Southwest Chief News & Future Operations

shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Tarm said:
Since I believe that the future of passenger rail in this country is to restructure the LD trains into corridors I would solve the SWC situation by truncating the route at Kansas City on the east end and Albuquerque on the west end. That would free up 904 route miles a day. The 904 miles could be reallocated to a second Chicago- Kansas City frequency (437 miles) plus a second Chicago-St.Paul frequency (410 miles). The Albuquerque-Los Angeles train could be flipped to a daytime schedule. All of these routes would be coach trains with their lower costs.

More frequencies, lower cost, better boarding times, higher ridership. Is Amtrak in the business of hauling passengers or is it just a rolling museum of 1950's train travel?

If we can't have more Amtrak we can at least have better Amtrak.

Tarm
Click to expand...
I tend to agree in principle, but adding CHI-KC/MSP trains would require state funding, which seems unlikely in at least the near future, as well as cooperation from BNSF and CP respectively. Restructuring the route is much easier said than done.
 
There's a little bit more information in this article which I feel like paint a pretty accurate picture as to where we stand right now. I still feel like there's hope to save the train as a through route. But what might just prove to be even more important from a long-term perspective is saving the line itself for future traffic needs (both passenger and freight).

http://www.hutchnews.com/news/20180626/amtrak-exploring-ending-southwest-chief-through-service

During a meeting last week between Amtrak’s CEO and a small Congressional delegation that included Kansas’ two Senators, it was revealed that the train operator is exploring ending passenger train service between Dodge City and Albuquerque, and implementing a bus connection on the route instead.

The proposal did not go over well with any of the lawmakers there, who had called the meeting to ask Amtrak to stand behind agreements it had previously made to upgrade and maintain its route through the south-central U.S.

...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tarm said:
Since I believe that the future of passenger rail in this country is to restructure the LD trains into corridors I would solve the SWC situation by truncating the route at Kansas City on the east end and Albuquerque on the west end. That would free up 904 route miles a day. The 904 miles could be reallocated to a second Chicago- Kansas City frequency (437 miles) plus a second Chicago-St.Paul frequency (410 miles). The Albuquerque-Los Angeles train could be flipped to a daytime schedule. All of these routes would be coach trains with their lower costs.

More frequencies, lower cost, better boarding times, higher ridership. Is Amtrak in the business of hauling passengers or is it just a rolling museum of 1950's train travel?

If we can't have more Amtrak we can at least have better Amtrak.

Tarm
Click to expand...
If they do cut the SWC from Kansas City to Albuquerque, do you really believe they would "reallocate" those "904 miles" into other trains?

I doubt it. Be careful what you wish for...
 
railiner said:
Tarm said:
Since I believe that the future of passenger rail in this country is to restructure the LD trains into corridors I would solve the SWC situation by truncating the route at Kansas City on the east end and Albuquerque on the west end. That would free up 904 route miles a day. The 904 miles could be reallocated to a second Chicago- Kansas City frequency (437 miles) plus a second Chicago-St.Paul frequency (410 miles). The Albuquerque-Los Angeles train could be flipped to a daytime schedule. All of these routes would be coach trains with their lower costs.

More frequencies, lower cost, better boarding times, higher ridership. Is Amtrak in the business of hauling passengers or is it just a rolling museum of 1950's train travel?

If we can't have more Amtrak we can at least have better Amtrak.

Tarm
Click to expand...
If they do cut the SWC from Kansas City to Albuquerque, do you really believe they would "reallocate" those "904 miles" into other trains?

I doubt it. Be careful what you wish for...
Click to expand...
I don't think it would be that easy. Wouldn't that ("reallocation") need to be ok'd by the host RR? Besides, time slots (on the host RR) are a factor as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don’t think Albuquerque to LA makes much sense as a day train. The running time is an hour longer than the Palmetto and an hour shorter than the Cap Limited. Add in the time change headed east, and you end up having to leave LA before any connecting trains arrive and still end up arriving late at night in Albuquerque. The schedule is best kept the way it is.

Kansas City to Chicago is pretty appealing. It doesn’t really parallel any highways, so the train is probably faster than driving (and some 90 moh running helps too). Beyond that, I’m not sure what the travel market really is between the two cities. The intermediate stops are pretty rural areas too, so I’m sure there is only so much additional train service they can support.
 
chrsjrcj said:
Kansas City to Chicago is pretty appealing. It doesnt really parallel any highways, so the train is probably faster than driving (and some 90 moh running helps too). Beyond that, Im not sure what the travel market really is between the two cities. The intermediate stops are pretty rural areas too, so Im sure there is only so much additional train service they can support.
Click to expand...
According to Google Maps, the train takes 25 fewer minutes than driving. Obviously the train can be late, but there is also often road traffic and extended stops on such a lengthy car trip. However, as has been explained here, that is unlikely to be significantly helped by what could happen to the SWC and would require state funding. The Midwest does have a lot of potential for corridor expansion (Duluth, MSP, Green Bay, Madison, Rockford, Quad Cities, Des Moines, Omaha, Lincoln, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Columbus, Toledo, Cleveland), but these need to be state ventures that should add to the LD network rather than replacing it.
 
