# Rail to Alaska?



## Striker

I've always wondered why a rail line wasn't constructed from Vancouver up to Anchorage. I know a lot of people use ferries to ship freight that far north and I know that the initial cost would be very high, but it seems to me that more people these days want to travel to Alaska and this might be a decent way to do it. Once connected to Anchorage, people could then board the Alaska Railroad and head up on to Fairbanks if they want.

Thoughts?


----------



## MrFSS

Striker said:


> I've always wondered why a rail line wasn't constructed from Vancouver up to Anchorage. I know a lot of people use ferries to ship freight that far north and I know that the initial cost would be very high, but it seems to me that more people these days want to travel to Alaska and this might be a decent way to do it. Once connected to Anchorage, people could then board the Alaska Railroad and head up on to Fairbanks if they want.
> Thoughts?


Find a topographic map of that part of the world. Alaska's state capital isn't even accessible by road, only water and air. There has been talk in the past about a railroad much further east that would come into Alaska, but you won't ever see one from Vancouver to anchorage. Too many mountains and glaciers.


----------



## jackal

There is a railroad as far north as Prince George (or one of the other Princes in BC--can't ever keep 'em straight), so any railroad connecting to Alaska would probably branch off of that one and follow the Alaska Highway north through Whitehorse, YT and then up to Fairbanks (then coming down to Anchorage via the current Alaska Railroad).

There has actually been more talk about it in the last couple of years--see here for more info:

http://www.alaskacanadarail.com

There's a good bit more info out there, too, that you can find by searching. I have some proposed maps saved on my computer--I'll see about uploading them and posting links sometime.

It'd be an expensive proposition, and frankly, because shipping by barge is twice as fuel-efficient as by railroad, there's not a huge push to do it, but it would be an awesome thing if it did happen. Tell your senators and representatives to support it!


----------



## printman2000

MrFSS said:


> Alaska's state capital isn't even accessible by road, only water and air.


Not sure what you mean by this. Google shows some roads leading into Anchorage from Canada.


----------



## MrFSS

printman2000 said:


> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alaska's state capital isn't even accessible by road, only water and air.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what you mean by this. Google shows some roads leading into Anchorage from Canada.
Click to expand...

Anchorage isn't the capital.


----------



## the_traveler

printman2000 said:


> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alaska's state capital isn't even accessible by road, only water and air.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what you mean by this. Google shows some roads leading into Anchorage from Canada.
Click to expand...

Anchorage may be a large Alaskan city, but it is not the capita of Alaska. Juneau is - and is surrounded on 3 sides by glaciers! Only the 4th side is water - thus you can only get there by ferry or by air!


----------



## Green Maned Lion

I'd wonder whose jurisdiction such a railroad would fall into, passenger wise. Amtrak? Alaska? An old-style joint-handling?


----------



## jackal

Green Maned Lion said:


> I'd wonder whose jurisdiction such a railroad would fall into, passenger wise. Amtrak? Alaska? An old-style joint-handling?


That's been a question of mine--if the rail line were built, would passenger service ever start, and if so, who'd do it? Maybe even VIA?


----------



## George Harris

What does this subject have to do with Commuter/Subway/Light Rail?

As to passenger service if any, it would probably run like the train to Toronto: Amtrak on the US side and Via on the Canadian side, maybe by the Alaska RR on the Alaskan end. The Alaska RR is not part of Amtrak. Like the Canadian remote areas services, there is no way something like this coule be expected to cover its costs.


----------



## Rail Freak

George Harris said:


> What does this subject have to do with Commuter/Subway/Light Rail?
> As to passenger service if any, it would probably run like the train to Toronto: Amtrak on the US side and Via on the Canadian side, maybe by the Alaska RR on the Alaskan end. The Alaska RR is not part of Amtrak. Like the Canadian remote areas services, there is no way something like this coule be expected to cover its costs.


Reading here reminds me of the "Bridge To Nowhere" controversy. Maybe the Bridge was like an Alaskan Stimulus Package!!!!!!! :unsure:

ps That was Alaska right?


----------



## Green Maned Lion

I'd say its different then the bridge because its connecting serious locations. Alaska isn't as empty as you're suggesting xD


----------



## JobMatchNow

That is a good idea I think the USA should invest in something like this, they could benefit from this by collecting more money through Alaska tourism since it would be easier for more people to travel there.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II

I'm not sure if ``there isn't even a road there'' is a valid argument here. ISTR that the Hurricane Turn Train in Alaska goes where no automobile does.

