BNSF Donner Pass

[mikeydc03]

Would BNSF benefit from owning the Donner Pass route? It seems the UP cannot provide sufficient care for the route, and I wonder if it would benefit the BNSF network to have direct access to Northern California. I wonder if BNSF would use the route more efficiently, as well as provide better services to Amtrak along the route.

BNSF has a tendency to improve routes and improve customer satisfation along the route. The only thing I am wondering is the fact that this route passes through UP's busiest yard in California. If BNSF could modernize this route as run fast intermodal trains over the route that it would be econimically benficial to BNSF. With the addition of mixed freaight trains, the route could be updated further to regain status as a primary route in the United States.

BNSF has the operational staff to run the trains, and has the PR this route needs. One huge problem on this route though is the Summit tunnel, it is the limiting factor that prevents double stacks from crossing the Sierra's. The new Reno trench is open so one major problem is adressed. The second problem is the antiquated signals. BNSF should upgrade the route to run at 79mph, especially in Nevada, where the terrain is flat. This route could also be updated for passenger trains to run at 90mph. If Amtrak and BNSF could team up to improve the the trackage from Auburn to Winnemucca the California Zephyr as well as BNSF intermodal trains would greatly benefit from this co-op. Currently UP has one intermodal train scheduled of the Donner Pass route. This route is parallel with I-80 from Chicago to the Bay Area, and I-80 is the most heavily used truck route in the United States.

There is a huge market for Intermodal trains in the West, but UP doesnt use the Donner Pass Route to its fullest potential. Its time to let BNSF improve the Donner Pass route back to its heyday, and recreate the legacy that SP created before it was taken over by UP.

[route_rock]

We already run over the line (BNSF) why buy something we dont want? We have access to Northern California as well from two ends. Plus we dont have enough people really and we dont make customers happy all the time.
Also why would UP cut themselves off? And 79 mph? all ouor locos are restricted to 73 tops.

[DGAS]

The OP has another thread going about fantasies regarding Donner.

Just check out this thread.

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=33154

[route_rock]

After reading the other thread all I can say is YIKES MAN!! I have been over Donner by truck seen the rail side through video and simulator. And you want to come down that mountain at 79 MPH???? How high are you? Serioulsy. And freight trains plodding on through the night is usually cause of a speed restricted car! I can run 55 if I have mty's, if I have certain cars that require a speed restriction I am stuck at it ( had a 50 mph car the other day)but if I have all loads I can do the max as long as my TOB is under 100.
One day I roll to the windy at 50 the way home I blast along at 70 mph.You see there is more to operating than just slapping a few cars togther and roll at 70 plus.
I dont get it you want all this speed youll need a ton of money and then what about all the speed restricted trains out there? I know the guys out of Fort Mad hate getting behind a Galeesburg to Chicago train thats stuck at 45 when they can go 70.Not fun then toss in Amtrak and then what? Your behind a bunch of slowpokes then you get a form b to go through . Then a form a thats a 10th of a mile long followed by one 2 miles away thats for 2 miles long.Causing a delay to all and sundry.

[mikeydc03]

I think one misconception is that I want to make 79mph happen overnight, by simply changing the speed restrictions. Well that is not going to happen, and that is not what I mean. I think that the route can be upgraded to sustain 79mph for passenger trains, and around 60-65mph for intermodal trains, and 60mph max for drags. This will only be accomplished through tunneling, and regrading. There are several bulb turns that could be replaced with a short tunnel, for example just east of the Truckee truck scales the tracks swing right and turn almost 300 degrees around, and then turn back to the east again. A tunnel through the rocks under 80, which is about 150 feet above the tracks could cut the mileage, and provide a better speed angle for the trains.

There are also several spots where the route could be realigned to offer less curves, or more hospitible turns for trains to take. Though there are some features that cannot be fixed like the horshoe curve through cold stream, but most of the features with investment can be fixed, Truckee already has plans to expand the mousehole which incledes plans to replace the fill that is currently in place. The plan will benefit trains by realigning the tracks to streighten out the curve into downtown Truckee.

[DGAS]

I'll play along again...

So, how is funding going to be secured for this project?

Federal funding?

State funding through increase in some form of taxes?

Railroad-financed with costs passed along to shippers?


I'm sorry but I firmly believe you're truly disconnected from reality regarding this project. In today's financial economy, the amount of money required for such a project would be in the BILLIONS. Additionally, it would take YEARS to complete engineering and environmental feasibility studies.

Asking the Federal government for funding isn't going to happen. Asking the citizens of California and Nevada to provide funding through a tax increase isn't going to happen (for painfully obvious reasons). Asking shippers to pay through increased rates isn't going to happen. Asking the railroad to self-fund isn't going to happen. This isn't Europe where the government pays for everything (no wonder the taxes are so high in socialist countries).

