VentureForth
Engineer
You can almost be rest assured that if Amtrak & The States get the funding and "save" the current routing, BNSF will find an excuse to keep running their own trains on it.
Bill to Save Southwest Chief
- Thread starter Chas
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
XHRTSP
Lead Service Attendant
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2014
- Messages
- 327
Assuming the funds can be identified, at that point would it be as cost effective for Amtrak or local agencies to just buy the line outright? Then charge the freight rent?
Any guesses in terms of cost? How many miles of line are we talking? 700, almost 800 miles?
VentureForth
Engineer
And then I want to see them rehabilitate the line from Pueblo through the Royal Gorge and up through Leadville...
Oh, I suppose that's narrow gauge...
Oh, I suppose that's narrow gauge...
Why? They don't run trains on it now and they own and maintain it. What's the source of the traffic?
Last edited by a moderator:
VentureForth
Engineer
They don't run on it because they want to abandon it. If it's paid for and maintained by someone else, they will likely use it.
When they threatened to abandon completely the line between Belen and Trinidad, New Mexico bought the whole route for like $90 Mil or something. If they refused the section from Lamy to Trinidad, they would have been charged like $87 Mil (These are off my head numbers from something that happened 10 years ago). When NM bought the whole section, with the off chance that Colorado would buy from Trinidad to Denver, BNSF suddenly started running trains on that track again. I don't have source info for all this - just what I experienced watching while I lived there.
When they threatened to abandon completely the line between Belen and Trinidad, New Mexico bought the whole route for like $90 Mil or something. If they refused the section from Lamy to Trinidad, they would have been charged like $87 Mil (These are off my head numbers from something that happened 10 years ago). When NM bought the whole section, with the off chance that Colorado would buy from Trinidad to Denver, BNSF suddenly started running trains on that track again. I don't have source info for all this - just what I experienced watching while I lived there.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
If they are really interested in maintaining some level of access to that trackage I am surprised that they are not simply trying to do a CSX-NY State like lease deal maintaining trackage rights. The whole thing might be more palatable for all sides involved since the amount of money immediately required would be much less.
Ispolkom
Engineer
Perhaps BNSF is relying on its recent experience in North Dakota. It failed to get any response until it announced that it would rather abandon through service on the Devils Lake subdivision than pay the $100 million to fix flooding issues at Churchs Ferry. Given the amount of traffic that line now sees, I'm wondering if BNSF wasn't being a wee bit disingenuous in order to get government help to pay for the Churchs Ferry project.
Perhaps we see a similar strategy here, where BNSF would be quite happy to keep an alternate route open at someone else's expense. One problem with a lease deal might have to do with the fact that you'd involve 2 state governments, run by governors of different parties with quite different interests.
N
Nathanael
Guest
Governor Richardson of New Mexico arranged to buy the line for, I kid you not, $5 million dollars. Cheap. Governor Martinez actually broke the contract deliberately, and really got nothing for it.
I think there's going to be a "once bitten twice shy" feeling about selling that line -- cash upfront and close tomorrow or no deal.
N
Nathanael
Guest
Ah. Mountains bore me. I've never seen the Panhandle, though...
I've thought about whether it would make sense to reroute the Zephyr on the "Overland" route. It would be much faster and more reliable. *However*, there's a huge amount of "ski traffic" on the present California Zephyr route, and no online passenger traffic to speak of on the Overland route through empty Wyoming. So unless a separate set of "Ski Trains" ran on the D&RG route, it wouldn't make sense. If the tourist traffic ever gets taken over by special corridor trains, perhaps funded by the state of Colorado, then I think within a few years you'll see people seriously suggesting a reroute of the CZ. But it doesn't look like that's going to happen any time soon.
I do wonder how much BNSF really wants to abandon the route. If the Transcon is out for some reason, this is their only route east from LA, and with the wild surges in traffic over the last decade or so abandoning capacity seems to be a questionable move. They've been burned with cut capacity plenty lately, after all, though to be fair the practice of transferring part of a (former) main line to another operator and then using it has precedent.
True. In 1983, the (then) BN mothballed but did not completely abandon their former NP route from Pasco to Auburn over Stampede Pass. In 1986, the BN sold the portion of the line from Pasco to Cle Elum, WA to shortline operators Washington Central Railroad. However, in 1996, to alleviate some of the congestion with the ever-increasing traffic generated by (now) BNSF, the BNSF reacquired the line from the Central Washington Railroad and resumed operations between Pasco and Auburn, over Stampede Pass. WIth freight traffic ever increasing in the Pacific Northwest, BNSF is beginning to rue the day they abandoned and removed the rails from the former SP&S route between Spokane and Pasco. There has been some talk, likely not too serious, of rebuilding that route, and/or acquiring the old Milwaukee Road right-of-way between Tacoma and the tiny town of Lind, WA, some 80 miles southwest of Spokane, where the BNSF's Northern Pacific line meets the old Milwaukee Road right-of-way, and rebuilding the rails on it. This route traversed Snoqualmie Pass. Likely that's not too serious a proposal either due to the very high costs to do so.