Also remember that Alaska makes a huge amount of money taxing oil production, such that they send checks out to their citizens instead of collecting an income tax. That means that the State of Alaska is in a stronger position to fund infrastructure projects than most other states.

That said, I have no idea what building and maintaining a railroad there would cost, and whether it would make any sense.


----------



## jackal

Joel N. Weber II said:


> I'm not sure if ``there isn't even a road there'' is a valid argument here. ISTR that the Hurricane Turn Train in Alaska goes where no automobile does.
> Also remember that Alaska makes a huge amount of money taxing oil production, such that they send checks out to their citizens instead of collecting an income tax. That means that the State of Alaska is in a stronger position to fund infrastructure projects than most other states.
> 
> That said, I have no idea what building and maintaining a railroad there would cost, and whether it would make any sense.


If I weren't busy at work (what am I doing reading AU? :lol: ) and weren't flying out in two hours, I'd do some digging and try to answer some of these questions. I have a folder with 1GB of data on the Alaska-Canada rail project on my computer.

However, I will take a second to address Joel's second paragraph:

Yes, Alaska is a resource-rich state. Yes, Alaska earns a good deal of oil royalties. Yes, Alaskans do receive a check (averaging about $1,000 and occasionally almost $2,000) each year (times roughly 400,000 applicants--total given away is about $400 million).

But like many states, Alaska has actually had several budget crises over the last few years. That oil money doesn't go directly to the state's coffers--it's placed in the Permanent Fund, which is a now-$40-billion fund that was set up to provide for Alaska's future if and when oil is unable to support the state anymore.

The dividends that we get are actually a portion of the earnings of that fund (which is invested in stocks, bonds, real estate, and all kinds of other investments). A certain portion of the earnings are used for inflation-proofing the fund, and then the earnings after that are split 50/50, with 50% going to Alaskan residents and 50% going to the state budget. $400 million is a tidy sum but not nearly enough to power the entire state budget for a year.

Now, with a constitutional amendment, the state might be able to tap into the Permanent Fund for a capital project like building the railroad, but Alaskans most decidedly do NOT like politicians tampering with the Fund. So for the forseeable future, the State of Alaska will most likely not be able to support such a huge venture single-handedly and will likely require substantial federal investment. (However, with the Canadians starting to support it and the Russians starting to become serious about a trans-Bering Strait link to the U.S., Alaska could well become the crossroads of Pacific trade, and we might stand to benefit substantially if we invest in such a link.)

Oh, and thanks, GML, for clarifying that Alaska isn't completely empty. While we do have the lowest population density (by far) of any state, we are indeed quite civilized...


----------



## printman2000

MrFSS said:


> printman2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alaska's state capital isn't even accessible by road, only water and air.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what you mean by this. Google shows some roads leading into Anchorage from Canada.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anchorage isn't the capital.
Click to expand...

Okay, I feel like an idiot. :blush:


----------



## MrFSS

printman2000 said:


> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> printman2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alaska's state capital isn't even accessible by road, only water and air.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what you mean by this. Google shows some roads leading into Anchorage from Canada.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anchorage isn't the capital.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay, I feel like an idiot. :blush:
Click to expand...

Naw - don't feel that way, when a lot of people are asked what's the capital of Kentucky, where I live, they say Louisville or Lexington, but its Frankfort!


----------



## Green Maned Lion

jackal said:


> Oh, and thanks, GML, for clarifying that Alaska isn't completely empty. While we do have the lowest population density (by far) of any state, we are indeed quite civilized...


Seems to be a misconception of snowbirds and other Floridians. They seem to think Alaska's population consists of disfavoured oil workers and a few dozen people with inuit names living in igloos. I guess because they have come to believe the NYMA is too cold for them, that nobody can live in a place as cold as Alaska, etc. Well we all experience temperature differently. Except for the period of December through early february, I tend to find New Jersey too hot. I've considered moving to Alaska many times, the only reason I don't is I'm worried about the cost of shipping for any of my businesses to the CONUS. *shrugs* When I retire, maybe- or if this rail link is built.


