Southwest Chief News & Future Operations

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
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.
[SIZE=medium]You know, I’d like to say a few things about the so-called “North Line” through La Junta and Trinidad. For one thing, I have wondered what, exactly the results would be if the states and Amtrak were to really get this line into a top-notch state of good repair with BOTH PTC and CTC? Would BNSF then become interested in diverting some through freight onto the line? I wonder. That’s kinda sorta what happened in North Dakota on the Devils Lake line.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]You see, the North Line across southwestern Colorado has ALWAYS been just a tad bit faster than the South Line through Amarillo. That is partly why the old AT&SF Ry ran most of their crack passenger trains over the line. This sounds hard to believe from today’s perspective but the fact is that as late as 1966 there were still five daily passenger trains a day (count ‘em FIVE) between Chicago and California. The Santa Fe ran all but one over the north line with the fifth over the South Line to provide local service to Amarillo. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]The North Line has also proven to be faster for freight although only if the trains are relatively short and light. The Santa Fe’s hot shot “Super C”, which they tried to bill as “The World’s Fastest Freight Train”, used the North Line. A few intermodal trains were also so diverted in the 1990s owing partly to congestion on the South Line as it was not yet fully double-tracked at that time.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]So, would they? Could BNSF possibly consider this? Not without CTC. In the era of caboose-less trains, operating on single track lines with hand-thrown switches becomes highly problematic. I suppose they could run several short, intermodal trains a day in one direction only as they would only have one opposing movement to meet (The Southwest Chief, of course). But the D.S. could order Amtrak into the hole. Also there are a couple of short stretches of CTS west of Trinidad and near Springer, NM.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]One final thought. This line could’ve been abandoned years ago like the SPT Company’s “South Line” through Douglas, AZ. But it was actually COAL that helped save the line. There were at least two, maybe three HUGE coal mines that shipped out unit trains but they closed a number of years ago. A renaissance is possible but unlikely. But new BNSF intermodal trains on the line? Also unlikely but not beyond the realm of possibility - especially with growing traffic. Time will tell.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]​Regards,[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Fred M. Cain[/SIZE]
 
fredmcain said:
jis said:
Southwest Chief among the first to get PTC on host railroad. CZ between Chicago and Denver too.

https://media.amtrak.com/2018/06/amtrak-marks-positive-train-control-milestone/
Click to expand...
Thanks, JIS. Yesterday I saw a similar article on my "Progressive Rail" e-mail newsletter. However, I couldn't see where the Hutchison-Dodge City-Trinidad-Albuquerque segment was mentioned so I wondered if they meant to include that too or what the situation is there.

Regards,

Fred M. Cain
Click to expand...
I believe Trinidad to (or just south of it) to Lamy (or slightly west of it where Rail Runner joins it) is Exempt, and is not required to have PTC by the current law. This is similar to San Louis Obispo to the boundary of Caltrain operations just south of San Jose where the Coast Starlight and a couple of non-hazmat freight operates each day. The CZ has such a segment too through the mountains in Colorado and Utah, Looks like Dotsero to Price or thereabouts..

Thence to ABQ technically does not require PTC on weekends given current traffic, but does on weekdays given total traffic. If Rail Runner temporarily cuts down the number of its runs on weekdays to below the PTC threshold, it could continue to operate without PTC giving Rail Runner some breathing room to complete installation of PTC, without affecting SWC service. We'll see how it rolls.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bretton88 said:
The real problem with serving lubbock is there's then no easy way to get to Fort Worth from there. You could use the UP line from Sweetwater to FTW, but I bet the UP would demand a king's ransom for that. So the easier option that will probably have less ridership is going from Amarillo to FTW completely on BNSF. At 800 miles, it is within the scope of Amtrak to create such a route, but it would be poor for a corridor service, and most likely require sleepers.
Click to expand...
Amarillo would be great too, almost 200 miles closer than FTW or LMY or ABQ. If not thrufare then Greyhound is still inexpensive enough
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What renovations are going on at the ABQ station? Seemed cramped and dark to me. Not sure its a great idea from Amtrak to be sharing stations with Greyhound.
 
bretton88 said:
The real problem with serving lubbock is there's then no easy way to get to Fort Worth from there. You could use the UP line from Sweetwater to FTW, but I bet the UP would demand a king's ransom for that. So the easier option that will probably have less ridership is going from Amarillo to FTW completely on BNSF. At 800 miles, it is within the scope of Amtrak to create such a route, but it would be poor for a corridor service, and most likely require sleepers.
Click to expand...
But even Amarillo would be a huge improvement for Lubbock, Clovis, Canyon and of course Amarillo itself.
 
railiner said:
frequentflyer said:
. Not sure its a great idea from Amtrak to be sharing stations with Greyhound.
Click to expand...
Why not? Having an intermodal station benefits everyone, except perhaps taxi's....
Click to expand...
It benefits everyone if it is done fairly well - a la St. Paul MN. It is a disaster if it done poorly a la Indianapolis. What a hellhole that is for an otherwise stellar city.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Alvarado Transportation Center isn't even 15 years old. I leave it and it's a dank and dark space?
default_ohmy.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Saw this posted on another site and since it contained the source I think it is appropriate to post for discussion.

