usmc1401 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If and when ACE needs the former SP ROW through
> Niles Canyon the museum may be happy. All the main
> line track would then be maintained by ACE. A big
> savings for the museum. The yard area would still
> be owned by the county district with no reason for
> the museum to leave. Since ACE is a weekday
> operation and the museum is weekend I see not a
> conflict in operations.

I really, really wish you were right, but! -- ACE already
runs weekend special trains from time to time -- but only
on the present UP (old WP) RoW. Might there be legal
and liability issues that might prevent the PLA/NCRY from
being allowed to continue to use the ex-SP RoW in Niles
Canyon once ACE starts to use that ex-SP RoW?

Please do not misunderstand me -- I VERY much want the
PLA/NCRY to be allowed to use the old SP RoW in the
Canyon in perpetuity -- but I greatly worry that events over
which the PLA/NCRY has no control might not allow that.

I think what ACE really needs is double track all the way from
Tracy to Niles, but that may not be necessary if they do not
encounter many freight trains on that line. Time -- and the UP
and the US economy -- will tell.

Margaret