----------



## jackal

Green Maned Lion said:


> jackal said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and thanks, GML, for clarifying that Alaska isn't completely empty. While we do have the lowest population density (by far) of any state, we are indeed quite civilized...
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to be a misconception of snowbirds and other Floridians. They seem to think Alaska's population consists of disfavoured oil workers and a few dozen people with inuit names living in igloos. I guess because they have come to believe the NYMA is too cold for them, that nobody can live in a place as cold as Alaska, etc. Well we all experience temperature differently. Except for the period of December through early february, I tend to find New Jersey too hot. I've considered moving to Alaska many times, the only reason I don't is I'm worried about the cost of shipping for any of my businesses to the CONUS. *shrugs* When I retire, maybe- or if this rail link is built.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Try convincing businesses that we are domestic and they don't need to charge "offshore" or "international" shipping.

Actually, for shipping south, because it's backhaul and barges and planes go down less full than they come up, shipping TO the Lower 48 isn't that bad--it's coming up where they'll get you. Depending on your shipping needs and how much shipping you do, shipping by barge is downright dirt cheap; it's the small package services (UPS, FedEx, DHL) that are spendy (although, again, southward isn't much more expensive than NY to L.A.). And the USPS ships Priority Mail for the same price nationwide and Parcel Post for pennies on the dollar (though Parcel Post travels on the slow boat to China and can take two to three weeks to cross the country).

All right, I'm exhausted, having been up for 32 hours straight on 5 hours of sleep. I'm in my motel room a half mile from DEN Union Station, listening to train whistles to help me fall asleep.  (And I board one of those trains in 9 hours!)

Anyone in the UT/CO area between now and the 20th...I'm always up for meeting up! (And RobertF, don't forget about Thursday!)


----------



## George Harris

jackal said:


> the Russians starting to become serious about a trans-Bering Strait link to the U.S., Alaska could well become the crossroads of Pacific trade, and we might stand to benefit substantially if we invest in such a link.)


There are two proposals out and about.

A bridge - which I regard as a fantasy concept

A tunnel - this is feasible as an engineering project. It would be about the same as two English Channel tunnels end to end.

However: Economically it is highly questionable. Putin likes it, but that does not mean mean a lot with the Russian checkbook firmly kept in pocket.

The major problem with the tunnel (or bridge should engineering fantasy ever happen) is not the tunnel itself, but building the facilities required to get to it on both ends. Figure about 2000 miles of railroad - or road - on the Alaska side and another at least 2000 miles on the Russian side. The terrain on both side is some of the most difficult to build through in the world. In particular, on the Russian side the mountains go straight down into the sea. That I have seen a couple of times on Detroit to Tokly flights. And, oh by the way the Russian system is at a different track gauge. It would make sense as a railroad to China, which isn't that far from where you would connect to the Russian system, and the Chinese system is at the same track gauge as the US, and in fact very close in equipment standards.


----------



## jackal

George Harris said:


> jackal said:
> 
> 
> 
> the Russians starting to become serious about a trans-Bering Strait link to the U.S., Alaska could well become the crossroads of Pacific trade, and we might stand to benefit substantially if we invest in such a link.)
> 
> 
> 
> There are two proposals out and about.
> 
> A bridge - which I regard as a fantasy concept
> 
> A tunnel - this is feasible as an engineering project. It would be about the same as two English Channel tunnels end to end.
> 
> However: Economically it is highly questionable. Putin likes it, but that does not mean mean a lot with the Russian checkbook firmly kept in pocket.
> 
> The major problem with the tunnel (or bridge should engineering fantasy ever happen) is not the tunnel itself, but building the facilities required to get to it on both ends. Figure about 2000 miles of railroad - or road - on the Alaska side and another at least 2000 miles on the Russian side. The terrain on both side is some of the most difficult to build through in the world. In particular, on the Russian side the mountains go straight down into the sea. That I have seen a couple of times on Detroit to Tokly flights. And, oh by the way the Russian system is at a different track gauge. It would make sense as a railroad to China, which isn't that far from where you would connect to the Russian system, and the Chinese system is at the same track gauge as the US, and in fact very close in equipment standards.
Click to expand...

Good points. Only thing I wanted to address was the facilities on either side: from what I've seen, it's 1,200 miles to Vladivostok on the Russian side (closest road/rail connection) and only 800 miles on the Alaskan side (to Fairbanks or somewhere near there--maybe Nenana, as it's a bit west of Fairbanks, and the route could follow the Tanana River).

