Author Topic: The new Missouri Valley Western  (Read 37413 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MVW

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1456
  • Respect: +364
Re: The new Missouri Valley Western
« Reply #225 on: August 12, 2021, 11:20:01 PM »
0
All good points, Otto.  :D

Yep, reefer loads need to be iced. Armstrong packing has an icehouse capable of serving a half-dozen cars; I expect to run two strings of reefers through there for icing and pre-cooling before spotting for loading. Other eastbound reefers, well, I believe the UP had the country's largest icing facility in Omaha. I'm assuming anything else heading east is iced and ready to roll straight through.

As far as the 28-hour rule for livestock, I'm using that as the reason for hustling in-bound stock cars directly to Armstrong packing for unloading.

Yes, I'm aware loaded stock cars are normally positioned forward to minimize injuries due to slack. I have loaded stock cars at the mid-point of trains, so I don't know if I'm necessarily violating protocol. And to be honest, if I am, I may just fudge this in order to make the operating scheme work.  :)

Finally, you're right again regarding the normal flow of loads and empties, and that empties would normally move as tonnage. But in this case, the C&NW had seven time freights scheduled between Chicago and Council Bluffs/Omaha each day, and I'm fairly certain empty reefers were often in their westbound consists just to maintain an adequate supply for the packing houses. I'm assuming the same was likely true for stock cars during peak shipping season (which is everyday on our railroads  :D).

The next decision I'll likely need to make is whether to schedule any more time freights, or start planning for traffic that necessitates daily extras to move at the dispatcher's discretion.

That's my twisted logic, anyway. But I can usually be talked down, if necessary.  :D You guys saved me from sedum trees.

I appreciate your taking the time to comment, Otto. Hope this makes sense.

Jim

Cajonpassfan

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 5393
  • Respect: +1961
Re: The new Missouri Valley Western
« Reply #226 on: August 13, 2021, 01:22:03 AM »
0
Yes Jim, it does, and besides, it’s your railroad :D
I only commented because I too am attempting to develop a plausible operating scheme for my (west coast) railroad. Doing so, I learned how traffic moved, and how important it is to distinguish between loads and empties even if we can’t tell looking at house cars (boxcars, reefers etc). It’s an interesting exercise resulting in generic trains just not making sense anymore; they each had a very specific purpose and consist. Have fun,
Otto

MVW

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1456
  • Respect: +364
Re: The new Missouri Valley Western
« Reply #227 on: August 13, 2021, 09:22:36 AM »
0
It’s an interesting exercise resulting in generic trains just not making sense anymore; they each had a very specific purpose and consist.

That's the way I've looked at. Every train has a purpose, and it sounds like for both of us a good part of the fun is trying to find out or figure out how the different movements fit together.

And looking back through my notes, I see that train #117 (the counterpart to #256) included tonnage as a regular part of its consist, even though it was a time freight, so it seems plausible #117 was used to keep the slaughterhouses supplied with empty reefers. It was definitely used to keep empty tank cars flowing to Wyoming.

I wish I had more information on the rest of C&NW's freight fleet for this time and place, but I think I've tapped just about all of the readily available resources.

Jim


MVW

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1456
  • Respect: +364
Re: The new Missouri Valley Western
« Reply #228 on: August 13, 2021, 08:23:25 PM »
0
I learned how traffic moved, and how important it is to distinguish between loads and empties even if we can%u2019t tell looking at house cars (boxcars, reefers etc). It%u2019s an interesting exercise resulting in generic trains just not making sense anymore; they each had a very specific purpose and consist. Have fun,
Otto

This is absolutely true, but I guess I never really just came out and said how I was trying to adhere to these principles.  :facepalm:  :)

Givens

- Balloon staging at both ends; no switching in staging.

- 24-hour cycle, with through trains running from staging to staging, laying over, and returning as opposing trains to their original starting point (thus re-staging).

- Each time a through train stops in Cedricsburg, anywhere from 1/3 to 1/2 of its consist will be switched out, and replaced by the appropriate outbound traffic from Cedricsburg Yard.

The goal is for through trains that not only continuously re-stage, but are blocked in the correct order to maximize traffic flow by minimizing switching time in Cedricsburg ... all while being mindful of SOPs. Some very nice side benefits of this exercise include understanding how scheduling these trains affects staging, and calculating how many cars of different types I'll need to fill my roster to full operational capacity.

I'll be posting more about this in a bit, but here's how this works out: #256/#117 will handle a total of 43 cars during an average session, based on the blocking diagram posted earlier; 15 of these cars won't leave the train during a session, meaning it's moving 28 cars to and from online industries in our 24-hour cyrcle. (But it could be moving as many as 33, since it carries a block of five reefers that never leave the train, representing bridge traffic between Omaha and the NYC.)

Staging will consist of five concentric loops, capable of holding about 185 40' cars. Train #256/#117, with its full complement of double-headed power, 25 cars and caboose, would be the size of the second-smallest of the concentric staging loops. (The same length as the longest track in my A/D yard.) It occupies 16% of staging, but that's misleading, because we're not going to be breaking up trains to maximize staging.

Jim

« Last Edit: August 13, 2021, 08:30:10 PM by MVW »

MVW

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1456
  • Respect: +364
Re: The new Missouri Valley Western
« Reply #229 on: August 15, 2021, 07:56:26 PM »
0


I made a list of all the industries in Cedricsburg and West Cedricsburg, and the maximum number of each car type they could hold. From there, I calculated the maximum number of cars those industries could accommodate in a single 24-hour session. Finally, I boiled that down to my arbitrary “ideal” session traffic rate, which turned out to be about 85% of capacity.

That tells us that during an average ops session, I'd expect to handle a total of 62 cars, moving to and from the (soon-to-be) nine online industries.

What else does that tell us? Well, let's look at the Calumet and the Arksarben. As mentioned earlier, #256/#117 will handle a total of 43 cars during an “ideal” session, based on the blocking diagram posted earlier; 15 of these cars won't leave the train during a session, meaning it's moving 28 cars to and from online industries. But it could be moving as many as 33, since it carries a block of five reefers that never leave the train, representing bridge traffic between Omaha and the NYC.

We're hoping to move 62 cars. If 28 are handled by #256/#117, and 33 are handled by #258/#251 … well that gets us pretty damn close.

I'll have to look at the type of traffic I can move on #258/#251, but I might be able to build everything around these four freights, which are really just two freights as far as staging is concerned.

And that's really cool, because I'm 'bout ready to embark on a little intermediate expansion phase that will give me three passing tracks for staging at both ends of the line. And I'll finally ... finally ... be able to move full trains in and out of town, rather than just pretend they're gone.

But I still won't have a loop for roundy-round fun. That's gonna have to wait a bit yet.  :(

Jim