Crossover
Train Attendant
A diamond hub is a city or township where major rail corridors intersect each other connecting other major or prominent cities or townships on the lines .
Bill to Save Southwest Chief
- Thread starter Chas
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
N
Nathanael
Guest
Oh, they've been arguing that for over a decade already. What *actually* happened, from what I can tell, is that all of the intercity proposals got put on the back burner while FasTracks was being built.
Regarding intercity rail, first there was the "east-west first vs. north-south first" argument; east-west was obviously much more expensive and had lower population. Then there was the "north vs. south" argument -- south was more expensive, had lower population, and had less local advocacy. Then there was "greenfield vs. UP vs. BNSF", but Fort Collins and Loveland and Longmont and Boulder obviously advocated for BNSF (which runs right through their downtowns), while Greeley (along UP) was less interested in rail and Cheyenne didn't care one way or another, so that settled that.
However, at this point, Boulder and Longmont got distracted by Fastracks, which offered them service -- but hasn't managed to provide it yet. So that's the big issue in the Denver area. "Higher-speed" service along the BNSF route is dependent on the Fastracks plan through Boulder and Longmont, so Fort Collins and Loveland kind of put rail service on the back burner. Fort Collins was also distracted by a "bus rapid transit" plan (which will have the usual poor-ROI result) and by BNSF's decision that it really needed to rebuild the BNSF line through downtown (which just happened, unfortunately without any station construction). So with everyone agreed that their rail service would come after something else happened, the urgency went away. Except in Boulder and Longmont, which are focusing their attentions on RTD and Fastracks.
Meanwhile, the state of Colorado is wasting money on redoing "high speed rail" studies where the outcome is already determined, by adding stupid options for people to reject. Oh well.
I expect that the momentum for intercity service in Colorado will come back shortly after Boulder-Denver rail is fully funded.
Boulder-Denver is also suffering from hostile competition within the government from another dumb "Bus Rapid Transit" project, which is funded, and will prove to be extremely underwhelming.
Crossover
Train Attendant
For example , Amarillo or Kansas City . Those are diamond hubs because they have many direct corridors that intersect .
trainman74
Conductor
Yahoo Travel article on the Southwest Chief -- being highlighted on the yahoo.com homepage today.
E
Eugene Small
Guest
Now we have 200 Million dollars back in the picture; but is it too late unless there is a" Warren Buffet" out there with really deep pockets. As of 1/30/09 new rail steel was 85 cents a pound. and it will take about 540,000 concrete ties. for 250 miles of track. Make it closer to 300 miles if include double track from Raton to Trinidad and sidings between Las vegas and Raton. This does not include the cost to remove old and install new nor does it include bridge replacement--there are several. So what is real dollar amount?
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,666
My understanding is that BNSF wants Amtrak to move. So any costly obstacles they put in front of Amtrak are actually going to strengthen the case for staying on the existing route. This basically puts an upper limit to what BNSF can ask Amtrak to pay for.
George Harris
Engineer
This question as asked cannot really be answered. Also, do not know what you mean by "will it crack?" I am assuming you mean the rail break. There are specific requirements for rail condition including frequency of inspection in the FRA that have to be met for any track, which vary with the speed permitted on the track. You better believe that BNSF follows them. There are many other factors in track condition other than just rail, and not just track, think bridges, signals, etc, as well.
I am reasonably sure that the rail is fairly old and well worn. the tie condition is probably not the world's greatest either. However, the issue with the track is the need to maintain it for sufficient speed to make for a reasonable run time for the SW Chief. If the track were to be reclassified for a lower speed, it could be maintained much more cheaply. Look up 49 CFR 213. It gives the Federal Railroad Administration's requirements for track conditions for various speeds.
I could talk for quite a while about things going into getting the track to a good condition and keeping it there, but I think I will stop now.
Last edited by a moderator:
neroden
Engineer
The track and ties have been allowed to deteriorate some, causing lower speed limits, and this would be expensive to bring back up to standard, but this isn't the biggest problem with the Raton Pass route.
The biggest problem is that the signal system is truly ancient (semaphores!) and really, really needs to be completely replaced in order to maintain passenger operation. That is expensive too.
The biggest problem is that the signal system is truly ancient (semaphores!) and really, really needs to be completely replaced in order to maintain passenger operation. That is expensive too.
George Harris
Engineer
If it is not maintained the speed limit drops to no more than 59 mph regardless of whether the track is good enough for a higher speed.