Still not disputing it being some of the hardest (and most remote) terrain in the world to build in--probably only Antarctica would be more difficult. The Alaskan side should be a bit easier, though, as there are no major mountain ranges in the way--the route would probably follow the fairly flat Yukon River basin and then turn up the similarly-flat Tanana for the connection to the Parks Highway and Alaska Railroad at Nenana. Try this Google Map terrain view.

Edit: Hmm...dragging that map I linked to the left, it might be more than 1,200 miles to Vladivostok--it looks a lot further than Nome-Fairbanks (but maybe it's just a quirk of the map projection). And, at least for the railroad portion, a good bit more building will need to be done on the American side, as the connection from Fairbanks to Prince George (or whichever Prince it is) would, of course, need to be built. (Maybe your 2,000-mile figure accounted for that.)


----------



## Joel N. Weber II

Are the Russians going to eventually adopt the same track guage as everyone else? Whether or not an Alaska to Russia railroad ever gets built, there's also the Europe to China shipping problem...


----------



## the_traveler

MrFSS said:


> printman2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> printman2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alaska's state capital isn't even accessible by road, only water and air.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what you mean by this. Google shows some roads leading into Anchorage from Canada.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anchorage isn't the capital.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay, I feel like an idiot. :blush:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Naw - don't feel that way, when a lot of people are asked what's the capital of Kentucky, where I live, they say Louisville or Lexington, but its Frankfort!
Click to expand...

And when you say you're from New York, they think you must be from New York City :angry: ! No - I lived in New York *State* (180 miles north of New York City) for 34 years!  I very seldom went to New York City - except to change trains of course!


----------



## Rail Freak

Green Maned Lion said:


> jackal said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and thanks, GML, for clarifying that Alaska isn't completely empty. While we do have the lowest population density (by far) of any state, we are indeed quite civilized...
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to be a misconception of snowbirds and other Floridians. They seem to think Alaska's population consists of disfavoured oil workers and a few dozen people with inuit names living in igloos. I guess because they have come to believe the NYMA is too cold for them, that nobody can live in a place as cold as Alaska, etc. Well we all experience temperature differently. Except for the period of December through early february, I tend to find New Jersey too hot. I've considered moving to Alaska many times, the only reason I don't is I'm worried about the cost of shipping for any of my businesses to the CONUS. *shrugs* When I retire, maybe- or if this rail link is built.
Click to expand...

Come on down and visit the Snow Birds and other Floridians in August! Come to think of it the Snow Birds are closer to Alaska then.

Seriously, I would LOOOOVE to visit Alaska by rail!

PS, GML, the point of Russia & Pacific shipping route is a very interesting subject!!!


----------



## George Harris

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Are the Russians going to eventually adopt the same track guage as everyone else? Whether or not an Alaska to Russia railroad ever gets built, there's also the Europe to China shipping problem...


Our track gauge (Canada, US, Mexico) is the same as most of Western Europe, but that is a far cry from everybody else.

Following is a list of places that use other gauges, just off the top of my head.

Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, parts of Bangladesh and India, and a few other places: 1.000 meters (3'-3 3/8")

Japan, Taiwan, Philippines, Indonesia, South Africa, New Zealand, parts of Australia and some other places: 3'-6"

Russia, Ukraine and most of the rest of the former Soviet Union" 1520 mm - really close to 5'-0"

Brazil, Ireland, parts of Australia: 5'-3"

Spain and Portugal: 1668 mm - really close to 5'-6"

Argentina, Chile, India, Pakistan, parts of Banladesh 5'-6"

In southern Africa, most former British colonies have 3'-6" gauge, most former French colonies have one meter gauge, most places north of the Sahara are at standard (4'-8 1/2") gauge

Otherwise, most places have "standard" gauge, including parts of Australia, and the Shinkansen lines in Japan.

Several of these places listed have some railroads at other track gauges than their main one.

Since India Railways carries more passenger volume both in pure numbers of people and passenger miles than anybody else, in fact I heard once more than all of Europe put together, does that mean that the whole world should convert to 5'-6" track gauge?


----------



## gswager

How wide is our American track gauge which it came from the width of horse chariot?


----------



## p&sr

George Harris said:


> Several of these places listed have some railroads at other track gauges than their main one.


