The Davy Crockett
Engineer
For a half a second I was half serious.
SWC issue heating up
- Thread starter BNSFboy
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
Ryan
Court Jester
1/4 serious, 100% of the time!
Amtrak George
Lead Service Attendant
POTENTIAL CHIEF REROUTE: I would actually be quite surprised if BNSF demanded Amtrak pay upgrades on the transcon when they want to downgrade the Raton pass route and get Amtrak off of it. I really think if the train is to survive a reroute is the only choice. Practically speaking, it is going to be super expensive to maintain track for passenger train speeds where the host railroad runs nothing and charges Amtrak 100%. In the event of engine trouble, there are no rescues available, the track is going to cost exorbitant amounts to maintain, and I worry about safety when isolated sections are only traversed by one Amtrak train daily in each direction and nothing else.
Hope Fred Frailey is wrong on this one, because the Transcon is the Chief's only chance to survive.
Hope Fred Frailey is wrong on this one, because the Transcon is the Chief's only chance to survive.
Albuquerque will be a bus connection-no backup moves, no wyeing the train. Remember when the CZ served Wyoming, the train came up from Colorado and stopped in the middle of the prairie at BORIE (not the state capital and largest city Cheyenne). This is the same situation in New Mexico. Belen will be the bus-train transfer point.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,508
Your source is????
printman2000
Engineer
You state this like you know it will definitely be that way. Unless you are some Amtrak insider or have major connections, I seriously doubt you can say this with 100% certainty.
If this is just your opinion, then you should state that.
The Davy Crockett
Engineer
I do, and I also remember the CZ San Francisco Zepher backing out of Denver.
Last edited by a moderator:
Amtrak Cajun
OBS Chief
I highly doubt that Amtrak will do a bus connection to Albuquerque, especially with as many people as it serves. That idea is pretty ludicrous. They would need a lot of buses for the amount of people that board and detrain at ABQ. Especially since ABQ is a fuel/crew change point. I dont know if that will still be a crew/fuel point if the reroute is accomplished, but Im just going on current fuel/crew status.
The only way to find out is for it to actually happen.
The only way to find out is for it to actually happen.
henryj
Conductor
I disagree with this observation. The SWC has made numerous detours over the Transcon over the years and it is always wyed just south of the Albuquerque station. If it moves to the Transcon permanently it will follow the same path. In Amarillo, the Santa Fe station is still there and in good shape. Amtrak can move back there or put up an Amshack nearby. There will be no backing or wying of the train in Amarillo. With the completion of the double track through Abo Canyon, the only single track sections I know of are the big fill at Vaughn over the UP and the crossing of the Pecos river in Fort Sumner, both rather short segments and both to be replaced by the BNSF soon. How fast can the SWC negotiate the transcon? Just as fast as it negotiates it now west of Albuquerque and east of Newton. As for the Raton Pass line, it's only a matter of time before Colorado and New Mexico realize the importance of this route and start up passenger service. I25 is just clogged with traffic. Something will have to be done soon. I just drove it a few weeks back. Probably Colorado will start with commuter trains south as far as Pueblo then Walsenburg and Trinidad. After that it won't take much to connect a couple of those trains with Rail Runner to the south. They may have to build a second or third track, but so far money hasn't stopped Colorado's expansion of light rail lines. The line from Trinidad east, however, probably won't be needed for anything but local freight service, so I don't see the SWC coming back to the route.
Last edited by a moderator:
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Unless you are able to provide some more evidence about how you know this to be true we shall assume that it is not true, since some of us have reason to believe from inside Amtrak contacts that what you state is not true.
While that's true I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for CO to build, or invest in, heavy rail southward. CDOT thinks they just "fixed" I25 and as far as I know are moving their attention to the I70 corridor which gets clogged with people going to/retruning from romps in the mountains. The light rail system Denver has built and expanded upon is impressive, and well used, but that's Denver only and I'm pretty sure heavy rail was rejected.
Last edited by a moderator:
Amtrak Cajun
OBS Chief
Love that gif Sorcha. Haha.
