printman2000
Engineer
Maybe I am wrong here, but shouldn't the freight traffic be just about the same on this segment of the transcon as it is on all the rest of the transcon?
Southwest Chief Re-Route?
- Thread starter NETrainfan
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
BNSFboy
Train Attendant
It should except for a few trains coming in and out of the Red River sub,the line that goes to Lubbock and another line that pulles off of the transcon at Clovis.
VentureForth
Engineer
There's just gonna be a whole lot more Transcon. Right now, there is minimal traffic between Belen and Topeka. True, once they join the transcon at Dailies Junction in Los Lunas, it's the same ol' Transcon from there West. After the reroute, it'll be busy Transcon all the way from Topeka to LA.
Last edited by a moderator:
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
It's not that busy and the double-track will definately help. There's less booming traffic on the Southern Transcon and reliability should be fine.
MAW66
Train Attendant
I used my GPS last time and noticed 90 mph through portions of western IL, north central MO, and KS. The overnight through KS is pretty quick, and the train rocks and rolls.
There are several long stretches of 65-75 mph; the average speed for the entire trip was 60 mph.
The CO and northern NM portions are sometimes mind-numbingly slow. We were going approx. 9 mph through the Raton and Glorieta area, sometimes hitting a whopping 19 mph.
Keep in mind our trip is always CHI to ABQ. Past ABQ, I'm not sure where the 90 mph stretches are.
I'm surprised to hear of the Chief running 90mph in Illinois... thought Illinois was 79mph max. Bet he was speeding!
I last rode the Chief in December 2007 from Topeka (KS) to Flagstaff (AZ) and back. The speeds in western Kansas and eastern Colorado had not yet been downgraded to 60; it was still 79, and the ride was pretty bumpy. LaJunta (CO) to Albuquerque (NM) was 79mph, excepting the passes. Once west of ABQ, the Chief gets back up to 90mph. IIRC, the train does 90 all the way out to Barstow (CA), with some exceptions (e.g., Holbrook, approaching Flagstaff westbound, running between Flagstaff and Williams Junction, etc.). Barstow to LA is basically 70-79mph, I believe, excepting Cajon Pass.I've ridden this train the entire route, both directions, but it was back in the days when the train ran 90mph nearly the entire trip, including Illinois. Those were the days! Westbound was in August 1992, with Pepsi-Can Dash-8s and F40s for power. Eastbound was in June 2001, with 4 P42s and miles and miles of boxcars and RoadRailers on the back. Interesting times.
Last edited by a moderator:
G
Guest
Guest
BNSF has been pretty good at leapfrogging the Empire Builder and California Zephyr around freights -- on double-tracked sections with sidings. Not so much on single-tracked sections.
If the Transcon is *fully* double-tracked and a few sidings (triple track) are installed in key locations, I think it will be quite do-able. believe the plan *is* to double-track the Transcon completely; does anyone remember which parts are not double-tracked right now? If there remain single-track bottlenecks, it won't be possible. Perhaps the most annoying area will be the vicinity of Wichita, where BNSF currently uses "directional running" which Amtrak can't use; after reading the report on the proposed Heartland Flyer extension, it seems clear more double-tracking and triple-tracking from Mulvane to Newton in the vicinity of Wichita would be highly desirable.
BNSFboy
Train Attendant
I do know that it is double tracked from Waynoka, OK through Amarillo, to Belen, NM
I could be wrong about IL. I wish I had a breakdown on my GPS, but I just have the entire route with the average speed. I remember flying through western IL, but we may have been going 79.I used my GPS last time and noticed 90 mph through portions of western IL, north central MO, and KS. The overnight through KS is pretty quick, and the train rocks and rolls.
There are several long stretches of 65-75 mph; the average speed for the entire trip was 60 mph.
The CO and northern NM portions are sometimes mind-numbingly slow. We were going approx. 9 mph through the Raton and Glorieta area, sometimes hitting a whopping 19 mph.
Keep in mind our trip is always CHI to ABQ. Past ABQ, I'm not sure where the 90 mph stretches are.
I'm surprised to hear of the Chief running 90mph in Illinois... thought Illinois was 79mph max. Bet he was speeding!
