Bill to Save Southwest Chief

Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Chas, thank you for the reference to the television coverage by KOAA and the presentation by Mr. Duncan. I'm wondering out loud if he has spoken to the folks over at Colorado Ski Country USA, ski areas, hoteliers and other tourism supporters?
 
Pueblo would be a good addition to the Southwest Chief, if it didn't add something like an 80ish mile detour (looks to be in the neighborhood of 160 miles La Junta-Pueblo-Trinidad, versus about 80 miles La Juanta-Trinidad). I'll leave it others more familiar with the rail lines in question to estimate the added travel time (but I'd assume it would be something like 1-2 hours, or more).

If the desire is to save the current route between Newton and Albuquerque through KS, CO, and NM, then it seems the focus should be on just that, not on add-ons and route deviations that will likely increase the cost. Once there is general agreement between the 3 states (and Amtrak and BNSF, and whatever other entities or agencies might be involved), then CO could decide to increase its contribution to cover the costs of a Pueblo detour. But I don't see much value in complicating the current issue (current/existing/northern route versus a possible southern/Transcon re-route).

Personally, I have mixed feelings about the better option. I certainly see value in maintaining service to communities currently served (Dodge City, Garden City, La Junta, Raton, etc.). But, at what cost? And, there would be benefits of adding Wichita and Amarillo to the Amtrak system.
 
Pueblo's big tourist trade is to the south to the Gulf of Mexico. Mountain people love to vacation on the coast and costal people love the ski slopes in winter and the mountains and trees in the summer. It is a built in conveyor opportunity.
 
Eric S said:
Personally, I have mixed feelings about the better option. I certainly see value in maintaining service to communities currently served (Dodge City, Garden City, La Junta, Raton, etc.). But, at what cost? And, there would be benefits of adding Wichita and Amarillo to the Amtrak system.
Click to expand...
It seems like this has been in the works for over a hundred years, since Santa Fe opened the Belen Cutoff.

Unless somebody steps up with money, there's really no chance for the route over Raton Pass. With the current batch of Republicans, I really don't see that happening. And, like you, I'm not sure that it's even worth it.
 
Take into account the fact that State of Illinois has upgraded track from Chicago To St. Louis( even with PTC) and now BNSF is trying to purchase the line between Dell City (a suburb of Oklahona City) and Sapulpa (just southwest of Tulsa). Just a small step to connect to the Transcon at Avard via Enid. Intresting question-- Could this be a new route for the Southwest Chief or even a new name for the new route?
 
Not sure how a (near) Tulsa to (near) Oklahoma City rail line is or would be related to the Southwest Chief.
 
Eugene Small said:
Take into account the fact that State of Illinois has upgraded track from Chicago To St. Louis( even with PTC) and now BNSF is trying to purchase the line between Dell City (a suburb of Oklahona City) and Sapulpa (just southwest of Tulsa). Just a small step to connect to the Transcon at Avard via Enid. Intresting question-- Could this be a new route for the Southwest Chief or even a new name for the new route?
Click to expand...
You're suggesting a completely different, and slower, route. First of all, there's no good way to get from Oklahoma City to Albuquerque. Second, one of the biggest markets of the SW Chief is express from Kansas City to Chicago, for which it takes the most direct possible route; nobody wants to change that.

If we were adding lots of new train services, sure, I'd say a separate St. Louis-Tulsa-OKC train would make sense. But we're not, not unless Oklahoma's government changes massively.
 
The present Southwest Chief route in all probability will be no more after Dec. 31 2015. That is when the contract ends. Now Amtrak is paying extra for maintance and upkeep,between La Junta and Lamy, but they do have option of moving over to the transcon any time and not pay the extra. Fact is that option could expire with the contract. Presently if a bridge fails, a derailment happens, rail down graded to exempt status Southwest Chief would be rerouted over Transcon. from Albuquerque,NM To Newton,Ks. So what is Amtrak going to be offered by BNSF-- no body knows. If Amtrak has to change routes where will it want to change to----no body knows. A Question I see is does BNSF want to seperate its Oil traffic from Passenger (in light of Oil wrecks and explosions.)? The Sooner Sub-- BNSF wants that line--will they get it? If or when they take it over what are they going to do with it?
 
Eric S said:
Not sure how a (near) Tulsa to (near) Oklahoma City rail line is or would be related to the Southwest Chief.
Click to expand...
Sounds like he means it to follow the historic highway US-66 route.....the historic railways that most closely paralled it were the Alton, Chicago to St. Louis, the Frisco, St. Louis to Oklahoma City, the Rock Island, Oklahoma City to Tucumcari, the Southern Pacific, Tucumcari to Vaughn, and finally, the Santa Fe, the rest of the way...
 
The abandonment of most the Rock Island route from OKC to Tucumcari pretty much scotches that idea.
 
RyanS said:
I'm not sure what you mean by "nobody knows", considering that its detoured over the transcon on many occasions and the route is pretty well know.
Click to expand...
This.

And, other than the recent talk of a Pueblo detour (still just talk, nothing resembling a concrete proposal), it has been portrayed as an either/or proposition, either come up with funds to upgrade/maintain the current route or reroute via the Transcon. Tulsa and Oklahoma City have never factored into the discussion of the Southwest Chief.
 
There is a good article in today's New York Times regarding the SW Chief and the states involved in the funding issues,,plus they have accurate photos!
 
Pretty accurate article for the most part. While BNSF does run some freight over portions of this route, the 200 or so mile stretch from Lamy to Trinidad is only used by the Amtrak train for the past several years. The Lamy stop does serve the Santa Fe area, but I question whether the train really makes much difference to the sleepy community of Lamy. Maybe some local residents do use the train, but they can't consist of very many. I do know that I will be on Train 4 from Flagstaff next Wednesday morning enroute to Chicago, and I've become very partial to the route through northern New Mexico. I see that today's westbound is around 5 hours late, evidently having a tough time departing Chicago yesterday. The other western trains left in good shape, except for #5, which left over two hours late. What is going on, Chicago?
 