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
When did the CZ serve Wyoming? The SFZ did but not the CZ.
Do you have any source or basis for your argument instead of just "it's happened before?" Because the SS has a backup into TPA, you know.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
CZ did not but the Pioneer did, and it stopped at Borie to serve Cheyenne.
But the two situations are very different. Cheyenne was never a major refueling and service stop for the SFZ, so substituting it by Borie was no big deal. OTOH ABQ is a major refueling and service stop for the SWC. Such functionality would be relatively difficult to provide at Belen, so using one as an argument for the other is more or less invalid.
Last edited by a moderator:
johnny.menhennet
Conductor
Cheyenne has 50,000 people. Albuquerque has a population rivaling the entire state of Wyoming's at 550,000 with an even larger metro. There is good reason to serve Albuquerque. In addition, Albuquerque is a refueling stop and crew change point, so all of the facilities meant to service the train would have to be rebuilt in addition to a station in Belen. Cheyenne was neither of those, plus there wasn't a great demand.
Edit: Sorry for mimicking so closely jis's post. We both posted at the same time.
Edit: Sorry for mimicking so closely jis's post. We both posted at the same time.
Last edited by a moderator:
Amtrak George
Lead Service Attendant
POSITIVE TRAIN CONTROL: has this been considered relative to the Raton Pass line? I understand that there is a mandate for this system beginning late 2015, although there might be an extension. Regardless, we are looking at (by one estimate) installation cost of $50,000 per mile of track, and that won't cover maintaining the system. Add that in to the track costs and the Raton line's prospects seem pretty dim (this issue is also being touched upon in the trainorders web site).
Aaron
Lead Service Attendant
While Phoenix could also be served on the Sunset Limited with a wye move, it would be a much bigger detour than serving Albuquerque on the Transcon reroute.
Ryan
Court Jester
That still doesn't address the litany of other reasons that Amtrak will continue to serve ABQ.
VentureForth
Engineer
It is true that Belen is actually a major refuling station for all the BNSF's travelling the transcon. It would be easier for Amtrak to be refuled in Belen. In the middle of a train yard. With no platforms. And transferring 100* passengers to 2 busses and their bags. And putting up the Amtrak crew in the Harvey house in Belen....
*75,779 pax in 2011. That's 207 per day, 103 per train.
*75,779 pax in 2011. That's 207 per day, 103 per train.
Last edited by a moderator:
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,669
I don't know how difficult it is to relocate a crew change point. The fueling point is definitely no problem as right now it's little more than a tanker truck.
I trust there will be some market reserarch done. How many of the people boarding at ABQ actually come from ABQ proper, and how many drive in from further afield? In the latter case it shouldn't make much difference to them whether they drive to ABQ or to Belen.
Mind you, I don't want the stop at ABQ to be dropped, but I don't think the final decison will be based on what people want, but on a thorough cost-benefit analysis.
But also to consider - is this a service stop that requires refilling the fresh water tanks and emptying the holding tanks? A refueling stop for freights probably doesn't have this capability.
The Davy Crockett
Engineer
3 & 4 moving from ABQ? Some thoughts:
1)I recall reading that even dedicated cross-platform rail transfers have a significant negative impact on ridership. Just the discussion of a 2 bus 'bustitution' to ABQ says something. I doubt Amtrak wants another Phoenix situation.
2)Wyeing the train would not be an issue. So this is a non-issue.
3)Going to ABQ would not have a significant negative impact on the schedule.
4)Amtrak already does a similar maneuver with the Silver Star. It works fine.
1)I recall reading that even dedicated cross-platform rail transfers have a significant negative impact on ridership. Just the discussion of a 2 bus 'bustitution' to ABQ says something. I doubt Amtrak wants another Phoenix situation.
2)Wyeing the train would not be an issue. So this is a non-issue.
3)Going to ABQ would not have a significant negative impact on the schedule.
4)Amtrak already does a similar maneuver with the Silver Star. It works fine.
VentureForth
Engineer
A thorough cost-benefit analysis will include what people want.
- Status
