winslow, AZ … and a Thought about up North
Part “B” (of A-D)
K.P. had somehow envisioned BNSF possibly moving the west side interlocking and crossovers west a bit to solve that now ‘too short’ of tracks problem. But, the present plant has presumably new replacement crossovers switches waiting to be installed, even with attached silver switch motors and all.
An overview looking eastbound (and the overpass the photos were taken from):
A westbound comes (from Main 3, background) to Main 1 (foreground, left).
Above, trains make crew relief in Winslow (out of view in the far background), and whatever track is free and / or convenient to use the dispatcher uses.
Continued in Part C
Apparently, BNSF doesn’t see a Complication …
… as a Complication
Winslow, AZ … and a Thought about up North
Part “C” (of A-D)
Looking west, that westbound scoots away:
Do you see anything odd about that above photo? I mean really odd? It is hard to see, especially at the above photo’s angle, but if you know anything about the history of the line and after pondering things, something odd just jumps out at one!
Check this photo out, at a better angle.
Trains normally going away from the camera down the grade on the westbound RIGHT track have a less gradient than trains elevating on the steeper LEFT track, totally opposite to and contradictory to normal industry practice! (Absent technical track profile data, K.P. is going by the obvious visual look of things.) Our forum contributor diningcar undoubtedly knew this! He was involved in the big 40 miles or so line relocation effort quite a few miles to the west back in 1959-60. Before that relocation, this line here (in Winslow) was LEFT biased and Automatic Block Signals (ABS) governed, often on cantilevered signal bridging, which means westbound trains normally went down the LEFT steep track, and eastbound trains came UPWARD on the less gradient RIGHT track in the just above photo! The forum can decide whether AT&SF management (“management”) back then was smart or dumb on this. But, with today’s high volume of traffic, it would seem a flyover would be mo
Apparently, BNSF doesn’t see a Complication …
… as a Complication
Winslow, AZ … and a Thought about up North
Part “D” (of A-D)
The northern Transcon K.P. knows little about, but he envisions a great portion of it is single-track. Anytime a second track is laid, layers (probably more accurately designers) are confronted with which side should the new track be laid on, to the right or to the left? In many cases the current side dictates. Occasionally, though, the new track would be better off on the other side, such as right biased running reaching a point where left biased running would be more beneficial. In that case what should those designers do?
Early double-trackers (like a century ago) so often used a flyover of some sort to change sides. BNSF calls some flyover arrangements a ‘natural crossover.’ Again, we go back to Arizona and Santa Fe’s 1959-60 line relocation. The now gone Santa Fe eastbound track went over the now gone westbound track maybe 10 miles west of Ash Fork, AZ and east of Seligman.
But, as discussed above, in the last 70 years or so railroads seemed to think avoiding such bridges was the better way to go, hence, situations like in Winslow, AZ developed. Undoubtedly, in the back offices of BNSF all the two-tracking on the northern Transcon they pretty much know what they want to do, and w
KP, there is no “permanent” bias running on the southern Transcon between Barstow and Belen although as you have noted there was in the past. Yes, on a given day at a location an occasional observer will see all EB’s on one track and all WB’s on the other; that same observer on a different day may see just the opposite.
The wonderful observation location on the old Route 66 overpass at West Winlow which you and many others choose can be deceiving unless one knows the history of the second main construction now approaching 100 years ago. The second main was constructed with modern (at that time) equipment and methods with the objective, in addition to obvious objective, to reduce grades and curviture from that which was built with ‘state of the art methods and tools’ in the 1880’s.
The prevailing grade west from Winslow is accending all the way to the Arizona Divide west of Flasgstaff even though in the photos you have furnished indicate a decending grade, but just for a short distance. Actually with today’s operations that accending eastward grade approaching West Winslow is an asset as the 70 MPH trains must decellatate for the crew change location about one mile east.
But the EB’s may approach West Winslow on either track as fits the dispatchers then current needs to expedite the priority trains. That is also true at East Winslow where (now a different dispatcher) EB and WB trains may enter or leave East Winslow on either track to satisfy that dispatchers current priorities. This is how CTC works and why a dispatcher may cross any train from one track to the other and then back again; and is why an observer may see a train holding short of a control point so the dispatcher may accomplish his priorities.
diningcar (4-24): Biases Roulette
Say a third trick dispatcher has had a relatively good day, and the 15 trains on his territory are all right running. The first trick dispatcher takes over, and a few trains are made to be left running to get around slower ones. The DS sees he has to get those left running trains back to right running ones because a fleet of right running trains are coming the other way. So, on and on it goes. Even the next dispatcher takes over, but sees he has 30 trains to deal with. He has no time to make all the trains left running just to flex the circuits. So, observers see most of the trains run right handed most of the time, and then SOMEONE coins the expression the line is right biased …
Hey, diningcar, I passed through Kingman, AZ this past trip, which to me is a right biased territory, as most of the trains I’ve seen over the years run on the right track in both directions. I got stopped by a westbound on the west side of town, and of all things, it was LEFT running! As the train kept and kept passing, a track machine zipped by eastbound on the other track, it also being left running. I immediately concluded there was track work to the west on Main 1 so that was why the westward train passing was on Main 2. I finally got across the grade crossing, and eastwardly paralleled the tracks a bit, and saw another westbound on Main 2 was coming to a stop at the red intermediate signal.
