Thanks for the reply,
I read a lot of your mails but I did not realize that you do such exciting
things out there!
What I thaugt was more like this: A railroad granting an other one trackage
rights would probably not like seeing its own trains on the siding all day
long while the other Companies trains rush by. Since I don't know a lot
about the rules of American Railroads (just reading Rights Of Trains,
though) I just wanted to know how the dispaching was done in such a case.
Now I understand that the trains class was decicive, right?
You have to know that I recieved that wonderful book "Serling Colorado -
Crossroads on the Prairie" and I think this is a very rewarding location to
model. But it is a bit different there where you have two Railroads coming
in from the southwest on the same track and leaving town splitting into two
single tracks. Must be fun to operate!
Sorry, but what is a BNSF S-BPATAC and a "Z" ? You're talking to a steam
guy, you know.
Have a nice evening!
Florian Griessenboeck
----- Original Message -----
From: VLBG <VLBG@s...>
To: <BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 8:02 AM
Subject: Re: [BRHSlist] Trackage rights
> Florian,
>
> Sterling to Union is BNSF on UP trackage rights. While it is
> presently Dispatched by BNSF I'm pretty sure UP still maintains
> it. Since there is no UP traffic I'm sure the BNSF pays for just
> about everything.
>
> I do not understand what you mean by "Whose trains had the
> precedency"? I do now and have at more than one time in the
> past Dispatched territories where other Railroads have trackage
> rights or joint trackage or whatever. I attach the level of
> priority to the train and my needs, not what Railroad it belongs
> to.
>
> Last night CNIC M337 was going through Budd west on MT #1.
> A BNSF S-BPATAC was just starting through Portage on MT #2
> at that time. #337 went first at East Cabin/East Dubuque. Since
> that was around 140 cars through a 10 mph tunnel and across a
> 15 mph bridge the stack train did have to wait a little bit at East
> Cabin. So what? If the BNSF train had been a "Z" the decision
> would have been different.
>
> Between Littleton and Pueblo I usually favored UP trains. They
> generally ran better. At times I would hold a Northbound UP
> empty at Colorado Springs to follow a BNSF Northbound up the
> hill. That was just selfish, what I really wanted is for the UP to
> push the BNSF over the top when they stalled. Going South I
> didn't have much choice as to what order things would move.
> With Government paid for triple track CTC between South
> Denver and Littleton there are probably more options available
> now. The UP coal loads would be about 25" faster up the hill
> so I'd try to get them ahead. It's just more practical that way.
>
> TheVLBG
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Florian Griessenboeck" <florian@v...>
> To: <BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, 15 January, 2002 09:33
> Subject: [BRHSlist] Trackage rights
>
>
> > Hi list,
> >
> > I don't know if I am right on this, If not please correct me.
> > The CB&Q mainline from Sterling to Union in Northeastern Colorado was
> > jointly used with the UP. Or was it actually Union Pacific rails where
the
> Q
> > had just trackage rights?
> > Whose trains had the precedency and who had to pay for maintaining the
> line?
> > Thanks for your help!
> >
> > Florian Griessenboeck
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
|