The "it receives Federal funding so we shouldn't have to pay" argument only holds water when that federal funding is sufficient. Since it isn't, that's not really a good argument.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RyanS said:
The "it receives Federal funding so we shouldn't have to pay" argument only holds water when that federal funding is sufficient. Since it isn't, that's not really a good argument.
Click to expand...
People pay for highways all the time over and above federal funding. But logic and consistency are incompatible with political posturing anyway. ;)
 
Considering how many "small towns in <name any part of the country> " have lost their "cherished train line" that arguement holds almost no water. There are plenty of places far beyond the small town category that have lost train service. If we start talking some serious restoration in other places this arguement MIGHT begin to have some validity for this line.
 
It would be interesting to know if this is a profitable route and not another boondoggle. As usual these "little details" are not clearly explained. Almost as if they don't want us to know.

By the way how old is this track? And will it crack?
 
greatcats said:
Pretty accurate article for the most part. While BNSF does run some freight over portions of this route, the 200 or so mile stretch from Lamy to Trinidad is only used by the Amtrak train for the past several years. The Lamy stop does serve the Santa Fe area, but I question whether the train really makes much difference to the sleepy community of Lamy.
Click to expand...
There's basically nobody in Lamy proper. As for Santa Fe, since RailRunner was established between Albuquerque and Santa Fe, Lamy isn't very important for serving Santa Fe any more.

The communities which would be bypassed by the reroute are small. The three in Kansas have meaningful population but low ridership rates. The ones in Colorado have high ridership rates but low population. The ones in New Mexico are *miniscule* and the most heavily used station is the one for the Boy Scout camp.

Hutchinson, KS: ~42,000 people (though they could drive to Newton or Wichita), ridership 5303

Dodge City, KS: ~28,000 (ridership 5149)

Garden City, KS: ~27,000 (ridership 7355)

Lamar, CO: 7836 (ridership: 1823)

La Junta, CO: 7046 (ridership: 6711 -- nearly half the population, assuming round trips)

Trinidad, CO: 8771 (ridership: 4765 -- a quarter of the population)

Raton, NM: 6607 (ridership 15733. Half of this is, according to Amtrak, the Boy Scouts for the Philmont Ranch. The other half is partly the bus connections to Pueblo/Colorado Springs/Denver.)

Las Vegas, NM: 13539 (ridership 5376)

Lamy, NM: 218 (ridership 12551, basically all connecting to Santa Fe; this ridership would move to Albuquerque)

By contrast,

Wichita, KS: 385,577

Amarillo, TX: 195,250

Even if Wichita and Amarillo had ridership, as a percentage of city size, like Hutchinson (the weakest on this list), this would still be more ridership than the existing route, with just two stations -- there could of course be more stations. And the route should be faster.

All three governors are refusing to fund the existing route. And it needs all three states in order to get funded. And the localities haven't raised any money for it, let alone enough money. Meanwhile Amarillo just bought its former station, while Wichita's station is in passenger-rail-friendly hands and being renovated, and Wichita has been pushing for rail service (albeit to OKC) and spending its own money on studies.

Just move it already. I know Amtrak is giving the communities on the existing route until the end of 2014 to come up with the money, and is refusing to talk to Amarillo or Wichita until then, but frankly I wish Amtrak had given them a shorter deadline, so that Amarillo and Wichita could get going.
 
IMHO this is no different than the San Francisco/California Zephyr being rerouted off of the UP Overland Route to the D&RGW through Colorado, which caused Wyoming to lose all Amtrak service. And that was merely as a matter of convenience, not even because a route was being downgraded. And nobody expressed outrage about a bunch of small towns losing service etc. So what is different this time? In this case no state is losing all service either.
 
True, the Wyoming situation did not create such an uproar. But that was over 30 years ago and the attitudes have changed and passenger trains are regarded as more important. From a tourist or railfan standpoint, there was excitement about having a daily train through scenic Colorado. And I recall for awhile - maybe I am wrong - the Pioneer continued to run through Wyoming.
 
greatcats said:
True, the Wyoming situation did not create such an uproar. But that was over 30 years ago and the attitudes have changed and passenger trains are regarded as more important. From a tourist or railfan standpoint, there was excitement about having a daily train through scenic Colorado. And I recall for awhile - maybe I am wrong - the Pioneer continued to run through Wyoming.
Click to expand...
The sequence of events was that San Francisco Zephyr was renamed and moved to the Colorado route as California Zephyr and the 5/25/35 split was moved from Ogden UT to Salt Lake City UT. Then after several years it was decided to move the 5/25 split to Denver and run 25/26 on the Overland route. But initially when CZ started running on the Colorado route there was several years when there was no service through Wyoming before 25/26 was restored through there. And then of course both 35/36 and 25/26 were canceled.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They should have done this re-route long ago. The difference in population density is almost a million people if you throw in a thruway bus to Lubbock, just a couple of hours south. It's a no brainer. The scouts can take the CZ and a bus to Raton or a bus from Albuquerque or they can just take a bus all the way or drive which most of them probably do anyway. The major cities which can be served include Wichita, pop 636k, Amarillo, pop 249k, Lubbock(by bus) pop 298k and Clovis, NM pop 38k. I assume that Amtrak would have the good sense to include Albuquerque as a stop and use the wye south of the station, but who knows. They don't serve Phoenix just 35 miles from Maricopa with even a bus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top