That's what I meant in my statement "other than the speed restriction".....
Perhaps the FRA could issue a rules waiver in a case such as this, with only the one train each way daily....
George Harris
Engineer
When frogs fly. Last I heard the signal system was still intact and nominally functional on the Phoenix line west out of Phoenix despite much of it being either out of service or used for car storage.
TVRM610
Conductor
Is the track good for anything over 59 on that line anyways? I know the line over the pass isn't high speed.. but I've only ridden through once and can't remember the speeds (or potential speeds.. ).
Kind of sad how times change.....I used to ride from Lamar to Kansas City on Number Four back in the seventies, and IIRC, we flew over that well-maintained jointed rail at 90 miles per hour in the smooth riding Hi-Level's.....
Last edited by a moderator:
XHRTSP
Lead Service Attendant
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2014
- Messages
- 327
So yes I understand why Pueblo might want rail service, but wouldn't it be in their better interest to advocate a line to Denver with two or more trains a day? That would open up Colorado Springs, Denver, and anything the Zephyr touches.
I'd imagine it'd be cheaper too, 115 miles or rail give or take to Denver vs 150 along the SWC to the Kansas border and another 90 to NM.
Last edited by a moderator:
nmrxabqfan101
Train Attendant
Ok I work for the Amtrak SWC coalition a organization working with leaders business leaders and citizens to save amtrak.
It has been anything but quiet since the end of the NM legislative session. Here is what I can report:
"To all friends and supporters of the Amtrak Southwest Chief Passenger Train:
A word of warning from the New Mexico Section of the Amtrak Southwest Chief Coalition:
There is a petition circulating on the web that originated with somebody named Alva Morrison and comes from MoveOn.org. It is entitled “Gov. Martinez, Save rail service to New Mexico”.
The information in this petition is totally false and deliberately inflammatory and the Coalition denounces this kind of "help". We do not want or need this kind of destructive "help". Please do not sign or in any way support this petition. It is included at the end of this email.
There are a number of people from, both political parties, who spent an enormous amount of time building a bi-partisan framework in New Mexico to allow the governor and legislature to actively support funding for keeping the Amtrak Southwest on its current route. We were pretty successful in the NM House and bot an authorization passed containing a $4 million/year for 10 years appropriation passed 47-12. That means it had significant bi-partisan support. It got to the senate too late to be passed and died. But were more successful than we had anticipated.
This petition is destructive of all that hard work. The Southwest Chief Coalition categorically rejects this petition and asks its member to refuse to sign it or associate with petition efforts like this in any way. The only way New Mexico as a state (legislature or governor) will support saving the train will be through bi-partisan compromise. Thus, the kind of hyper-partisanship represented by this petition will only help kill the train.
Gov. Susanna Martinez:
The Legislature has authorized our State to match the money contributed by Colorado and Kansas to save Northern New Mexico's only commercial rail line, allowing Amtrak to continue service to Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Las Vegas, and Raton. Please sign the legislation and allow this vital rail artery to remain open.
Colorado and Kansas have NOT contributed funding to be matched. The NM Legislature has NOT authorized any funding. The information in this petition is so totally false as to suggest that it is really deliberate misinformation. Please support the Amtrak Southwest Chief by rejecting this petition or any future uncoordinated efforts like this."
2. The Obama Administration has opened up another chance at TIGER Grants with a $600 Million set of programs. Information has been circulated to various agencies and economic development officers, with some supportive response. I hope to have more info in the near future.
3. There will be a telephone (remember those) conference call on Thursday, March 13th among the Three-State Coalition leadership and several NM Legislators. We have had some difficulty arranging this call in the past; if it takes place as scheduled, I will send out a report afterwards.
4. We again find ourselves in a period of relative quiet. That doesn’t mean nothing is happening, only that there hasn’t been much to report. Your continued efforts are very much appreciated. My expectation is that we will probably begin work on the next legislative session in April.
It has been anything but quiet since the end of the NM legislative session. Here is what I can report:
"To all friends and supporters of the Amtrak Southwest Chief Passenger Train:
A word of warning from the New Mexico Section of the Amtrak Southwest Chief Coalition:
There is a petition circulating on the web that originated with somebody named Alva Morrison and comes from MoveOn.org. It is entitled “Gov. Martinez, Save rail service to New Mexico”.