Yes, like the USA where "Narrow Gauge" remains popular for Tourist Trains in many places.

In San Francisco (at the corner of Market & Powell), there are four different systems... BART, Light-Rail [subway], Heritage Streetcar, and Cable Cars... using three different gauges...

BART is 5' 6"

Cable Cars are 3' 6"


----------



## George Harris

gswager said:


> How wide is our American track gauge which it came from the width of horse chariot?


This little tale is in the Urban Legend category. For many years track gauge was whatever the individual railroad builder felt like it ought to be, and could be anything from around three feet up to six feet or sometimes more.


----------



## Guest

Rail Freak said:


> Come on down and visit the Snow Birds and other Floridians in August! Come to think of it the Snow Birds are closer to Alaska then.Seriously, I would LOOOOVE to visit Alaska by rail!


Me too, but I'm wondering if rail wouldn't have the same problems as the AlCan highway - having to be rebuilt every

spring? It's such a long way that a rail trip would have to travel rapidly, and if the tracks sagged and dropped away each

spring like parts of the highway do, it could make for a long, uncomfortable, maybe dangerous ride.


----------



## jackal

Well, there are tracks as far north as a couple of the Princes (George and Rupert, maybe?), and those are in the same areas as some of the highways that encounter the problems you mentioned, so if they can be maintained to safe standards, I'm sure tracks north of that wouldn't be _too_ much of a problem.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

At incredible expense, you can make pretty much anything structurally sound across anywhere and practically forever. Its quite simple in concept- piers/pillars drilled 100 feet down into bedrock and wet-cemented in. 100 feet into bedrock, mind you, might mean digging through 2000 feet of ice and muck.

Sitting somewhere on my hard drive is my plans for a home if I ever get the chance to build it. The design premise is that it should be able to withstand a 8.0 earthquake AND a F5 or Class 5 storm at the same time, require absolutely no maintenance to its structure for 300 years, and be absolutely fire proof to outside sources. I figure it would cost about 2 million dollars to build it as a 3200 sq-ft structure with minimal depth. Why? I have this thing for over-engineered, over-built things. I don't know why THAT is.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II

Does New Jersey ever see either an F5 storm or an 8.0 earthquake?

I think the really important thing in the northeast is just to make sure you pick a location that isn't vulnerable to flooding (both by assuming that the sea level may rise somewhat over the years, and paying attention to where the rivers are and where they will flood in heavy rainfall or snow melting). Then you could use the money you save by having a more cost effective house for a private railroad car, and/or to bribe Giordano's to open a restaurant in New Jersey.

With any vehicle, there are significant weight issues if you want to built it solidly enough to last forever with no maintenance.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Does New Jersey ever see either an F5 storm or an 8.0 earthquake?
> I think the really important thing in the northeast is just to make sure you pick a location that isn't vulnerable to flooding (both by assuming that the sea level may rise somewhat over the years, and paying attention to where the rivers are and where they will flood in heavy rainfall or snow melting). Then you could use the money you save by having a more cost effective house for a private railroad car, and/or to bribe Giordano's to open a restaurant in New Jersey.
> 
> With any vehicle, there are significant weight issues if you want to built it solidly enough to last forever with no maintenance.


If I ever build it, it will be in the most remote, unreachable place I can think of. If I have the money needed to build it, I don't have any need to earn more money, no need to go to any sort of job, and I can finally have the solitude I often crave. And when Marx's predictions come true, I'll be nicely out of harms way.


----------



## bobbyj

May I add my 2 1/2 cents worth to this discussion?

The former British Columbia Railway graded a ROW north from Prince George a few years ago, but money became a problem. At the same time they were running out of money, the U.S. denied permission to the Alaska Railroad to build a connection to the BC line.

The BCR was going to build to Whitehorse, the Yukon territory and the Alaska railroad was to build from Anchorage east to the border, with one of them building a connection.

The Canadian National has a track from Jasper to Prince George to Prince Rupert, (one can ride VIA's Skeena)

and take ferries from there to ports in Alaska.

If you like nice scenery--ride the White Pass and Yukon out of Juneau sometime! It, at one time, ran to Whitehorse.


----------



## the_traveler

bobbyj said:


> If you like nice scenery--ride the White Pass and Yukon *out of Juneau* sometime! It, at one time, ran to Whitehorse.


