[N&W] Re: Double Stacks on the Pocahontas Division
nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org
nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org
Wed Jun 2 21:36:22 EDT 2004
Certainly Conrail did NS a favor when they enlarged the Detroit River
Tunnel. Prior to that time, NS maintained two tugs and four floats
for traffic that wouldn't clear the ex-Michigan Central tunnels -- hy-cubes,
multi-levels, etc. By my recollection, the floats would accomodate
24 car lengths. Translated, that mean 12 hy cubes -- three on each
of four tracks. And not only was NS floating traffic to/from the CP,CN, and
the St. Thomas Division, they were also floating oversized traffic for
CR and CSX as well. Reflecting again from a study of the joint facility
made 15+ years ago, it cost about $26.00 per CAR LENGTH to make
the 20 minute crossing. And remember, hy-cubes and multi-levels got
dinged for TWO car lengths.
Harry Bundy
____________________________________________________________________________
This week's issue of "Engineering News Record" had a brief article about a
planned intermodal facility in Portsmouth, VA, to be complete circa
2007. Maersk was cited as developer. So perhaps there are several reasons
for increasing clearances. BTW, I believe domestic containers are longer,
not higher.
John Samples
>
> From: N&W Mailing List <mailing-list at nwhs.org>
> Date: 2004/05/18 Tue AM 02:50:05 GMT
> To: N&W Mailing List <mailing-list at nwhs.org>
> Subject: Re: Double Stacks on the Pocahontas Division
>
> Raising the clearances of a tunnel or raising the roof, sounds
> misleading. Actually, they lower the floors as well. It can be done. In
> the past few years prior to the CSX/NS destruction of Conrail, Guilford
> Rail System managed to get Federal and State funding to increase clearances
> of the Hoosic Tunnel in Massachusetts. This tunnel is still one of the
> longest if not the longest tunnel east of the Mississippi. Of course one
> of the mistakes they made was they did not make it large enough for the new
> international double stacks to make it through, but domestic double stacks
> still make it. (Excuse me if I flipped flopped on which is larger, domestic
> or international.) It can be done, expect to see some tunnel boring
> machines and a diversion of traffic. Guilford, made a deal with Conrail to
> ship most of it's traffic over to Conrail, until the work was
> completed. So it looks like some interesting times will be had on the old
> Pokey.
>
> A.J. Gemperline
> > Gordon--
> >
> > Like the rest of the N&W, I guess we better get pics of the tunnels while
> > we can!
> >
> > Bucky Wilson
> > ___________________________________________________________________
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "N&W Mailing List" <mailing-list at nwhs.org>
> > To: "N&W Mailing List" <mailing-list at nwhs.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 11:09 PM
> > Subject: Double Stacks on the Pocahontas Division
> >
> >
> > > Some recent Mail List questions have addressed the routes of
double stack
> > > intermodal trains through Roanoke, and replies have pointed out
how the
> > > numerous relatively low tunnels on the former N & W Pocahontas
Division
> > > prohibit the operation of double stacks there.
> > >
> > > Mail List subscribers may be interested in the following article
from the
> > > current issue of Progressive Railroading about plans to remedy the
> problem
> > > on the Pocahontas Division.
> > >
> > > Gordon Hamilton
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > HEARTLAND CORRIDOR
> > >
>
> > > The planners of a $266 million, three-state intermodal corridor
will meet
> > > sometime this month to discuss the project. Norfolk Southern
Railway, the
> > > Kanawha Valley Local Port District, West Virginia Public Port
Authority,
> > > Ohio Rail Development Commission, Ohio Department of
Transportation and
> > > Virginia Port Authority plan to build the "Heartland Corridor," a
> > dedicated
> > > double-stack container line between Norfolk, Va., ports and Columbus,
> > Ohio.
> > >
> > > The project would include upgrading NS' lines, reconstructing 28 rail
> > > tunnels and 24 overhead obstructions, and building intermodal ramps in
> > > Roanoke, Va., Pritchard, W. Va., and Columbus, where an Ohio River
port
> > > facility, industrial park and warehouse would tie-in to the ramp.
> > >
> > > The corridor is designed to capitalize on NS' routes, inland ports
along
> > > the Ohio River and adjacent interstates to increase the river basin's
> > > intermodal traffic volume.
> > >
>
> > > The project will address facility requirements to accommodate a
projected
> > > 200 percent increase in South American import and export traffic per a
> > > recent Latin American trade and transportation study, corridor
planners
> > > believe.
> > >
> > > "[The district] wants to be ready to capitalize on this intermodal
> > > transportation trend as an economic generator for the vitality of the
> > > entire three-state region," said Kanawha Valley Local Port District
> > > Director Stephen Weir in a prepared statement.
> > >
> > >
More information about the NW-Mailing-List
mailing list