Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Old vs. New
Author: Martin Burwash
Date: 12-28-2009 - 19:48

A little late to the party here. I thought it was a good article so far as presenting one person's pet theory. Nothing wrong with that. True, there was a major amount of 20-20 hind sight presented, but still it is an interest "what-if."

I think in reality, most people grossly under estimate the scar the Wellington Avalanche left on GN management. I think, even 10-20 years later there still was the idea that for the GN to succeed over time, the heavy snow zone through Wellington needed to by by-passed..hence the new tunnel, AND don't forget, pulling the line out of the slide proned Tumwater Canyon. You have to look at both projects as one...with one major goal in mind, keep the rotaries in the roundhounse. To that end, the new alignment has proven to be a wise move.

In the 20's, diesel/electric locomotion, DPU's and the like could not have been foreseen. You can't even bring those apsects into the discussion if you wnat to remain true to the thought of the time. Electric power was a proven commodity at the time the surveys for the new line were being made, so it made perfect sense to make designs and decisions based on that technology.

Just a few ideas from a guy that's been up there a time or two.

Martin Burwash



Subject Written By Date/Time (PST)
  TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Question for Bob Kelly George Andrews 12-21-2009 - 17:42
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Question for Bob Kelly LWBaxter 12-21-2009 - 20:08
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Question for Bob Kelly Steve Carter 12-21-2009 - 21:45
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Why not add capacity this way? Throttle Hogg 12-22-2009 - 08:45
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Why not add capacity this way? Mike 12-22-2009 - 09:50
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Why not add capacity this way? George Andrews 12-22-2009 - 10:53
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Why not add capacity this way? Mike 12-22-2009 - 12:20
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Why not add capacity this way? up833 12-22-2009 - 12:29
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel Bruce Kelly 12-22-2009 - 12:35
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel douglasm 12-22-2009 - 14:02
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel George Andrews 12-22-2009 - 15:04
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel MILW tunnel Dilbert 12-22-2009 - 15:44
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Question for Bob Kelly Bob Kelly 12-22-2009 - 17:34
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Question for Bob Kelly David Smith 12-22-2009 - 18:12
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Old vs. New Bruce Kelly 12-22-2009 - 19:54
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Old vs. New Steve Carter 12-23-2009 - 00:02
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Old vs. New Ewal Zastrow 12-23-2009 - 12:26
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Old vs. New George Andrews 12-23-2009 - 13:14
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Old vs. New almo 12-24-2009 - 23:59
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Old vs. New Martin Burwash 12-28-2009 - 19:48
  Re: TRAINS article on Cascade Tunnel - Old vs. New George Andrews 12-28-2009 - 21:18


Go to: Message ListSearch
Subject: 
Your Name: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **     **  ********   **     **  ********   ******** 
 **     **  **     **  **     **  **     **  **    ** 
 **     **  **     **  **     **  **     **      **   
 **     **  ********   *********  **     **     **    
  **   **   **         **     **  **     **    **     
   ** **    **         **     **  **     **    **     
    ***     **         **     **  ********     **     
This message board is maintained by:Altamont Press
You can send us an email at altamontpress1@gmail.com