You will wait a long time to ride the White Pass & Yukon in Juneau. Especially since it departs from *Skagway*!  (And besides - Juneau is surrounded on 3 sides by glaciers and on the 4th side by the Inside Passage!)


----------



## George Harris

> The former British Columbia Railway graded a ROW north from Prince George a few years ago, but money became a problem. At the same time they were running out of money, the U.S. denied permission to the Alaska Railroad to build a connection to the BC line. The BCR was going to build to Whitehorse, the Yukon territory and the Alaska railroad was to build from Anchorage east to the border, with one of them building a connection.


Not saying it isn't so, but I never heard any of this before. The BCRR graded what was called the Dease Lake extension, with the possible final destination of Alaska, but it never got so far as rails being laid, and the "few years" is somewhere over 30 years ago. I think maybe even as far back as the 1950's

An Anchorage end connection to the ARR would be totally impractical if anyone looks at the terrain. There have been studies to connect Alaska and BC, but they have mostly aimed for somewhere around Fairbanks on the Alaska end. The oldest serious study was one done during WW2 for building of a railroad instead of the Alaska Highway.


----------



## jackal

George Harris said:


> An Anchorage end connection to the ARR would be totally impractical if anyone looks at the terrain. There have been studies to connect Alaska and BC, but they have mostly aimed for somewhere around Fairbanks on the Alaska end. The oldest serious study was one done during WW2 for building of a railroad instead of the Alaska Highway.


Plus, things are slightly different now than they were when these older studies were being done--the ARR's connection between Fairbanks and Delta Junction, which is about maybe a third of the way between Fairbanks and the Canadian border, is almost a done deal--I don't think anything's going to stop it now. Besides the shorter distance, the terrain between Delta and the border is FAR less challenging than over the Chugach Mountains between Palmer (just north of Anchorage) and Glennallen (the route the Glenn Highway travels on).

If passenger service ever materializes, routing through Fairbanks will add about 15 hours to journeys from Anchorage to the Lower 48, but it'll also make for a faster run across to Russia if the tunnel ever gets built...(a pipe dream, but...)


----------



## George Harris

For the location of the WW2 era survey for the railroad to Alaska, at least as it goes across the Yukon Territory, go here:

www.emr.gov.yk.ca/minimg/pdf/yukon_advanced_exploration_projects_2007_12x17.pdf

It is a large file: 7.7 MB

It shows the line as running, from British Columbia boundary to Alaska boundary,

Watson Lake - Ross River - Carmacks - Moosehorn. It passes about 140 km north of Whithorse.

From the look of this, Dease Lake would be about 120 to 150 km more or less straight south of Watson Lake. Fort Nelson, where the active north end of the BCR is located would be somewhere between twice to 2.5 times as far. I'll look at the Alaska end later.

The site, www.emr.gov.yk.ca/mining/mapsdatapubs.html#Maps has several other interesting maps, as well.


----------



## adkkev

From http://www.emr.gov.yk.ca/oilandgas/pipelin...astructure.html

"Rail System

The White Pass and Yukon Route (WP&YR) railway narrow gauge railroad was completed in 1901. There are 170 kilometres of track between Whitehorse and Skagway, Alaska, however, operations to Whitehorse were halted in 1982 following mine closures. Starting in May 2007 a new all-Canadian route Tourist Passenger Service will operate between Carcross, Yukon and historic Bennett, B.C. There are no plans to resume freight operations.

The Yukon government recently committed to contribute $3 million toward a joint feasibility study with Alaska to build a rail link from Alaska through Yukon and into northern British Columbia. Such a railway would provide benefits to Yukon and Canada and would support key industries in the North such as oil and gas, mining and tourism"


----------



## George Harris

> The Yukon government recently committed to contribute $3 million toward a joint feasibility study with Alaska to build a rail link . . .


 If they decide to do something besides study, call me. Otherwise it is simply another waste of time and money. If one percent of the studies that have already been done turned into reality, we would be putting some serious money into railroads. Right now all that money is being put into is appeasement of those that want to see something really happen.


----------



## jackal

I've uploaded the gig or so of data to Amazon S3 (much of the gig was uncompressed TIFF images of the proposed rail routes, so I recompressed those to the more manageable JPEG format). I'll need to sort through it all, renaming the files to more descriptive and less combobulated titles, and then I'll post some links here.

I don't think there is anything really newsworthy or earth-shattering in the files, but there are some nice maps and things.