Seaboard... Here's a freebie idea for you. Buy the old Santa Fe high levels... Buy some old E-8's and paint em in war bonnet, buy the raton route, and get a deal with BNSF for the rest of the route and re-establish the Super Chief.

Honestly if the service was done right, you could charge good money for the experience. I'd say run it out to the Grand Canyon either (I mean actually run it all the way to the canyon and let people transfer to the hotels there at the canyon...)

It's actually not that far-fetched of an idea, you'd just have to get the right funding for it.
 
crescent-zephyr said:
Seaboard... Here's a freebie idea for you. Buy the old Santa Fe high levels... Buy some old E-8's and paint em in war bonnet, buy the raton route, and get a deal with BNSF for the rest of the route and re-establish the Super Chief. Honestly if the service was done right, you could charge good money for the experience. I'd say run it out to the Grand Canyon either (I mean actually run it all the way to the canyon and let people transfer to the hotels there at the canyon...) It's actually not that far-fetched of an idea, you'd just have to get the right funding for it.
Click to expand...
Where will he find passenger rail liability insurance that can cover dozens of deaths, hundreds of injuries, loss of property, and hazardous materials recovery on fully indemnified foreign track? BNSF doesn't have it and won't sell access to anyone without it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
$$$. Ha. Ed Ellis could buy it, so it is something you can purchase, it's just apparently very expensive.

The most unrealistic part of that idea, in my opinion, is getting BNSF to agree to run the trains at all. You'd have to get the states involved to put political pressure on them I would think.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
crescent-zephyr said:
$$$. Ha. Ed Ellis could buy it, so it is something you can purchase, it's just apparently very expensive.

The most unrealistic part of that idea, in my opinion, is getting BNSF to agree to run the trains at all. You'd have to get the states involved to put political pressure on them I would think.
Click to expand...
Yeah and look at the financial shape Ed Ellis is in now.
 
MikefromCrete said:
crescent-zephyr said:
$$$. Ha. Ed Ellis could buy it, so it is something you can purchase, it's just apparently very expensive.

The most unrealistic part of that idea, in my opinion, is getting BNSF to agree to run the trains at all. You'd have to get the states involved to put political pressure on them I would think.
Click to expand...
Yeah and look at the financial shape Ed Ellis is in now.
Click to expand...
It's a shame it went that way... he was trying to do exactly what we all wanted. Dome cars. "Pullman Service." Food cooked on board. I was hoping it would last a little longer than it did at least.

I rode the Chicago to New Orleans route once and the Hoosier State twice.
 
I think the market might be there. No one has really tested it. I don't think Amtrak as a brand can ever compete in an moderately upscale market, yet look at what they can sell deluxe bedrooms for? (Meaning even if Amtrak tried something truly upscale, they're brand image is so bad, they wouldn't be able to attract new customers from that market easily.)

Ed Ellis's train didn't last long enough to see if a market was there, but even if it had lasted longer, chicago to New Orleans is not going to be the best route for that type of service. I heard from one of his employees when I rode, that they wanted to move the service to the capitol, lake shore, or Cardinal but amtrak wasn't being cooperative.
 
Ryan said:
Indeed. As much as the self selecting group of people here post about wanting nice things, the market (in both aviation and rail travel) has shown that cheap wins every time. There just isn’t a market for moderately luxurious service at prices us mere mortals can afford.
Click to expand...
Many of the luxury rail companies that previously existed eventually perished not because there was no market for their services but because they operated at the pleasure of a finicky host that may or may not welcome their business from one quarter to the next. They also weren't large and diversified enough to survive extended downturns in our disaster prone financial system. Amtrak's wishy-washy attitude toward luxury rolling stock is itself a symptom of this extremely uneven playing field. If VIA's Canadian wasn't forced to humor an adversarial host they might be able to attract more luxury customers and increase frequencies instead of suffering worsening delays and operational complications. Legend Airlines and Virgin America are examples of people actually paying more for better service. Until the momentum threatened bigger fish who either flooded the market with dumped inventory or simply swallowed up their much smaller competitor.