Donner Pass meets today's needs. Stop being a railfan and look at the bigger "picture", which is a vast majority of container traffic from the Pacific Rim comes through the Port of LA and Long Beach. A total redesign, when other more advantageous routes exist - such as the BNSF transcon line or the current UP route from LA to Chicago - isn't going to happen, no matter how much you think it's a good idea.

Why reinvent the wheel?

[mikeydc03]

Why reinvent the wheel?

If the wheel isnt turning well something has to be done, following a generation of lack of inspiration, its time for the government to invest in Rail infrastructure. Its fact that governments benfit from a stong network of rail, and the US doesnt have that. Maybe the United States needs to look for a stong hint of advice in Europe, because obviously we are not doing certain things right. Investing in Amtrak and rail infrastructure would be the smartest investment the United States has done. The Airlines have lost more in three years than Amtrak has in 30. Smart investment? Roads are no where near covering their costs, smart investment? 10 Highway interchanges, or 30 years of rail service? Even if the United States Invested to bring track speeds up to 100mph for passenger trains, we would still be 100mph slower than trains around the world. Though 100mph nationwide would provide twice the capacity that we have today. Electrifying the entire national network would also improve mobility as well as energy consumption. So the wheel needs to be reinvented to provide a national network of railroads.

[mikeydc03]

Why reinvent the wheel?

If the wheel isnt turning well something has to be done, following a generation of lack of inspiration, its time for the government to invest in Rail infrastructure. Its fact that governments benfit from a stong network of rail, and the US doesnt have that. Maybe the United States needs to look for a stong hint of advice in Europe, because obviously we are not doing certain things right. Investing in Amtrak and rail infrastructure would be the smartest investment the United States has done. The Airlines have lost more in three years than Amtrak has in 30. Smart investment? Roads are no where near covering their costs, smart investment? 10 Highway interchanges, or 30 years of rail service? Even if the United States Invested to bring track speeds up to 100mph for passenger trains, we would still be 100mph slower than trains around the world. Though 100mph nationwide would provide twice the capacity that we have today. Electrifying the entire national network would also improve mobility as well as energy consumption. So the wheel needs to be reinvented to provide a national network of railroads.

[DGAS]

You know, I was going to respond to your post but determined I'd be wasting my time. You're ignorance is readily apparent and you just don't get it.

Good luck with your fantasy.

[Tadman]

The two funding sources - railroads and government - have a fiduciary duty to their bosses - stockholders and taxpayers, respectively - that require them to act in ways that best benefit their bosses at all times they are acting within the scope of their employment.

In other words, they must choose the best project for those funding sources. That is determined by how much chance there is of the project cost being recovered by extra revenues derived from upgrading speeds and capacities.

As other posters have indicated, this project will cost billions. It would likely take decades to recover the investment, if it is fully recoverable at all. By that time, business models will have changed, railroads changed, and traffic changed. The risk is simply far to high to ever envision recovering the cost of increasing speeds on a mountainous railroad.

At this point, the railroad brass or government considering funding this project would be immensely negligent to give this project a go-ahead. Likely to the point it would be gross negligence, and civil charges would be brought against those that made the decision. As a legal professional, I say the above with certainty, and would bet the other legal professionals on this forum would agree - it's basic concept.

So no, I don't think that anybody with any business sense would support this project.

And Europe doesn't matter. They have different laws, and they're also in somewhat of an economic morass compared to the US. I don't think modeling ourselves on the Europeans is going to work.

[cnr6060]

I have ridden Donner Pass on NRPC train #5 and I saw and felt a tired line that the UP has grudgingly absorbed through the SP merger.

I see points of why the Donner line should be upgraded and why it's fiscally impossible, especially when it's not the only route to CA from the East. In a way, I think we are all lucky that UP hasnt abandoned the Donner Route or at the very least made it a secondary line with 45 MPH speed limits and TWC.

Look at it this way, North American rail transportation isnt about speed, it's about bulk movements, and right now we are only beginning to really revitalize passenger trains in urban corridors. I look it at this way, as soon as the Capitol Corridor is expanded to Reno, the CZ will fall to a private operator "ala Rocky Mountain Rail Tours" and become a high end weekly train "tour" along the route to Chigaco. So in a way, the present situation allows what we have right now. A Daily CZ on a line without too much traffic, excluding what's East of Reno.

If they ripped up the old Espee line and made the old WP the main with more sidings the route would become more efficient. Remember that the WP was better engineered than the old SP (Cal P).

Paul
Mile 140 Wainwright Sub
CNR Main Line

[GN 599]

I work BNSF's Gateway sub to Keddie CA and the only thing remotely close to something like that are the rumors that we might buy the canyon sub (feather river), but its just a crazy rumor. We were also supposed to have our own pools to run East out of Keddie or Portola to run the DENSTO's and the STODEN's and other trains of ours that are manned by UP crews but that never happened.