The signal went yellow, but the train didn’t budge, and waited for a flashing yellow …
&hell
K.P., you can get a one-stop ticket from ONT to MSP on Southwest. Then head to St. Paul and visit Dayton’s Bluff to photo-shoot the BNSF, CP and UP yards. Then head west and stop at Minneapolis Junction to check out 261. After that, head north and stop at Northtown Yard in North Minneapolis. Then take US Highway 10 all the way to Fargo pretty much alongside the BNSF two track main. In North Dakota the paired track is a little more challenging to follow but generally can be followed on main roads.
Another option is to follow BNSF down the Mississippi to Illinois all the way to Galesburg. There is some awesome scenery, and some great places right on the river to get a great burger, watch the tow boats on the Mississippi and the CP across the river, and literally be within yards of the BNSF twin mains as the BNSF trains roll by. And roll they do - this is the former route of the Twin Cities Zephyrs and you will be up close to rolling thunder, pedal to the metal railroading.
KP,
May I suggest that you are spending a lot more effort than necessary on “biased running”, April 24 A-D.
The modern dispatcher seeks to move his trains as quickly as possible given today’s traffic and today’s maintenance of way activities. That is the only hard and fast rule.
The former ATSF across Arizona was originally single track, then double track, and is now generally two main tracks. The double tracking was done ca. 1901-1920 as I recall. By definition, double track features movements with “the current of traffic”. Block signals were installed to protect trains movine in only one direction on each track and trains normally ran with the current of traffic, that is, in the direction that the engineer could see the signals. Operating against the current of traffic was possible, but generally involved train orders and either the crew threw its own switches, or a trainman called off the extra board specifically called to handle the switches did so under the dispatcher’s direction. This was slow and awkward. After the ICC imposed speed limits related to signals, operating against the current of traffic was slower than with the current.
Today, with two main tracks both main tracks are signalled for movement in both directions. In general, the only penalty for using the former “wrong main” is delay caused by movement through the crossovers at less than main track speed, that is, not much. 2 MT provides greater capacity than DT since it elimiated the cost and time penatly imposed by operating against the current of traffic under DT.
When the line was double tracked, the opportunity to seek out less steep routes was presented. Where a significant improvement could be made at a “low enough” marginal cost, a new line would be built. If the new line had to pass over the old, and then pass back, it was done. Remember this is in DT days with current of traffic and the new line was intended to handle
KP & others: Your observations at Kingman are similar to mine because of the very steep (short) grade WB on track 1, while the more moderate ascending grade on track 2 is much longer for reasons explained by PNWRMNM. On Cajon there is one alinement (track ?) that has a lessor EB ascending grade and that is the logical choice for EB trains although the two other tracks may be used but probably for lighter trains.
Question about bias running. Seem to recall there was a bridge over the Mississippi river that had just bias running. Read somewhere that rail on the bridge would creep and would have to remove some rail at one end and place some on other end.
Does this occurr on regular rail now that rail anchors are used ?
diningcar (4-25): The 100 Years Bias Plan
First off, there is no 100 years bias plan, at least as far as I know. But, historical events and circumstances have to make one wonder.
For clarification, in Cajon Pass in Southern California, the line is left biased. Eastbound trains tend to be routed on Main 1 (of 3 tracks).
(So, between Cajon and Summit, Main 1 is generally used for eastbound trains, while Main 2 is used for westbound trains. Mains 1 and 2 are on a 2.2% grade. Main 3 is the shorter, original 3.0% line.)
Near Frost (or Victorville), the biases change from left running to right running because of the “natural crossover” at M.P. 39.1.
In Steinheimer’s great 1970’s Cajon Pass feature article in TRAINS, because of the way the then new Barstow Classification Yard was oddly built, the west side eastbound access to the yard was via Main 1, the westbound track. Steinheimer theorized that the “natural crossover” (at M.P. 39.1) near Frost would be eliminated. That would be a smashing success IF (“if”) the three areas of paired track had a track built alongside them, including in the Kingman, AZ area. That would make the BNSF line completely left biased from Los Angeles to beyond Belen, NM, and I don’t know how much farther east it would go. Somehow I wonder if that is the great master plan. It might take a hundred years to do, but maybe that is the plan …
In other matters, diningcar, do you (or anyone else) know on the southern Transcon what the biases are all the way to Chicago, now that it is all almost two-tracks all the way?
Best,
K.P.