Last edited by a moderator:
VentureForth
Engineer
To reiterate, the $5 mil (?) was only to tack on the distance between Lamy and Trinidad and had to be bought with the rest of the line to Belen.
Though the return on investment may have taken a while, I think BNSF would be paying lease back before too long when the Transcon and the Northern routes are maxed out.
Feds and State should be looking at how much BNSF revenue is being hauled on the recently refurbished routes that were ready for abandonment.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3 using the Android Amtrak Forums mobile app
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,659
If I remember rightly how it was reported in Trains magazine at the time, they didn't just resume running trains on the old tracks, but spent quite a bit of cash bringing the route back up to standards.
Devil's Advocate
⠀⠀⠀
Wow, what a mess. Rather unfortunate for New Mexico to elect a bad faith governor.
There used to be a separate Ski Train for nearly 70 years. First there was the worldwide economic turmoil caused by a market bubble here in the US. Then there was the resulting credit market implosion. Finally there was a large increase in liability requirements imposed by Amtrak (possibly at Union Pacific's request or insistence). And that was the end of the Ski Train. According to Amtrak the hardware that had been fine for decades was now unsafe to run, although it appears to still be in use on other routes.
Last edited by a moderator:
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Besides it would be a reversal on part of Amtrak since it is they who tried and worked very very hard to move the train from the UP Overland Route to the then D&RGW route in the first place.
They did spend millions on upgrading the line. Unfortunately, the biggest improvement they could have done has, so far as I can tell, not been done yet, and that is enlarge the Stampede Pass Tunnel in order to allow double-stacked intermodal cars. At present the tunnel is too short for double-stack cars and this greatly reduces the Stampede Pass route's usefulness for transcontinental traffic. After the initial money was spent to get the line ready for traffic again, the line fell into some disrepair, limiting its usefulness even further. However there are now some upgrades being done to the trackage. There has been talk of providing funds to upgrade the tunnel but so far all it has amounted to is talk.
N
Nathanael
Guest
Ah yes. A great loss to see that end.
It wasn't a full substitute for the existing route, though. Apparently tourist traffic fills the train up to Glenwood Springs (33113 on/offs in 2013), and there's even a lot of traffic to Grand Junction (29826 on/offs in 2013). It's only west of Grand Junction that the traffic really drops off. So to replace the California Zephyr's role in the Rocky Mountains, I feel that you'd have to run trains all the way from Denver to Grand Junction. (Green River, UT and Helper, UT have insignificant traffic and Provo is connected to Salt Lake City by FrontRunner.)
Don't confuse the size of the station's town with the area that it serves. La Junta and Trinidad, Colorado, attract passengers from the cities of Colorado Springs and Pueblo, plus various other towns.
NARP press conference in Pueblo planned tomorrow, Sat., Jan. 25.
"A press conference will be held to discuss legislative efforts to save the Southwest Chief at 11am MST tomorrow, January 25 at the Pueblo Museum Rail Yard in Pueblo, Colorado.
"Local and state legislative leaders will be present to discuss their newly introduced legislation to save the train, which, without significant track maintenance, is at risk of being rerouted or discontinued.
"Representative LeRoy Garcia of Pueblo will be among the leaders present. This week Garcia introduced a bill that calls on local communities and private investors to partially fund the necessary upgrades to the track. The bill also proposed a new train stop in Pueblo, CO with the goal of increasing ridership in Southern Colorado."
"A press conference will be held to discuss legislative efforts to save the Southwest Chief at 11am MST tomorrow, January 25 at the Pueblo Museum Rail Yard in Pueblo, Colorado.
"Local and state legislative leaders will be present to discuss their newly introduced legislation to save the train, which, without significant track maintenance, is at risk of being rerouted or discontinued.
"Representative LeRoy Garcia of Pueblo will be among the leaders present. This week Garcia introduced a bill that calls on local communities and private investors to partially fund the necessary upgrades to the track. The bill also proposed a new train stop in Pueblo, CO with the goal of increasing ridership in Southern Colorado."
printman2000
Engineer
printman2000
Engineer
And another, stating that Amarillo is ready and waiting...
http://amarillo.com/news/latest-news/2014-01-25/next-stop-amarillo-lawmakers-scramble-amtrak-fix
http://amarillo.com/news/latest-news/2014-01-25/next-stop-amarillo-lawmakers-scramble-amtrak-fix
One could claim that with regard to the Sunset Limited east; but not in this case. If Amtrak reroutes, which at present seems likely, then Amtrak has to keep paying to run the train. Only if it remains on its current routing would Amtrak technically be getting some help, and even then not really. The money is really going to BNSF; not Amtrak. Yes, Amtrak won't have to pay BNSF track fees in that area; but that's a small amount of money.
Related question: has anyone seen published per mile lease/usage fee rates? ie, for a single SWC, what does Amtrak pay to BNSF to run from LAX to CHI, ie, what percentage of the ticket price goes to pay the track fees... don't have any sense at all of even the size of this number - is it insignificant, or is it large enough to be a determining factor in terms of routing and budgeting?
- Status
