Union Pacific Donner Pass Route

I am just wondering what the average velocity of this route is? As well as the trafic density of the route is? Is this route a primary route in the UP network? What improvements could be made to the route? Is 79mph possible on this route?

mikeydc03 wrote:I am just wondering what the average velocity of this route is?

Velocity? You mean speed? "Velocity" is better suited for Space Shuttle mission discussions.

My SWAG? Average speed is probably 25-40 mph depending on location. The line does cross the Sierra Nevada mountain range.

mikeydc03 wrote:As well as the trafic density of the route is? Is this route a primary route in the UP network?

Well, the route is part of a transcontinental route (think "Overland Route") and was a major part of the old Espee. So, I'd say yes - it's a primary route.

mikeydc03 wrote:What improvements could be made to the route? Is 79mph possible on this route?

The UP will be undertaking the largest public works project in history - they're boring underneath the entire Sierra Nevada's in an attempt to provide improvements and 79 MPH trackage. Preliminary engineering feasibility studies recommend the entrance on the Nevada side begin in Lovelock with the California side starting in Roseville. This would provide the best opportunity for minimal grade issues and allow the trackage to be built with no turns or curves in the track. Work is scheduled to commence on the project once funding from California and Nevada has been secured.

Local officials are excitedly enthused about the number of jobs that will be created. However, railfans are objecting to the project as it will remove one of the early 1900's feats of engineering. Additionally, railfans lament the loss of locations that provide excellent vistas for photography. The project will be the subject of a documentary on Discovery Channel's "Extreme Engineering" TV-series.



Seriously, have you looked at aerial and topography maps of the line? I doubt there is much that could be done, within fiscal constraints, to make many improvements.

As for your "79 mph" comment, you do realize it's mountain railroading at its finest, right? If the railroad allowed for 79 MPH, you'd see daily catastrophic derailments, especially on the descent grade from Donner summit.

I think I was mainly concerning 79mph operations for passenger trains. This route that you speak of, is there public document? I am interested to see what potential improvements UP is targeting. Tunneling is what UP needs to do more of, that is the way train speeds can increase without building a new route.

Not much more can be done to it accept relay the 4 mile stretch from shed 10 to switch 9. Cant really rebore, remember its SOLID GRANITE....
Theres already a straight 2 mile tunnel ( Tunnel 41 ).
Trains have rouble making it up, let alone going down. No way in hell would you ever get 79MAS outta it. I believe its 40 now.

Why in the world would they even do all that crap for 2 passenger trains? ( WB & EB Amtrak #5 & 6 ) Not counting the Reno Fun Train which is only a few months of the year..

the improvements would not only benefit the freight trains, but Amtrak California is looking to extend the Capitol Corridor to Reno, the CZ would benefit, the Reno fun train would benefit, and UP would benefit from the capacity to operate Double Stacks over the summit if the Summit tunnel is either cut up, or undercut to make it possible to run double stacks. The best alternative would be to relay through the sheds, which diverge at either end of the summit tunnel, and reconverge at the other end. UP could route trains through the shed while the tunnel is imroved, including heightening, fire safety, as well as possibly widening or boring a new tunnel. New technologies have made it possible for tunnel boring machines to cut through granite, as well as run it through existing tunnels to make the tunnel wider, as well as taller. The tubular machines could possibly work along the entire route for several years. They could be used to improve the route from Reno to Auburn by making it accessable to Double stacks. Then UP could run the 24-34 trains a day it states it has the capacity to do.

The main traffic along this route is auto trains, which are the most numerous, then comes mixed freight, some grain trains, and there used to be a daily intermodal train, but recently it had gotten shorter and later, so not sure if it still runs. It used to roll through Truckee at sunset, and again at dawn in the opposite direction. So if UP could in fact add Double stacks to this route would it be utilized more? And if so would they run it to the 34 train max they state the route can handle?