My GPS has been wrong before too, especially when I'm walking. (I do not walk 45 mph.)
yarrow
Engineer
the station in abq isn't the old alvarado station but a new bland series of waiting rooms. looks kind of like the old station from the outside. the station in lamy is the old station and is really cool. i don't recall car rental in the station at abq. we have always taken the swc to abq and rented from enterprise which is just a few blocks away and will pick you up, i believe. the shuttle from lamy is expensive, imho so i would go to abq and rent or take railrunner.
Keep in mind that rail lines with frequent heavy freight trains get worn out more quickly than rail lines with passenger trains and less frequent lighter freights. If Kansas, Colorado and New Mexico could fund some maintenance along with Amtrak to the existing line, it might make for a smoother passenger experience. States have funded highway maintenance for years. It would not bankrupt them to fund some rail maintenance to keep passenger train service to smaller towns that may lack alternatives.
MikeM
OBS Chief
I think the deal breaker is that most of the passenger route is jointed rail, last replaced in the late 1940's. It's pretty much at the end of it's life, and since there hasn't been much major maintenance for a number of years, upgrading to CWR would be pretty pricey. Not to mention signal systems (including some semaphores) that are most likely due to be upgraded.
Although I suspect both Kansas and New Mexico governments will make the appropriate sad sounds and look for federal support and assistance, any real state funding to cover incremental maintenance will not materialize. Kansas specifically is currently looking to cut more out of the state budget after last year, where a number of tax reductions passed the state legislature. A block of moderate republicans that used to provide a swing vote on some matters like this were primaried out of office last year, so what is left is pretty conservative. I really would recommend taking any last Raton Pass trips in the next year or so if you want to see it before it goes freight only. There may be some limited spend on consultants to look at the route, but that will be that.
Although I suspect both Kansas and New Mexico governments will make the appropriate sad sounds and look for federal support and assistance, any real state funding to cover incremental maintenance will not materialize. Kansas specifically is currently looking to cut more out of the state budget after last year, where a number of tax reductions passed the state legislature. A block of moderate republicans that used to provide a swing vote on some matters like this were primaried out of office last year, so what is left is pretty conservative. I really would recommend taking any last Raton Pass trips in the next year or so if you want to see it before it goes freight only. There may be some limited spend on consultants to look at the route, but that will be that.
VentureForth
Engineer
I'll tell you what - when the Railrunner first started, it was going 79 on jointed track between ABQ and Bernalillo - under SEMAPHORES.
It truly was as smooth as most welded track I've been on.
My shameless plug for my ABQ and Lamy pictures...
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/6/4/6/9646.1154048400.jpg
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/1/4/4/8144.1104180300.jpg
It truly was as smooth as most welded track I've been on.
My shameless plug for my ABQ and Lamy pictures...
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/6/4/6/9646.1154048400.jpg
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/1/4/4/8144.1104180300.jpg
Last edited by a moderator:
TVRM610
Conductor
N
Nathanael
Guest
Thanks!
Google maps is my friend (though it may be out of date). Going northeast from Waynoka, OK, single-tracking starts at bridge at 36.708431, -98.785817, and double-tracking resumes at 36.775394, -98.725077. Single-tracking resumes north of Alva, with a long river bridge which is probably really expensive to double. Northeast of Alba there is what looks like a prepared second trackbed including bridges, but no second track (except for two sidings) for a long way. The second track kicks in at 26.912650, -98.563867 and continues all the way to slightly north or Mulvane. There's actually a couple of sections with three tracks.
(Yes, it was an absurdly self-indulgent use of time to follow the whole route on Google Maps. But Now You Know.)
I'm guessing BNSF is trying to complete the double-tracking from Mulvane to Waynoka. It makes plenty of sense for Amtrak to avoid moving until it is all done. The section from Mulvane through Newton and Newton is going to be an issue for the westbound because Amtrak will be going "against the flow of traffic" on the single-tracked line. The rest of it, well, it should cut significant time off the current schedule. More time will be saved with PTC, and if the train moves in 2016 PTC will probably be in place already.
Regarding crossing gates, the current trend when gates are replaced is to put in "constant time warning" gates, which the freight railroads want anyway, so that the warning time is the same for a 20 mph coal train and a 70 mph intermodal. (This means people in cars don't have to sit for long periods after the gate drops waiting for that coal train to show up.) Once those are in, the 90 mph timing is not an issue. These also get funded from road money for road safety. They'll get installed though it make take years.
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,655
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I'm not familiar with that location. Why can't Amtrak just follow the flow of freight? Even if passenger stops are affected, I think it wouldn't be the first or only station to be served in one direction only.
