Southwest Chief Re-Route?

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.
Doesn't the same unwillingness to spend money on part of New Mexico also necessitate the funding for PTC for the Rail Runner? What is the basis for selecting one New Mexico project over another both requiring external help to overcome New Mexico's follies? From a federal funding angle one would imagine that something that preserves the national rail,network should have higher priority than running a local intra-state service, no?
 
Doesn't the same unwillingness to spend money on part of New Mexico also necessitate the funding for PTC for the Rail Runner? What is the basis for selecting one New Mexico project over another both requiring external help to overcome New Mexico's follies? From a federal funding angle one would imagine that something that preserves the national rail,network should have higher priority than running a local intra-state service, no?
Guess which section of Railrunner needs expensive signal upgrades to install PTC. Hint: it isn't Santa Fe to the junction with the mainline! Consider which train uses this route.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But if Railrunner stopped running there would only be one train on thats ection which then could be operated without PTC using an exemption as permitted by the PTC rules. ;)

Just being silly and argumentative here myself, but the more serious point is, perhaps the whole New Mexico folly needs to be addressed as a single issue and not as multiple ones. It would be foolish to sacrifice the integrity of the national network to just be able to run the Rail Runner. Just IMHO of course. ;)
 
Looks like Amtrak is threatening to end or reroute AGAIN...

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/amtrak-required-new-safety-tech-could-end-southwest-chief/article_c3c8d07a-ca23-53cf-90fb-4f188856f1d5.html

Just when advocates of saving the Southwest Chief’s historic route through New Mexico and two nearby states thought they had come up with money for necessary track repairs, Amtrak told congressional leaders this week that it might terminate the service altogether because it can’t afford to install required new safety technology.
 
Looks like Amtrak is threatening to end or reroute AGAIN...

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/amtrak-required-new-safety-tech-could-end-southwest-chief/article_c3c8d07a-ca23-53cf-90fb-4f188856f1d5.html

Just when advocates of saving the Southwest Chief’s historic route through New Mexico and two nearby states thought they had come up with money for necessary track repairs, Amtrak told congressional leaders this week that it might terminate the service altogether because it can’t afford to install required new safety technology.
What are the requirements, in terms of exactly which stretches of track must have PTC installed? It's not just tracks over which passenger trains operate, right?
 
Given how busy that KCT trackage is (BNSF transcon mainline, plus others), is it accurate that the 6 Amtrak trains/day are the only ones that would trigger the requirements that PTC be installed?
 
the more serious point is, perhaps the whole New Mexico folly needs to be addressed as a single issue and not as multiple ones.
It sure should! Unfortunately we won't see that from the short-sighted Martinez administration. :p


Given how busy that KCT trackage is (BNSF transcon mainline, plus others), is it accurate that the 6 Amtrak trains/day are the only ones that would trigger the requirements that PTC be installed?
It's *sort of* accurate.

For some inexplicable reason, the Secretary of Transportation / FRA have allowed TRRA and KCT to get away with running massive numbers of dangerous hazmat shipments over these lines without triggering the PTC requirement. The non-Class I carriers are not *automatically* required to install PTC. However, the FRA could simply order them to install PTC at any time. Based on the intent of the law, the FRA *should* order them to do so. From 49 US Code section 20157:

(f) Other Railroad Carriers.— Nothing in this section restricts the discretion of the Secretary to require railroad carriers other than those specified in subsection (a) to implement a positive train control system pursuant to this section or section 20156, or to specify the period by which implementation shall occur that does not exceed the time limits established in this section or section 20156. In exercising such discretion, the Secretary shall, at a minimum, consider the risk to railroad employees and the public associated with the operations of the railroad carrier.
The Class Is (who own TRRA and KCT) looooove to try to force their costs onto other entities; it's a habit they probably developed during the 'bankruptcy era' of the 1960s-1980s.

In short, this is more malicious behavior by the Class I execs. They should be smacked down hard by the FRA, which should simply tell KCT and TRRA that they're required to install PTC due to the high number of hazmat shipments and to stop blaming Amtrak.

This is basically a loophole which TRRA and KCT are trying to exploit. The FRA -- or the Secretary of Transportation -- can close the loophole on its own. Or if they refuse to do their job, Congress can be asked to close the loophole by applying the PTC rules to non-class I carriers. (They would still only apply to lines with 5 million gross tons of traffic annually, or passenger traffic. I'm pretty sure TRRA and KCT have more than 5 million gross tons of traffic annually.)

It's also worth noting that FRA routinely grants exemptions for:

(2) Passenger service is operated on a segment of track of a freight railroad that is not a Class I railroad on which less than 15 million gross tons of freight traffic is transported annually and on which one of the following conditions applies:

....