From: Evan Stair <[email protected]>

Date: June 21, 2018 at 10:30:22 PM CDT

Subject: Amtrak June 19 Presentation to Congress -

Buses may replace Southwest Chief Dodge City to Albuquerque

All,

The attached file shows Amtraks plan, as presented to the Kansas,

Colorado, and New Mexico Congressional contingent on Tuesday, to use

substitute bus services between Dodge City (possibly La Junta) to

Albuquerque on the Southwest Chief route. I have not received any

feedback regarding how the US Senators and US Representatives present

reacted to this presentation. Hopefully, someone in one of these

states will communicate directly with an attendee to gauge the

reaction and share this with all of us.

I suspect substitute bus service would be implemented after

the Positive Train Control (PTC) mandate date of December 31 of

this year. The effect of this would be damaging, not only to

those cities that would lose rail service, but to all Southwest

Chief cities. Slicing a route into three different segments,

two rail, one a bus, will destroy travel continuity for this

route. Understand, ridership drops substantially (I understand

by half) with every transfer. So we are really discussing

long-term the discontinuance of service. The towns that could

lose rail service initially include:

-Garden City

-Lamar

-La Junta

-Trinidad

-Raton

-Las Vegas

-Lamy

Further, Amtrak seems to have attempted to load the Congressional

contingent with statistics that in some cases are deceiving, others

confusing, and some irrelevant. For example, the capital expense

costs to establish multiple frequency services between say Chicago

and Kansas City or Los Angeles and Flagstaff/Grand Canyon are well

beyond the ability of a state compact to fund. Further, Amtraks

claim of poverty here flies in the face of the $1.3 billion, a

record amount appropriated by Congress, for operation of the national

system this year.

Most of all, as former Amtrak CEO Joseph Boardman said, Amtrak

is attempting to weaponize Positive Train Control (PTC), a collision

avoidance system. Simply put, there are mitigations and possible

waivers Amtrak is refusing to consider, that could keep the full

train route running.

My recommendation is that everyone here contact your Congressmen.

Ask them how the June 19 meeting was received and if they plan to

take any action to prevent the bus substitution from occurring.

If you would like to discuss this further feel free to call me.

Thank you for your support,

Evan Stair

President

Passenger Rail Kansas

Passenger Rail Oklahoma
Click to expand...
LINK TO DOCUMENT:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/397rbtfluu9uifp/Dismantling-National-System-Trains-3-4.pdf?dl=0
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am not that aware of the politics and such mentioned in the above post, but it reads to me as if Amtrak is advocating a partial bus service to replace their train service?

Is this some sort of temporary thing while the "train control" mentioned is installed, or a permanent proposal?

Confused!
 
caravanman said:
I am not that aware of the politics and such mentioned in the above post, but it reads to me as if Amtrak is advocating a partial bus service to replace their train service?

Is this some sort of temporary thing while the "train control" mentioned is installed, or a permanent proposal?

Confused!
Click to expand...
Lots of things that are officially temporary drag on for ever. It's a useful way to get rid of stuff while pretending to be attempting to fix it,

So anything that's tempoarry without there being a timeline as to when it will be fixed can be consdered permanant.

That said, in this case, I still think this is a trick to hard-bargain for more money. Threaten the worst and jog people out of their lethargy. the SWC is a train a lot of people feel very emotional about, so going for this particular train seems like a calculated ploy to me.
 
This is the opening salvo to the dismemberment of the LD network. Ride it soon or you will never again have the chance to travel over Raton pass.
 
Ryan said:
It sounds like a “Congress, if you don’t give us the money to operate this service, we can’t continue to operate it” play.
Click to expand...
Except that Anderson seems to be going out of his way to provide talking points for abandoning some or all of the Southwest Chief and has worded his support for the national network to include "alternate" transportation options.
 
Amtrak's mission to provide national rail service surely includes service between the country's second- and third-largest cities. I have sleeper tickets CHI-LAX and back in April, fingers crossed!
 
I tend to agree with cirdan’s last point. It would destroy the route as a through service and would not find me taking it to Chicago. Among other reasons for this dilemma, however, is the fact that a couple of hundred miles of railroad is only being used for this one train.
 
Reroute it. A few conference calls with BNSF and a couple senators would do the trick. Where theres a will theres a way. Anderson is living in a bubble he needs to go.
 
Pretty much what it say's. Seems the new management doesn't understand it's own network. Ridership and revenue will plummet. While corridor service makes sense between large cities in our mega-regions, the only logical way to serve the vast expanses of the west is a LD train that creates overlapping corridors. It's sad that it's come to this. I always thought threats to Amtrak would be from Congress and our government. Never dreamed it would be from within. I've always hated how Congress likes to micromanage Amtrak, ie food and beverage. But now we need Congress to micromanage Amtrak just keep a few stations staffed and not slice up it's national network to serve those who pay for it.
default_mad.gif
 
The problem is the Railrunner stretch. La Junta is the farthest Amtrak can go and have servicing and turning facilities. This also indicates Amtrak is willing to run on the PTC except tracks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts

Back
Top