The Fraser and Thompson River Canyons: One of the Heaviest Corridors in North America - Trains Magazine
Adrian said, "Actually, CN runs grain trains that exceed 10,000 feet that ARE loaded from the prairies to Vancouver."
No one said anything to the contrary that I can see. Nor did I say the 9500-train was the average train size. It was simply to point out that if you're talking about the number of trains on the one hand total tonnage on the other, then empties trains offset the loaded trains.
BNSF is running several stack trains out of Southern California at 10,000 and 12,000 feet. This has been going on for several years. They can be 10,000 tons. Other stack trains are not as big - about 8,000 to 9,000 tons, but the sheer volume - 20 per day each way many days - makes the tonnage add up. And this doesn't count priority intermodal traffic (Z trains, mostly), which are relatively light but can be 10 trains in each direction. And, it's very important to remember that while all traffic can ebb and flow, grain traffic can be very seasonal, though it's more balanced than it used to be. Still, the flow of stack trains tends to be much more regular in volume than grain trains based on a year-round operation.
As far as mechandise traffic. Sure, CN might run some at 10,000 feet, but they don't run as many. California's population approaching 40 million assures there are more such trains on BNSF and UP than there would be on CN and CP. Depending on the transportation service plan in place at the time, a place like Winslow, AZ can see westward merchandise trains in one day originating at Belen, Clovis, Amarillo, Slaton/Lubbock, Tulsa, Fort Worth, Temple, Houston, Kansas City, and Galesburg in multiple sections along with eastward counterparts. (Makeup trains to bypass hump yards occur regularly from places like Omaha, Sioux City, Springfield, or Memphis.) Again, the sheer volume would easily overcome longer trains on CN or CP. In other words, especially with regard to general merchandise, the fact that California has a greater population than all of Canada alone explains why routes to/from it would have greater amount of such traffic, not to mention its proximity to other major population centers in the Southern U.S. Or, think of it is this way: With regard to general merchandise or intra-continental TOFC or container traffic, it matters not how long the train is; all that matters is the amount of it, and there's a whole lot more that wants to go to or from California than Vancouver, BC.
And, I'll still vote for BNSF and UP along the Columbia River over CP and CN along the Fraser/Thompson as far as tonnage. Trains might not all be as large as on CN or maybe CP, but there is more. There is some coal traffic (for Centralia, WA and Roberts Bank, BC), several crude trains daily (to a variety of ports, like Port Westward, Tacoma, Arco, and Cherry Point), as well as many grain trains (over 20 per day is not unsual, and as stated earlier, just about all the unit train traffic on BNSF is loaded - BNSF has delivered as many as 17 unit grain trains in one 24 hour period to west coast ports in the Pacific Northwest). BNSF also will run loaded stack trains from Tacoma (and sometimes Seattle) via the Columbia River Gorge when the Scenic subdivision is full; and of course ALL UP traffic goes this way. And, much like California, when it comes merchandise traffic which can tend to be non-export, the population base in Western Washington and Western Oregon eclipses that of Vancouver, BC several times over. So much more of it, that it makes the "longer train" point moot.
The average number of trains on BNSF alone along the Columbia River is rarely less than 40 and can be as high as 50. Add in 20-25 on the UP side, and that most of the BNSF trains are loaded, there's easily more tonnage along the Columbia than the Fraser, including grain trains off CN at Vancouver and CP at Sweet Grass, Montana going to California!
