Weekend Update 12/25/22

[nkalanaga]

Hilda is breaking one of the first safety rules I learned growing up, after "Expect movement on any track, in either direction, at any time."

"Never step ON the rail, as they're very slippery.  Step OVER the rails."

And, if you have to walk along the track, walk outside the rails, preferably off the ballast, if possible.

[Spruslayer]

That Hilda is a bit of a rebel. When she gets home some good old disciplinary action must be administered by taking her over my knee and spanking her. Problem is she seems to like it.Yet another hazard of being married to a redheaded vixen 😉

[craigolio1]

By the mid-1970's there was little traffic left on the CN Cowichan sub, apart from the terminal traffic around Victoria.  There was a proposal for the E&N to take over what little business remained (mainly the BCFP mill at Youbou), and to accomplish this, it would have been necessary to build a connection between the E&N and the CNR somewhere in the Cowichan Valley.

R.A. Fisk & Associates and Thurber Consultants Ltd were retained to study the options for connecting the two railways, and the report, "Tidewater and Cowichan Subdivisions Abandonment Study", was submitted in June 1979.  Somewhere I have a copy of the report, but all I have to hand at the moment are my summary notes.  Four possible connections were proposed: (1) Koksilah (behind Top Shelf Feeds), m 38.5 E&N Victoria sub to m 4.1 CN Tidewater sub, 0.6 miles; (2) Chanlog, m 13.2 E&N Lake Cowichan sub to m 70.1 CN Cowichan sub, 1.9 miles; (3) Kwassin Lake Rd, m 15.2 E&N Lake Cowichan sub to m 71.9 CN Cowichan sub, 1.4 miles including a bridge across the Cowichan River; and (4) Lake Cowichan, m 17.7 E&N Lake Cowichan sub to m 73.6 CN Cowichan sub, 0.5 miles including trestle across Lake Cowichan.  One of the problems in making such a connection was that at the two places where the lines were adjacent (Koksilah and Lake Cowichan), there was a grade separation between them.  The Lake Cowichan connection would have left the E&N alignment just east of the station, passing under the CN (or more likely, through the site of the former embankment), cross the river/lake (not sure which it really is at that point) on a new trestle, and picked up the CN alignment on the north shore (I assume).

If I remember correctly, the Lake Cowichan option was one of the more expensive even though it was of the shortest length, probably due to the trestlework required, but probably would have been the preferred option if the project had gone ahead, because it would have minimized the amount of duplicate trackage.

On my layout, I have assumed that option (4) was chosen, but that CN continued to serve the Youbou mill via trackage rights from Victoria.  This gives me another job on the layout, and a chance to run Rapido's GMD1s.  I have designated the connecting switch at m 17.7 as the new "Lake Cowichan" , where CN trains to Youbou will diverge.  No room, sadly, for trestle or E&N station building, but at least the track schematic is right.

That’s fantastic info! I had no idea that this was proposed although I had often wondering if it was ever considered.

Thanks very much for posting the info.

Craig