(ii) If the segment is signaled (e.g., equipped with a traffic control system, automatic block signal system, or cab signal system) and no more than 12 regularly scheduled passenger trains are operated during a calendar day.
Which indicates that there are more than 15 million gross tons travelling on the TRRA and KCT lines. They really should be ordered to install PTC period.

If you want to look at the actual law, it's here:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/20157

And consider donating to Cornell's LII; it costs them money to keep all this law on line.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I received an alarming message today from a news producer in Wichita. An excerpt is below? Any further info on this?

Amtrak Vice President of Operations DJ Stadler testified Wednesday before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, which held a hearing on passenger-rail safety. Stadler gave a report on Amtrak's efforts to implement PTC on its network.

In his written testimony, Stadler said that in Missouri, Amtrak's Southwest Chief route runs on track owned by two host railroads, the Kansas City Terminal (KCT) and the Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis. As Class III railroads, they are exempt from the federal PTC requirement unless the track is used by passenger trains.

"Because they're considered Class III, the PTC requirement is triggered by the operation of passenger trains," Stadler said. "These hosts have maintained that because Amtrak's trains trigger the PTC requirement, Amtrak is responsible for the cost of PTC installation, which amounts in the case of KCT to $30 million."

Because Amtrak can't afford that cost, and neither can the state of Missouri, Amtrak notified KCT officials that Amtrak service over the KCT track will end by the end of 2015 unless the parties come up with an alternative, Stadler said.

"We do not wish to cease service, but if this issue is not resolved soon, it could end in either the rerouting or termination of the Southwest Chief and the River Runner," he said.
 
KCT and TRRA should be forced to pay for it themselves. The Secretary of Transportation (through the FRA) can simply issue an order that they must implement PTC due to the volume of hazmat traffic on the lines.
 
In a perfect world the SWC would split somewhere west of Kansas City with the main train following the main BNSF transcon to ABQ. A short section of P-42 sleeper, coach(s) lounge would follow the present route to ABQ. Recombine and proceed to LAX. Would need no additional schedule time, no additional loco as 4 or 5 cars should make it over Raton with one loco. No additional cars unless loads go up significantly.

This gives an alternate route for either section if there is a disruption on one route with whole train using other route.
 
Trains Magazine has a report on the tentative deal that is behind a paywall, but the headline and start of the article provides the key info for those who are not subscribers: Amtrak, Kansas City Terminal to forge PTC deal. In short, Amtrak reached an agreement in principle with Kansas City Terminal, jointly owned by BNSF and UP, to install PTC. The article elaborates on the two Missouri Senators jointly submitting a bill to delay the full implementation of PTC past the end of 2015 deadline. I suspect that BNSF and UP decided it was the wiser political move to go ahead and agree to pay for installing PTC on KCT (after 2015) as a favor to the two Missouri senators
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Some good news for the Chief!

Amtrak rail project to begin next week

http://www.gctelegram.com/news/local/amtrak-rail-project-to-begin-next-week/article_59556d86-867e-5638-a17b-6abc363f9092.html

This would be speculation but may create some on-time performance issues during project.

Although being middle of the night territory, it may not/ hopefully will not be too bad.

Lastly too bad the ATS (Automatic Train Stop) could not be reinstalled for some 90 mph high-balling, PTC will hopefully do the same, even better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure if this is related to Illinoisandy's post above:

From Pueblo County, Colorado, Commisioner Sal Pace on Friday, 10/16:

Southwest Chief Announcement

Join me and dignitaries from Colorado and Amtrak for a big announcement regarding the the Southwest Chief that impacts the Pueblo community.

The announcement will be immediately followed by a reception including cocktails and refreshments.

WHEN: 4 p.m. Monday, Oct. 19, 2015
WHERE: Steelworks Center of the West
215 Canal St. Pueblo, CO 81004


To RSVP please email Laura Heberly at [email protected]
 
That sure sounds like the train is going to be routed over to Pueblo, doesn't it? I can't think of any other reason that such a big deal would be made of a meeting concerning the SW Chief and Pueblo.
 
I will be so happy if the SWC gets rerouted to Pueblo. Some rail fans may bemoan the added time on their trip through southeast Colorado, but serving the southern end of the Front Range could really boost ridership on the SWC. Whereas people in Colorado Springs (metro area of over a half million people) may have never considered taking Amtrak before, a stop in Pueblo means it's only a short drive for them to hop on a train to ABQ, etc.
 
Hmmmm. This Pueblo event should have been taking place in the past hour. I am not opposed to a routing into that city, if it can be handled efficiently.
 
The Pueblo Chieftan is reporting that the announcement mentioned in a post above is that the rails used in the rehabilitation of the route used by the SWC will come from a Pueblo-area company. Amtrak route upgrade means $8M boost for local economy

So, nothing about a reroute through Pueblo, other than a mention that it is still something that Pueblo-area officials are interested in accomplishing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top