The information in this petition is totally false and deliberately inflammatory and the Coalition denounces this kind of "help". We do not want or need this kind of destructive "help". Please do not sign or in any way support this petition. It is included at the end of this email.
There are a number of people from, both political parties, who spent an enormous amount of time building a bi-partisan framework in New Mexico to allow the governor and legislature to actively support funding for keeping the Amtrak Southwest on its current route. We were pretty successful in the NM House and bot an authorization passed containing a $4 million/year for 10 years appropriation passed 47-12. That means it had significant bi-partisan support. It got to the senate too late to be passed and died. But were more successful than we had anticipated.
This petition is destructive of all that hard work. The Southwest Chief Coalition categorically rejects this petition and asks its member to refuse to sign it or associate with petition efforts like this in any way. The only way New Mexico as a state (legislature or governor) will support saving the train will be through bi-partisan compromise. Thus, the kind of hyper-partisanship represented by this petition will only help kill the train.
Gov. Susanna Martinez:
The Legislature has authorized our State to match the money contributed by Colorado and Kansas to save Northern New Mexico's only commercial rail line, allowing Amtrak to continue service to Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Las Vegas, and Raton. Please sign the legislation and allow this vital rail artery to remain open.
Colorado and Kansas have NOT contributed funding to be matched. The NM Legislature has NOT authorized any funding. The information in this petition is so totally false as to suggest that it is really deliberate misinformation. Please support the Amtrak Southwest Chief by rejecting this petition or any future uncoordinated efforts like this."
2. The Obama Administration has opened up another chance at TIGER Grants with a $600 Million set of programs. Information has been circulated to various agencies and economic development officers, with some supportive response. I hope to have more info in the near future.
3. There will be a telephone (remember those) conference call on Thursday, March 13th among the Three-State Coalition leadership and several NM Legislators. We have had some difficulty arranging this call in the past; if it takes place as scheduled, I will send out a report afterwards.
4. We again find ourselves in a period of relative quiet. That doesn’t mean nothing is happening, only that there hasn’t been much to report. Your continued efforts are very much appreciated. My expectation is that we will probably begin work on the next legislative session in April.
Last edited by a moderator:
nmrxabqfan101
Train Attendant
Keeping the Chief on the current route is about saving the communities in it serves. Amtrak has said specifically that they have no intention of running armarillo route at all and no do want to talk to the communities there and cause a expectation that they will get rail service at this time but BNSF has stated publicly that they want and prefer amtrak stay on raton pass. Amtrak has stated a re route will cost them double what they asking now. There is a solution in the works but I can't state the details. If the chief moved from the current route the Tourism and Local Economies would take a hit really hard is what your not understanding. UNM is going to be conducting a study a cost benefit analysis at the request of the nm legislature and the bill that passed to get that moving. Once complete it will be sent to governor Martinez office and if approved we can see some good things happen if the results show the chief is really needed in north central NM. Mayor Berry of Albuquerque is working on a economic package to keep the chief and also is in talks with Kansas Governor also about the situation. The pueblo re route would add 31 million estimate to the cost to keep the train. But the local nm rail runner express commuter train which runs from Belen NM to Santa Fe NM Would take a big hit cause they pay NMDOT fees to use there trackage which then goes to rail runner operations. Clovis NM and Belen NM are not liking and really don't want amtrak in there towns. And as far as BNSF keeping raton they are keeping raton as a safety valve in case the southern route keeps clogged. Also they will maintain raton to 30 from what I was informed. Pacer wants to build a plant in lamy NM to export oil by rail to ABQ and the San Miguel waste site near Las Vegas wants to start exporting by rail cause the costs of semi are too high for them. Also Tesla motors wants to build a plant in ABQ but there requirement is railroad tracks and BNSF has agreed to lay down new tracks if needed. So this all can help the chief is put into play soon. .
VentureForth
Engineer
nmrxabqfan101, first, welcome to the forums. This is a great place to discuss various ideas and thoughts. I appreciate your local access to the thinking that's going on in ABQ.
A lot of what you say is encouraging, but not consistent with what other discussions that we have seen around here. I think many of us would quite prefer to see Amtrak stay where it's at, but let's get real - there are no communities along the line that are going to dry up and whither away if Amtrak leaves. And, if they do, such is the way of life. Passenger service has been reduced by nearly 90% since its heyday but 90% of the communities haven't gone away. When Steam was converted to Diesel, yes, those many steam-servicing towns have been reduced but few lost completely.
