Q125/Q126 via GRP

[BL2-1843]

It has just come to my attention, subject to an early April Fool joke, that container trains Q125/Q126 reroute trains will run Chicago/Toledo via GRP starting next Saturday and running 4 days per week. Also if successful, will become permanent trains, although am not sure why they would want to do that. They had better start NOW to get people on board to have enough crews to run them.

[TrainWatcher]

Not to mention the trackage... Those will be the highest priority trains on the road.

[David Lang]

If this is true, I wonder if it has anything to do with the new North Baltimore Intermodal facility and the additional trains/congestion it may cause, thus creating a need for potential congestion relief i.e. the utilization of the CSX Plymouth and Grand Rapids Subs and track to and from Toledo. Just simply a guess on my part - I could be totally off. We will see.

I'm sure Doctor No and other knowledge CSX sources will weigh in and provide their analysis. It will be interesting if this becomes a reality.

David Lang

[MSchwiebert]

First problem I see with that - unless they did a crapload of work in the last few weeks is that CSX has no intermodal terminal in Toledo. Even if they did and found business to secure for it - why run it the long way and force the trains to negotiate all of the Toledo Terminal & Vickers when they could operate via Deshler and have to deal with neither?

[AveryRdhouse]

Well, here we go again. Remember the Iron Highway, remember the CP train's. The GR crew's will go out of they're way to get thing's over the road and try to keep the traffic here and Jacksonville will do they're best to screw it up. Anybody see a pattern here?

[sd70accsxt700]

Well Doc can correct me if I am wrong, but they must trailers/single stacks, because if IIRC 20'2" cars are not allowed west of Plymouth. Domestic containers are 20'2" stacked. From what I am hearing Q133/134 will now be running "somewhat" perminatly be running Cincy to Chicago via Deshler.

[rob]

There is no hight restriction on the Plymouth sub. The restriction was for the tunnel. Cp would ship the high cube container to oak yard, but if you forgot to set them off you would make round tops out of them. Rob

[cr7535]

Q133 and 134 are TEMPORARY reroutes to Chicago while they are working on the van site in Columbus.

And Considering Q125 and 126 run between Memphis and Atlanta, I don't see that happening. But, there have been several X101 and X102s this past week between Detroit and Chicago via Toledo, but they would have to add to the pools out of Grand Rapids if anyone stayed there.

[sd70accsxt700]

There is no hight restriction on the Plymouth sub. The restriction was for the tunnel. Cp would ship the high cube container to oak yard, but if you forgot to set them off you would make round tops out of them. Rob

Ok it must have been north of Plymouth then. For some reason I always forget that X500, and the old X502/03 (?) used to have stacks. Oh well that is what I get for trying to rember from memory.

[csxt4617]

Ok it must have been north of Plymouth then. For some reason I always forget that X500, and the old X502/03 (?) used to have stacks. Oh well that is what I get for trying to rember from memory.

X500 is the only one who'd have the 20'2" stacks (intentionally anyway ) I don't remember seeing them on any other train, except one time X534 had a 20'2" rack on it, which was caught before it left Chicago (I think it was set out on the IHB). I did catch an X501 once with a 45' APL stack on top west of GR, and it looked like someone had stomped on it from what I assume was squeezing it thru the tunnel...was really surprised it wasn't removed in Detroit. Anyway, I sure hope this Q125/Q126 rumor is true...will be nice seeing pigs thru GR again

[donnieland]

iirc when cp/cn aqquired the tunnel to windsor, cp lowered the track in one of the bores to allow
the passage of double stacks on the 500/501 etc, this was done in the 90's as i recall

[MSchwiebert]

The one tube from Detroit to Windsor did get lowered, but it was not possible to make enough changes to accomodate two "domestic" boxes - which are taller than the "international" boxes. (8.5 feet vs. 8 if I remember right) Not sure if there is still talk of a new tunnel to correct this or not.

[canpac08]

I was looking back over some of my old Chicago Service Area paper work about the Detroit Tunnel. this paperwork was issued after we sent a reroute train through and tore up parts of the tunnel. these rules only apply to the north tube of the tunnels since the south tube has not been enlarged at all. the safe double stack combination's for the north Tube are either 9'6" on an9'6" or an 8'6" and a 9'6". There was talk and it had made the Windsor star about a new tunnel in the works. I know this as fact. as for location of the new Tunnel it has been speculated as to be closer to Del Ray that part is all rumor the rest is facts.