----------



## David K. Beals

MrFSS said:


> printman2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alaska's state capital isn't even accessible by road, only water and air.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what you mean by this. Google shows some roads leading into Anchorage from Canada.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anchorage isn't the capital.
Click to expand...

The capital for Alaska is a ocean port city that exists without a highway access. The State of Alaska hasn't built a road to the City of Juneau.


----------



## jackal

David K. Beals said:


> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> printman2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alaska's state capital isn't even accessible by road, only water and air.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what you mean by this. Google shows some roads leading into Anchorage from Canada.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anchorage isn't the capital.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The capital for Alaska is a ocean port city that exists without a highway access. The State of Alaska hasn't built a road to the City of Juneau.
Click to expand...

Dude, you do realize that this thread is over a year old, right? 

On the other hand, thanks for bringing it up. For those who were interested in it, I never did get around to sorting all of the files I have on the Alaska-Canada Rail project.

I have them all uploaded, but unfortunately, Amazon S3 doesn't do virtual directory listings (since there's no such thing as a directory). I have to go through and paste the links to each individual file here (or create a web page that functions as a file listing). And while I'm at it, I might as well resize the 20MB TIFFs down to reasonably sized JPEGs, both to save you download time and to save me bandwidth costs (as insignificant as they are on Amazon S3).

Hopefully, I can get that done in less than another year...


----------



## gswager

Psst... keep bugging him to finish his project early :lol:


----------



## jackal

All right, all right!

Took me about an hour, but I threw together a VERY basic index.html file of the contents. I didn't do any transmogrifying or reticulating of splines or recompressing any files, so you're stuck with grabbing that 20MB TIFF image if you want to see it. (Y'all have 10mbps connections, right?  )

The number to the left is the file size in bytes (1,000,000 is one megabyte).

Here's the index.html file (clicking this link may force you to download the file instead of viewing it in your browser, strangely; after you download the file, you can double-click it and it will re-open in your browser to allow you to access the actual linked files):

http://s3.amazonaws.com/trainmedia/misc/al...arail/index.htm

Let me know if any of the links don't work.

IP.Board doesn't appear to allow the use of HTML within posts, or I'd just post that list of files here in this post.

Edit: OK, here's the direct list of files so you don't need to download the index file above:

