Steve,
I am going to reply to your original post even though I know that
there have been several subsequent posts. First, let me preface my
comments by saying that I do not follow the GN nor to I know a lot
about their activities except as they may have influenced the Q. I
certainly do not know the history of Gavin Yard and it wasn't my
intent to upset GN fans as I thought my comment was true and benign.
Like Cy, my comment was based on post BN information. In the mid
1980's, Electro-Motive conducted a locomotive demonstration on the BN
using some new Alaska Railroad GP49s. The locomotives two westbound
and one eastbound trip between Chicago and Seattle. After that they
were shipped to Alaska. During a portion of the trips, I was the EMD
rep on board. Going through North Dakota, we stopped and were held at
Minot for the better part of an hour. The locomotives were adjacent
to the hump with a good view of it. Stored on top of the hump were a
number of maintenance of way cars which seemed curious so I asked my
RR companions. I was traveling with the System Superintendent of Air
Brakes whose name escapes me (his first name was Art and he was an
older gentleman at the time). Also traveling with me was Carl
Stendahl Jr. from the Mechanical Dept. Art's response was that the
hump was out of service and was one of the mistakes that the railroad
had made. I thought he meant BN because I didn't know when the hump
and yard were built. I also don't know which RR he came from.
Basically, he said it never should have been built there. I do know
that Carl and his dad, Carl Stendahl Sr. were both from the GN and he
certainly did not take exception to the comment or elaborate.
In retrospect, Northtown Yard had been upgraded by that time and his
comment may have suggested that GN should have built the hump yard in
the Twin Cities instead of Minot. That may have saved the BN the
expense to build Northtown later on. (As I recall, Northtown before
merger was a smaller NP facility. I don't know what facilities GN had
in the Twin Cities pre merger.) In any case, my comment was based on
those brief comments by BN personnel during that trip. I took it for
face value. I agree that a company's needs change over time.
Certainly, as you stated, when GN made the decision to build Gavin,
it probably was a good idea under the circumstances at the time.
Bill Barber
Gravois Mills, MO
On Mar 7, 2011, at 2:41 AM, CBQ@yahoogroups.com wrote:
> Minot, ND Hump Yard - was Fourth Main
> Posted by: "Steve Haas" Goatfisher2@comcast.net goatfisher
> Sun Mar 6, 2011 11:06 am (PST)
>
>
>
> Bill Barber commented in part:
>
> <<Of course, this isn't the only corporate mistake made by
>
> the Hill Lines. There was a hump yard built at Minot, ND, I believe,
>
> that was never used for it's intended purpose.>>
>
> Bill,
>
> Can you provide any additional information and/or sources for this
> conclusion? Which Hill road are you referring to?
>
> As far as I know, the only Hill line through Minot was the GN. They
> built
> Gavin yard, dedicating it in 1956. Every thing I have read in the
> Great
> Northern literature suggests the yard accomplished everything it was
> intended to do:
>
> 1) Gavin reduced the switching burden on GN facilities at both ends of
> the system. Traffic originating on the east end of the road needed
> only to
> be classified into blocks for locations east of Minot (Wilmar,
> etc), and
> Minot and beyond. This greatly reduced the burden on Union Yard in
> the twin
> cities and improved service levels dramatically across the line.
> Trains
> arriving from the east in Minot could quickly be classed and
> blocked for the
> various locations west of Minot, again increasing the service level.
>
> 2) Conversely, traffic originating on the west end of the system and
> bound for Minot and points east didn't need to be classed and
> blocked on the
> west end. Again the traffic could be blocked for intermediate
> points and
> the Minot and beyond traffic that could be quickly and efficiently
> classed
> at Minot on its way east.
>
> 3) As a result of these efficiencies, GN was able to advertise and
> market
> reduced delivery times from one end of the system to the other.
>
> As I said above, in 30 years of interest in the GN I've never heard
> a single
> comment that Gavin yard performed less than expected. Can you provide
> information to the contrary? I'd be curious to learn if such
> information
> exists, as it would definitely paint a different picture.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Steve Haas
>
> Snoqualmie, WA
[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/
|