The hotel and restaurant market is a more practical market to enter, which helps promote competition and leads to more diversity at different prices and service standards. Unfortunately, starting a new self-sustaining passenger rail or airline service isn't like opening a new hotel or restaurant. It requires a lot more time and money, most of which will need to come from investment banks and venture capitalists, who are generally unwilling to stay the course for over a decade or more that it would take to build and establish a major force in the marketplace. The moment they see an opportunity to sell at a profit they'll gladly hand their investment over to anyone regardless of the impact or outcome. For these and other reasons it's lazy and disingenuous to blame the consumer for lack of meaningful choice in a supply side industry with an extreme cost of entry. If "cheap wins every time" was actually true then Amtrak wouldn't be able to charge more than first class airfare.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back to the topic matter. I have a SICK feeling that Anderson's plan for the SWC is going to become reality by Jan 1, 2019 because he isn't even bowing to the pressure of any of the local politicians along the route that would be affected by this plan telling him that this is NOT a good idea. There's little we can do to save the train if Amtrak won't even listen to the concerned politicians. My advice is to ride it while you can because Anderson's plan will ultimately result in the complete discontinuance of the train forever and ever.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anthony V said:
Back to the topic matter. I have a SICK feeling that Anderson's plan for the SWC is going to become reality by Jan 1, 2019 because he isn't even bowing to the pressure of any of the local politicians along the route that would be affected by this plan telling him that this is NOT a good idea. There's little we can do to save the train if Amtrak won't even listen to the concerned politicians. My advice is to ride it while you can because Anderson's plan will ultimately result in the complete discontinuance of the train forever and ever.
Click to expand...
You very well may be correct. But I am still hoping this is some subterfuge to either get a lot more funding to save it, or at least move it over to the Transcon.

We'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out...
 
Anthony V said:
Back to the topic matter. I have a SICK feeling that Anderson's plan for the SWC is going to become reality by Jan 1, 2019 because he isn't even bowing to the pressure of any of the local politicians along the route that would be affected by this plan telling him that this is NOT a good idea. There's little we can do to save the train if Amtrak won't even listen to the concerned politicians. My advice is to ride it while you can because Anderson's plan will ultimately result in the complete discontinuance of the train forever and ever.
Click to expand...
I have to agree with you, the default Amtrak position is clearly "no can do" rather than "this is what we need" in order to save this route. Amtrak is in the business of running trains, right? Or only the trains they want?

I booked a trip in July to ride #4 LAX > CHI before it and/or the traditional dining service goes away...and likely not to return.
 
The big elephant in the room is still Rail Runner. Even if every other issue is resolved, according to FRA's latest missives based on their latest status review. Rail Runner has very little chance of meeting the requirements for getting an extension. So much so that they are basically working on trying to get an exemption by cutting service to below some threshold that may be acceptable to FRA, and their plan at present does not include the Amtrak frequency.

And all this horse manure about using ATS to meet PTC requirements? Well that is what it is. FRA says so in a more pleasant round about way hiding behind the wording of the relevant legislation in their letter to the Governor of New Mexico.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As a side note... is the Raton Pass route nota potential viable shortline? If Strasburg Railroad can make money moving freight cars over 4 miles of track it seems there would be SOME potential industries on that route. Obviously BNSF isn't going to be looking for those industries, they just care about the big money on the transcon... but a shortline operation could buy it, build a freight business AND make money leasing the line to amtrak each year. (obviously amtrak would have to keep running that route...)
 
jis said:
The big elephant in the room is still Rail Runner. Even if every other issue is resolved, according to FRA's latest missives based on their latest status review. Rail Runner has very little chance of meeting the requirements for getting an extension. So much so that they are basically working on trying to get an exemption by cutting service to below some threshold that may be acceptable to FRA, and their plan at present does not include the Amtrak frequency. All this while the Senator from new Mexico is huffing and puffing at Amtrak, instead of at least getting Rail Runner to make one slot available to Amtrak.

And all this horse manure about using ATS to meet PTC requirements? Well that is what it is. FRA says so in a more pleasant round about way hiding behind the wording of the relevant legislation in their letter to the Governor of New Mexico.
Click to expand...
The sad irony here is, I recall a few years ago that Amtrak was Rail Runner's biggest source of revenue.

crescent-zephyr said:
As a side note... is the Raton Pass route nota potential viable shortline? If Strasburg Railroad can make money moving freight cars over 4 miles of track it seems there would be SOME potential industries on that route. Obviously BNSF isn't going to be looking for those industries, they just care about the big money on the transcon... but a shortline operation could buy it, build a freight business AND make money leasing the line to amtrak each year. (obviously amtrak would have to keep running that route...)
Click to expand...
What potential industries? There are none, as far as I can tell. That's why the railroads don't run anything there.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top