I agree that the idea for a reroute through the Southern Transcon would be a difficult proposition for both BNSF and Amtrak. This is a very crowded line with trains going in both directions. It's hard to put an 80-90 MPH train out there with 60 MPH trains and expect one not to clog up the other. If I were BNSF, I would almost pay the maintenance on the current routing to a) Keep Amtrak off my main lines, and b) Maintain a solid secondary route in the event of an emergency and to increase capacity if needed.
This entire exercise has been entirely about money. The best solution is the one where the government(s) gives BNSF the most money. Period.
A lot of what you say is encouraging, but not consistent with what other discussions that we have seen around here. I think many of us would quite prefer to see Amtrak stay where it's at, but let's get real - there are no communities along the line that are going to dry up and whither away if Amtrak leaves. And, if they do, such is the way of life. Passenger service has been reduced by nearly 90% since its heyday but 90% of the communities haven't gone away. When Steam was converted to Diesel, yes, those many steam-servicing towns have been reduced but few lost completely.
I agree that the idea for a reroute through the Southern Transcon would be a difficult proposition for both BNSF and Amtrak. This is a very crowded line with trains going in both directions. It's hard to put an 80-90 MPH train out there with 60 MPH trains and expect one not to clog up the other. If I were BNSF, I would almost pay the maintenance on the current routing to a) Keep Amtrak off my main lines, and b) Maintain a solid secondary route in the event of an emergency and to increase capacity if needed.
This entire exercise has been entirely about money. The best solution is the one where the government(s) gives BNSF the most money. Period.
Last edited by a moderator:
nmrxabqfan101
Train Attendant
Well believe what you want to believe I have sat in some meetings talked with state reps plans drawn out plans already in the works sat in on transportation meetings cause I didn't see you there I saw my self in those meetings also with NM state governors office so I'm just on here to moderate what's fact from fiction cause allot of rail fans have this all backwards some have a good idea and some just throwing wild theory's. Yes a possibility of a re route is there but amtrak does not even want to touch the southern route they said at a public hearing In Santa Fe NM. I do know more details on this than you.
nmrxabqfan101
Train Attendant
I've seen the pre luminary numbers of the total loss of the chief to the communities from raton to ABQ and what it would do to the local commuter rail service. So if you haven't seen them then there is no room to say otherwise what is happening if you don have all the information in hand like I and 78 other people. The official numbers are to be released later this year publicly. Which I will gladly share with you.
nmrxabqfan101
Train Attendant
Remember I'm not saying the towns with die and be no more just there economies and tourism that the chief brings will be HIT HARD.
Well best of luck, what they say in a public meeting mean nothing. Sorry but if you take it as fact, you will be quite unhappy at the end.
Too many upsides with the reroute. Sure if you provide the funds they take it, but get it in writing on what your paying for, and the time frame of the deal. Nice history of walking away from deals.
Last edited by a moderator:
neroden
Engineer
Citation needed.
http://www.cnjonline.com/2013/11/16/amtrak-move-makes-sense-for-clovis-taxpayers/
Yes, I understand that the local towns along the existing route (north of Lamy) would be hit very hard by a move. Have they offered up any money?
Citation needed. Previously, BNSF said it would cost Amtrak the same amount to reroute as to stay put. And there's no logical reason why it could cost more.
The Kansas Governor -- the awful Sam Brownback -- is going to spend nothing whatsoever on passenger rail. And his administration has actually said so. Even Wichita can't get a dime out of him for rail service.
All proposals I've seen regarding the reroute still have Amtrak running up to Albuquerque, and paying NMDOT for Belen-Albuquerque-Isleta instead of Lamy-Albuquerque-Isleta. It's 30 miles less. On the other hand, NMDOT wouldn't have to maintain Lamy-Waldo Canyon for passengers any more, which probably is a greater savings. So in short, this should be a net improvement for NMDOT's budget.
Wise.... if true...
Oil and waste are both slooooow traffic with low speed requirements, and so it's not at all clear that this helps keep the tracks in good enough condition for passenger speeds. Tesla's batteries would be slightly faster traffic, but they're probably going to locate very close to ABQ if they choose ABQ.
In short I don't really trust your information, because it doesn't fit with what I'm finding elsewhere. I do understand that a reroute would hurt the bypassed cities pretty hard, but they don't seem to be able to pay to maintain passenger speeds. Politically, it really looks like there's not going to be any change in Kansas before the end of the year.
- Status