Here we go again..
http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=28321

Golden?

What's the deal Mikey?? You didn't get enough of your fantasy in that previous thread?

You've GOT to be a major foamer...

You're ignorance about mountain railroading, especially in the Sierra Nevada's, is plainly evident.

Let it go...you're fantasy is never going to come true.

first of all Passenger service at 79mph is possible anywhere, except maybe hanging over a cliff making a 90 degree turn. Freight service may still be limited to 50-60mph, but 79mph is no technological break though. IF it is foaming to see trains travel just over the speed limit of a highway, I can see that you find it acceptable that previous generations traveled faster on trains. How is it acceptable to run trains 15-30mph slower when we are supposidly at a higher technological level than before? If 79mph is risking everything but reality, then why dont we run trains at 15mph? is that a good safe speed?

The point of this is just research to study a plan for the future when we can in fact have a train that can average over 60mph in this country. Just because nothing has been done in the past to improve rail infrastructure, doesnt meen that we can just sit here and do nothing. If we did nothing from the 1950's on trains would still be moving faster than they are today. What makes this implausable? The fact that the FRA has created such limiting rules for railroads? The fact the UP doesnt want to invest in infrastructure on a route that isnt as profitable as others? Or is it the fact that in order for one to want change they must fit into the mold that the FRA has set?

For one who speaks, it is impossible to learn if one cannot listen. I have listened, and I have learned that there are limitations, but I have also seen the positive roles trains can play in the world, and the United States is wasting a valuable resource. So I could be like you and say it is impossible, but is it really? Is it really foaming? Absolutely not, we have learned from the past, and we are still learning today, the railroad industry has the resources to make it happen. If it takes a limit on the number of cars on a train to operate at 79mph then so be it. Two 30 car intermodal trains would be more efficient to run than a 60-75 car mixed freight.

This image of slow freights lingering on into the night has to stop, in order for freight trains to remain competitive they have to create a sleek new image to promote there services. Donner Pass will be updated to operate at higher speeds, when is the quetion. The more the government is fed by the lies that freight trains have to be slow and heavy, the longer it will take to undate the US rail network. Positive research can create locomotives that are capable of controling a 30 car train, as well as reducing the wear on the rails. Amtrak's study showed that three Genesis locomotives could pull 30 cars, 15 passenger and 15 freight cars. With the AC6000 and the SD90MACS out there this is not unreasonable.

I for one am for improving and moving foreward, you can sit along the tracks and say its not possible all you want, but in fact it is possible, and you can do all of the studies you want to attempt to prove it wrong, but you will make as much progress as the railroads have. You'll end up farther back from when you started and not even realize it.

Yeah, and the AC6000s and SD90s were also pretty much failures..

I have been researching Donner for quite some time, but i just wont waste my breath replying to these outragous claims for stuff that will never happen.

Nova55 wrote:I have been researching Donner for quite some time, but i just wont waste my breath replying to these outragous claims for stuff that will never happen.

Go easy on the kid, his high school teacher is expecting a well-written paper.

What about the Moffat Route? Do they need to make that 79mph also???

Who is this Mikey guy? Man...

Before G-A comes down on this like Thor, allow me to mention a few things:

1. The money involved should sober you up immediately, unless you really are THAT high. What would it cost to do this all?

2. Many countries seem to think that electric railroads are the way to go. Perhaps they are. The cost to upgrade here, however, means it's likely a no-go. That doesn't mean it's not the better way to go. It just won't happen.

I don't think Mikey is a student. I think Mikey is a former european who has an idea and would like to see it work. Kids don't use "velocity" in regards to trains. I teach them, so I know.

OK, G-A, shut this ca-ca down.

Dave Becker

DGAS wrote: Velocity?

That is how the UP measures speed.

I'll lock it down and ask... in the future we dont bring up topics that you'll typically find in the Amtrak Forum... make believe crap... this is what id do to this line... and what not.