In New Mexico, there are two areas which have single tracks. One is bridge that goes over Pecos River, in Ft Sumner. Other one is dirt filled flyover over UP tracks, west of Vaughn. It'll take a lot of dirt to make it wider.
Latest double tracks expansion was in Abo Canyon which it was completed last year or two.
Latest double tracks expansion was in Abo Canyon which it was completed last year or two.
Serving stations in one direction only would be a rather undesireable situation. (I believe the Canadian does this on a stretch in BC, and the Texas Eagle did this for a period of time in AR & TX, perhaps.) For very minor stations, perhaps this would not be too big a problem. However, one of the potential stops affected would be Wichita, which in terms of population would be one of the largest Southwest Chief stations (although the timing of the stops would likely reduce potential ridership).
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,655
Thanks.
Then it sounds to me as though that could potentially be a major course of delay, esepcially if the dispatcher isn't totally on top of it.
N
Nathanael
Guest
Serving Wichita only in one direction? No, not a good idea.
Theoretically Amtrak's westbound could reverse in Wichita and follow the flow of traffic the rest of the time (Newton isn't that important if Wichita is served.) This would still make double-tracking from Wichita to Mulvane desirable, though.
N
Nathanael
Guest
I just looked at these on Google maps. The actual UP flyover appears to be double-tracked, but there's a long section EAST of Vaughn which isn't. Anyway, much the same situation.
The Davy Crockett
Engineer
I can't help but wonder how much impact the opening, in 2015 or 2016, of the newly expanded Panama Canal will have on the Transcon. When you read BNSF's website about the BNSF Midcon they say
What all this means for the SWC reroute is obviously unclear and is anybody's guess, but it is a factor which should not be overlooked.
but then here BNSF says expanded canal won't hurt West Coast ports. That seems hard to completely believe, as this article states:
That is quite an impact. Thus it seems fairly easy to see the high stakes involved for BNSF. The expansion of the Transcon may well have to do with remaining competitive, as its cheif advantage is speed, vs going through the canal. At the same time it would seem that freight on the Transcon could be reduced when the canal opens, therby possibly reducing the impact the SWC would have on freight traffic.
What all this means for the SWC reroute is obviously unclear and is anybody's guess, but it is a factor which should not be overlooked.
Last edited by a moderator:
henryj
Conductor
The actual flyover is single track. I usually stop there on my trips to Colorado and stay at the Belaire Motel and listen to trains going by all night. The best railfan spot, in my opinion, is down by the UP tracks where you can watch the BNSF rolling by overhead or the UP right beside you. To access it you take Walnut St off Highway 54/60 all the way to the railroad tracks and turn left. Follow that as far as it goes and turn right over the tracks. Take the gravel road to the left which takes you down to the UP tracks. I usually just park somewhere down there trying not to trespass on UP property and sit and watch the show. Since the flyover is single track, it makes a bottle neck. BNSF runs trains in groups when it's really busy, first one way, then the other. UP is not as busy but it's a crew change point so sometimes they have multiple trains down there. It can be a great photo location depending on the time of day and the weather. Great sunsets and sunrises and some great sky and clouds.
Not that I want to see it move, but I also think it's 90% or better that it will. It's just too much money to rehab the Raton line for two trains a day. As mentioned above, it's one of the few lines that still uses semaphore signals. BNSF had planned on replacing them, but cancelled it when they decided to abandon the line instead. Railfans love them, but they're a maintenance headache. Too many moving parts, they're worn out after decades of use, and replacement parts have to be scavenged or made custom.
Passenger trains are limited to 59 in "dark" (signalless) territory. Even though there's no other traffic on the line, signals are also used to detect broken rails or misaligned switches.
So the line is really suffering from deferred maintenance. Bringing it back up to full speed will cost more than anyone involved has to spend.
Passenger trains are limited to 59 in "dark" (signalless) territory. Even though there's no other traffic on the line, signals are also used to detect broken rails or misaligned switches.
So the line is really suffering from deferred maintenance. Bringing it back up to full speed will cost more than anyone involved has to spend.
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
I agree exactly. The Transcon should be much faster than the current route and the latter will just get slower and slower without maintainence. It is as if running on an abandoned line already.
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
Siemens Caltrans/IDOT Venture design, engineering, testing and delivery (2Q 2024)- Latest: TrimetWESFan1003
-
-
-
