by BM6569
Wasn't there some rail dropped east (north) of royal junction on the main line earlier this year or late last year?
Railroad Forums
Moderator: MEC407
BM6569 wrote:Wasn't there some rail dropped east (north) of royal junction on the main line earlier this year or late last year?Yes, it was reported as relay rail and as I recall it has since been installed.
newpylong wrote:That certainly is outrageous . You won't see CTC installed up there unless someone pays for it. There is still plenty of capacity if track speed is increased and sidings are rebuilt.Ok. And that's exactly what I was sort of pointing at. The implication is that District 1 is going to be substantially rebuilt from Royal Junction all the way to Mattawamkeag. Royal Junction - Danville Junction has already received substantial attention. It would appear to be the case that we should expect trackwork between Waterville and Danville Junction within 3-5 years and trackwork between Waterville and Bangor within 1-3 years (if not sooner).
pnolette wrote:Just noticed today a new signal base and signal box at MP 180,Five miles east of CPF 185,or Royal Jct.Don't know how many blocks they are installing,or if this is going to be the new approach signal to CPF 185.Five miles does seem to be a long block though.Is there a siding in the area?
Rockingham Racer wrote:My understanding [correct me if I'm wrong] is that the transport of Bakken [and other] oil is a temporary boon to the railroads, and will become less lucrative with fewer trains as pipelines continue to be put into the ground. .Both CP Rail and BNSF are expanding their ability to move oil from the North Dakota / South Saskatchewan Bakken shale source. For example, as stated recently by CP........ " It’s a roaring business. In 2009, when Calgary-based Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd. started dabbling in crude oil transportation, it moved 500 of its black barrel-shaped cars out of the basin. Last year, its oil trains carried 13,000 cars and soon CP could be moving 70,000 cars or more a year out of the North Dakota Bakken tight-oil field alone.
Rockingham Racer wrote:My understanding [correct me if I'm wrong] is that the transport of Bakken [and other] oil is a temporary boon to the railroads, and will become less lucrative with fewer trains as pipelines continue to be put into the ground. OTOH, one could ask if Irving is projecting a pipeline to arrive at their facility in the future? If so, District 1 will be just fine without CTC. It will also be fine without CTC if more passing sidings of a suitable length are installed. There are many subdivisions on western railroads that handle 8+ trains a day on them operating under train orders from the dispatcher.The pipeline operators are just as aware, if not even more so, of the risks associated with building pipelines to the shale fields. Some say that the production curves of shale fields can have a very steep drop off after an initial production surge. This would make it all that much less likely to be profitable for the pipeline companies. Regardless, all indications are that rail will continue to play a role that is more significant than usual for oil transport. How much so is yet to be determined. We will only really know once the production expansion in North Dakota tapers off (which it has yet to do!).
gokeefe wrote:The pipeline operators are just as aware, if not even more so, of the risks associated with building pipelines to the shale fields. Some say that the production curves of shale fields can have a very steep drop off after an initial production surge. This would make it all that much less likely to be profitable for the pipeline companies. Regardless, all indications are that rail will continue to play a role that is more significant than usual for oil transport. How much so is yet to be determined. We will only really know once the production expansion in North Dakota tapers off (which it has yet to do!).Yes, production curves are only known for a few years as the drilling is only a few years old. But, wells can be refracked to restimulate production.
Rockingham Racer wrote:My understanding [correct me if I'm wrong] is that the transport of Bakken [and other] oil is a temporary boon to the railroads, and will become less lucrative with fewer trains as pipelines continue to be put into the ground. OTOH, one could ask if Irving is projecting a pipeline to arrive at their facility in the future? If so, District 1 will be just fine without CTC. It will also be fine without CTC if more passing sidings of a suitable length are installed. There are many subdivisions on western railroads that handle 8+ trains a day on them operating under train orders from the dispatcher.That's not what I've heard from industry. It's supposed to be about 20 to 30 years before the Bakken is fully connected with pipelines. Drilling is simply occurring too fast to keep up with the permitting, ROW acquisition, and construction of pipelines. In fact, drilling has occurred so fast in order to lock in leases at older/lower rates (like $5/acre vs. $1500+/acre and 10% royalties vs. 12-15%) and due to 10-year low natural gas prices that 34% of Bakken gas wells are being flared off, some for even over a year, as there is nowhere for the gas to go.
pnolette wrote:The nearest siding is Walnut to Royal Jct.,which is four miles west.The next closest siding would be New Gloucester,which is 7 miles east.Does that kind of distance make sense for braking applications when running really long trains? Obviously the train wouldn't be loaded if it were coming from Waterville towards Royal Junction but it might matter nonetheless.