RailRoadFan.com

When was the GTW single tracked between Bancroft (mp 248.7) west of Durand and Okemos (mp 227.49)east of Lansing? I recall this being in the mid '90s with all the removed rail being piled up in the sw corner of I-96 and M-52. I recall there being an article by Don Phillips in Trains about this.

Tim wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 12, 2022 12:00 pm

When was the GTW single tracked between Bancroft (mp 248.7) west of Durand and Okemos (mp 227.49)east of Lansing? I recall this being in the mid '90s with all the removed rail being piled up in the sw corner of I-96 and M-52. I recall there being an article by Don Phillips in Trains about this.

2000-2001 - same with Potterville-Walton

GTW Flint Sub Single Tracking, Don Phillips, Trains 4/2000p12
From an article about a proposed BNSF-CN merger;
I want to digress briefly here. If CN wants to grow traffic from Halifax to Chicago, why in heavens' name did it allow Hunter Harrison to single-track the CN main from London, Ont., to Sarnia, and the Grand Trunk Western across Michigan? There is already anecdotal evidence that this was a mistake with current traffic levels. And they're going to grow the traffic by removing capacity? Chalk it up as one of railroading’s truly odd moves.

I suppose they could buy the CSX line and do directional running.

Tim wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 19, 2022 12:57 pm

why in heavens' name did it allow Hunter Harrison to single-track the CN main from London, Ont., to Sarnia, and the Grand Trunk Western across Michigan? There is already anecdotal evidence that this was a mistake with current traffic levels. And they're going to grow the traffic by removing capacity?

Success breeds its own inertia.

The GTW had never been a strong financial performer. It was a short haul regional with too much secondary trackage. The CN as a Crown corporation suffered from too much track and too many employees. CN prior to privatization often had difficulty covering its expenses. With privatization and deregulation CN made a dramatic turnaround financially by slimming down what it didn't need and expanding in the U.S.

On the GTW auto parts traffic was declining as auto makers pulled supply operations closer to the assembly plants. The secondary lines were trimmed and small shippers got the message CN wasn't interested in small loose car customers. The GP38's were replaced with higher horsepower six axles. Short fast trains became fewer longer trains. Mainline capacity does not constrain CN traffic growth. Consider the west coast traffic Santa Fe and BNSF ran over large sections of single track. If it does constrain CN growth the second track is relatively easily relayed.

There was also value in the materials like rail and ballast reclaimed pulling up the second track and a reduction in capital costs as the last of the jointed rail was replaced on one track vs. two.

Paul Tellier launched CN's turn around. To a degree Hunter Harrison was a man in the right place at the right time.

On a semi-related note, check out the book "Grand Trunk Corporation" by Don Hofsommer. Really goes in depth about how in the 50s and 60s, GTW and CV were always money-losers that had to propped up by the CN year after year. I don't think a lot of people realize how close the GTW came to being sold off by CN. CN being a crown corporation was heavily scrutinized in the 70s by having US based subsidiaries that existed largely thanks to Canadian tax payer dollars. Visionaries like John Burdakin were very instrumental in turning around CN's US-based subsidiaries and making them into successful, money-making operations. A large part of that was pruning of unprofitable lines and services, along with some physical plant rationalization and simplification. Standardization of motive power and buying used locomotives whenever they could also kept costs low.

SD80MAC wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 11, 2022 11:13 am

On a semi-related note, check out the book "Grand Trunk Corporation" by Don Hofsommer.

It's an interesting book. Check it out if you can.

The first portion in MI single tracked under Hunter's VP-Ops tenure was Okemos-Shaftsburg, effective 10/25/99.

If the CN/KCS merger hadn't been blocked by the government the Flint and South Bend Subs would've been the busiest lines in Michigan and possibly the midwest by a good margin. That double track would've been missed real quick... even today it seems silly as there seems like enough traffic to warrant it.

I assume around this time the double track between Schoolcraft and Penn came out as well along with Valparaiso to Sedley?

Keep in mind the signaling.
It was double track ABS-current of traffic, north track westbound trains, south track eastbound trains.
It's now single and occasional 2 main track CTC.
That does make a difference in capacity.

MQT1223 wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 11, 2022 3:40 pm

If the CN/KCS merger hadn't been blocked by the government the Flint and South Bend Subs would've been the busiest lines in Michigan and possibly the midwest by a good margin. That double track would've been missed real quick... even today it seems silly as there seems like enough traffic to warrant it.

I assume around this time the double track between Schoolcraft and Penn came out as well along with Valparaiso to Sedley?

Valpo to Sedley was never double tracked. That was the one stretch of the GTW main that was always single track.