[ETR#101]

canpac08, MSchwiebert & Doktor No, here's a link to the Windsor Star article about the tunnel from June 18th. And there's also a link to the short PDF document about it. The tunnel will be built in the same spot, but the old tunnel will remain and the new tubes should run on either side of it. I don't know how they'd get to Del Ray anyways. If it's from the existing portal making a sharp left, that's one hell of a tunnel lol.And it would be next to impossible to run a new line off the CASO towards Del Ray. It will also be deeper and longer to make the grade 2.15%. What I find odd is the speed limit will be 80 kph (50 mph). Isn't Sarnia 70 mph?

I wonder if the old tubes will be used in a service/emergency capacity, or if it will be used for an eventual high speed rail connection to Detroit.

The story:

http://www.windsorstar.com/Windsor+Detr ... story.html

PDF.....it's in the story but I thought it would be better to link it here so you don't miss it lol

http://www.crgateway.com/LinkClick.aspx ... d&tabid=74

[canpac08]

yeah thats the article I had read, The whole Delray idea was something some one at the terminal had brought up when I heard it I doubted it myself but we need a new tunnel. of course when complete it will make our high-wide detector obsolete. Of course I can;t wait for a new tunnel I hate the old one. Be glad when they retire it.

[MSchwiebert]

Wonder if one can wager at any of the Windsor casinos on which one gets built first - the second rail tunnel or the second Ambassador bridge....

[ETR#101]

Me neither, I want to watch them build it lol. I would actually hope they don't retire the old tunnel. It should be updated and used as a passenger train tunnel if/when the Canadian govn't start HSR in the Quebec-Windsor corridor, it would be a great way to keep freight and passenger lines separate. The CASO should be rebuilt for HSR service and the CP line can handle all the freight. All the new grade separations CP just made to Walker and Howard roads over here are ready to be double tracked at any time, just need to put the actual span over the roads.

MSchwiebert, I'd put my money on the tunnel. Matty's bridge is never gonna get built, and there's way too much contoversy over the new bridge in the west end. All though, I have seen the start of it over here. Just southeast of intersection of Howard and Hwy#3, they're beginning to build on and off ramps. It's weird to see them out in the middle of a feild with nowhere to link up to. Actually....one points stright at some guys house 100 meters away

[MSchwiebert]

My tongue was firmly in my cheek about which one would get built first I had forgotten that there are two bridge proposals out there. In any event I'm agreeing with you about the bridge most likely getting done first considering that the bridges involve the govt's'of two nations and the whims of one rather eccentric businessman

[trnwatcher]

So Dok you think the Q125/126 trains are training sessions to see what kind of issues they run into before the CN starts running their stuff from Chicago to Detroit? As Averyround House stated earlier, the Iron Highway in concept was on OK idea, but at that time this line had 8-12 CP trains and Q336/337 as 5-6 day a week trains. Even back then you where looking at least 1 eastern coal train coming out of Toledo for West Olive. Even Q334/335 where running 6 days a week back then I think. Things would sometimes run very slowly especially if crews where dying on the law and once the few sidings that could hold those CP trains got full things barely moved. Much more traffic on this line back then than now. If J-Ville keeps the staffing levels up where the trains aren't sitting for 12-18 hour stints like the CP's did at times, this could work.
I'm wondering if this isn't phase one of the idea of running CN trains one direction on CSX and the opposit direction on the ex-GTW. This rumor has been circulating for over a decade now. Like you said....until it's craved in stone....it's anyone's guess.

[David Lang]

"I'm wondering if this isn't phase one of the idea of running CN trains one direction on CSX and the opposit direction on the ex-GTW. This rumor has been circulating for over a decade now. Like you said....until it's craved in stone....it's anyone's guess."

Could someone explain why CN/CSX would do this - CN trains on direction on CSX and the opposite direction on the GTW? What is the benefit to this? Why would CN trains run on CSX anyway? Does CN do this in Canada, i.e., for example CP has all the Eastbounds and CN has all the westbounds or an I way off? Thought I heard something about that a while back.

It is VERY interesting, as Doc pointed out, why CSX is investing all this money and improvements into the line AFTER CP left. That didn't seem logical...until now.

David Lang