Hi Jack,
Yes, that routing would have accomplished everything you proposed, however,
the connection from the BNSF Transcon and the K-Line in Ft. Madison is a
problem. There is no westbound to northbound or southbound to eastbound
connection. So, for westbound trains, the power is on the west end of the
train and once at Ft. Madison are on the wrong end for the trip north on the
K-Line and no place Ft. Madison to turn the train. For eastbound trains
coming down the K-Line, the same is true ? the power is on the wrong end of
the train and since there is nowhere in Ft. Madison to turn the train, it
would have to be backed to Galesburg. This would require Amtrak?s power to
be moved to the end of the train or have additional BNSF locomotives added
to the back to get the train to and from Ft. Madison. This is what the Q
did back in the day when it used this detour routing.
Dave Lotz
-----Original Message-----
From: CBQ@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CBQ@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Jack
Ferris
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 12:19 PM
To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CBQ] Re:Burlington Bridge
The detours are interesting. I would have thought Galesburg to Ft.
Madison, then north to Burlington and visa-versa would have been less
circuitous and would have allowed Amtrak to handle the normal stops
across Iowa.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
CBQ-digest@yahoogroups.com
CBQ-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|