813,284 2005_Org-Des_Analysis.pdf

1,026,560 2005_Org-Des_Analysis.xls

189,440 2006_Vehicle_Assignments.xls

547,330 1_BNSF2006_West_Coast_Corridor_Coalition_Jan_17_Review.pdf

1,547,883 2_Port_of_Portland_Rail_overview.pdf

3,515,084 4_Ports_of_Long_Beach_and_LA.pdf

2,273,846 5_Port_of_tacoma_wccc_rail_jan_06_pot.pdf

3,060,757 ALASKA.TIF

15,872 ARRC_Cost_Proposal-UAF_Alaska_Canada_Rail_Link_Feasibility_Study.xls

62,464 ARRC_Cost_Proposal_to_UAF-Alcan_Rail_Link_Feasibility_Study.doc

32,256 Alaska_Canada_Rail_Connector_Mileage.xls

21,551 Alaska_Canada_Rail_Link-News_Release_031706.pdf

24,064 Alaska_Canada_Railroad_Connector_Feasibility_Study.doc

53,760 Amd.xls

187,452 AverageCycleTime.pdf

3,791 AverageLocoUnitMilesByClass.pdf

42,496 BenefitsAlaskaCanadaRailLink.doc

3,132,749 CanadaRails.pdf

579,360 CanadaRailsV1.pdf

7,913 CarMileageByCarKind.pdf

365,741 CarUtilizationReport.pdf

2,313,381 CarUtilizationReportGenericCars.pdf

27,136 Chinese_interest_in_Buying_WP&Y_RR-Whitehorse_Star_March_8_WP&YR.doc

51,200 Data_Needs_from_Alaska_RR.xls

46,592 Final_Work_Package_Budget_to_UAF.doc

6,168 FreightMilesSummary.pdf

23,064 GrossTrailingTons.PDF

27,571 GrossTrailingTons2.PDF

31,566 GrossTrailingTons3.PDF

4,090 LocUnitMiles.PDF

3,791 LocoMiles.pdf

3,791 LocoMilesAverage.pdf

13,706 LocoMilesByTrainClass.pdf

13,706 LocoUnitMiles1.PDF

13,706 LocoUnitMiles2.pdf

1,899,584 LocoUnitMiles3.pdf

4,090 LocoUnitMiles4.pdf

7,915 MileByCarKInd3.PDF

9,274 MileByCarKind.PDF

11,022 MileByCarKind1.PDF

9,276 MileByCarKind2.PDF

11,024 MilebyCarKind4.PDF

3,061 PassengerFleetSummary.pdf

32,256 Press_points_for_$50_mil.doc

1,424,637 Revised_Alaska_Canada_Route_Alternatives.pdf

566,784 Screen_Capture-Alcan_Routes.doc

25,483 TrainMIlesSummary.PDF

2,345 TrainMilesSummarySummary.PDF

22,519 TrainTrips.pdf

22,519 TrainTrips2.pdf

22,519 TrainTripsByClass.pdf

7,828,749 West_Coast_Corridor_Port_Information.pdf

9,098 ZeroMIlesSummary.PDF

1,657,018 alaska1.jpg

33,840 alcan.dwg

19,229,231 alcan.jpg

1,158,016 alcanraillinkpresentation.zip

7,743,151 canada.jpg

2,443,030 carreport.pdf

19,456 locomotivefuelefficiency.xls

551,936 passengerridershipdata.xls

501,535 railroutealternatives.jpg

55,347 revisedroute.jpg

465,659 russia-transsiberian_railroad.pdf

9,519,105 yukon.jpg


----------



## AlanB

jackal said:


> IP.Board doesn't appear to allow the use of HTML within posts, or I'd just post that list of files here in this post.


Allowing HTML within posts can be very, very dangerous. Hackers can do very bad things to the board when that's allowed.

But I'm not not sure why you need HTML anyhow. All you made was a list of links, you could have just used the same link feature that you used to link to your index page.


----------



## PetalumaLoco

Index file downloaded quickly and opened ok (firefox)

Attempted to open each link, got the download or open with prompt, did not follow thru but am assuming the links work ok.

Except problems the the following links;

1_BNSF2006_West_Coast_Corridor_Coalition_Jan_17_Review.pdf

error mssg

"This XML file does not appear to have any style information associated with it. The document tree is shown below."

alcan.dwg

This is an AutoCad drawing file and requires a viewer or Acad installation (on my laptop anyway)


----------



## jackal

AlanB said:


> jackal said:
> 
> 
> 
> IP.Board doesn't appear to allow the use of HTML within posts, or I'd just post that list of files here in this post.
> 
> 
> 
> Allowing HTML within posts can be very, very dangerous. Hackers can do very bad things to the board when that's allowed.
> 
> But I'm not not sure why you need HTML anyhow. All you made was a list of links, you could have just used the same link feature that you used to link to your index page.
Click to expand...

Copy and paste, dude, copy and paste. 

I'd have had to go through and reformat that long list to BB code instead of just copying and pasting it into the post. Actually, as I got to thinking about it after I posted, I think it would actually be easier than I thought, since I think this implementation of BB code is similar enough to HTML that I could probably just do a find and replace and replace all instances of <a href=" to , and then any leftover "> to ]. (I think I got that right.)

 

Maybe I'll do that...

 



PetalumaLoco said:


> Index file downloaded quickly and opened ok (firefox)
> 
> Attempted to open each link, got the download or open with prompt, did not follow thru but am assuming the links work ok.
> 
> 
> 
> Except problems the the following links;
> 
> 
> 
> 1_BNSF2006_West_Coast_Corridor_Coalition_Jan_17_Review.pdf
> 
> error mssg
> 
> "This XML file does not appear to have any style information associated with it. The document tree is shown below."
> 
> 
> 
> alcan.dwg
> 
> This is an AutoCad drawing file and requires a viewer or Acad installation (on my laptop anyway)


 

I'll correct the filename on that first file (I left a space instead of converting it to an _ as I had in the index file). As far as the second one...well, I don't have Acad or any viewer, either, so I can't even tell you what's in it...    If anyone does, feel free to tell us or to convert it into a file format viewable by normal people!


----------



## PetalumaLoco

I loaded it into my Acad viewer and it was blank. Which makes sense, the file size was only 36k or so, and an empty Acad file would be about that size.


----------

