posted
Having ridden the SWC in July crawling through a slow order near Lamy and inching our way over Raton Pass, I cannot envision a scenario now which would allow the train to remain on it's current route.
The track conditions are deteriorating and bringing them 'back up to speed' is getting more expensive the longer nothing is done.
And I can't argue that repairing the track here should be done. BNSF has no incentive to do it.
I would agree that this reroute is coming and it would not surprise me if it comes sooner than most people expect.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is a wye in the auto yard just south of the Albuquerque Station that they have used on all the detours in the past. Eastbound into the wye before backing into the station and then westbound the same thing.
also it is 4.1 miles shorty going the Southern Route even with the trip back down to Belen included in that firgue.
Chris
Posts: 711 | From: Santa Ana | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Using the wye to continue service to Albuquerque as Chris suggests is certainly a doable proposition. In fact, the backtracking to serve Albuquerque is a shorter backtrack than what the Silver Star does to serve Tampa.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
For anyone here who has somehow envisioned Local funding of Amtrak's LD routes, Mr. Frailey has provided a textbook as to why if any proposal, such as from a hostile future Administration, for such were to be set forth, consider it DOA (dead on arrival). Lest we forget, there has been one attempt at a locally funded LD, the Lake Shore's forerunner, that lasted all of seven months during 1971.
As I've noted in the past, Boy Scouts is one of those tickets that aspiring managers on any a number of railroads had to get punched. While I'm not about to be invited for a first hand review, I think a walk down BNSF's "mahogany row' in Fort Worth, would show a Boy Scout memento or two visibly displayed. However, this may no longer be enough to ensure continued rail service to Philmont.
As one of the comments at Mr. Frailey's blog noted, the Super Chief's business model of providing end point to end point service with little regard for anything in between expired some seventy years ago.
Finally, should the reroute occur, Albuquerque will be served by an Ambus connection at Belen; let's just stow all this chatter about the wye two miles South of town or that "they back into Tampa two miles every day". So far as Tampa goes, they have to wye the train anyway, so "just keep backing" (and pray) rather than incurring the cost of building a station out at Ybor City, or wherever. The Chief would simply stop at a station in Belen, just as did ATSF #2DD and #1DD last on A-Day, do its station work, and highball.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
GBN, I'm not so sure about the Ambus connection. I would think BNSF would be happy to get the SWC off their mainline - especially with an extended stop that would be required in Belen for the servicing / crew change that now occurs at Albuquerque.
Perhaps someone can explain the logistics of the back up move required if Albuquerque continues to be used - what's the distance involved. While never desirable, Amtrak seems to manage it with both the BNSF and UP at the busy Tower 55 interlocking in Ft. Worth to make the TE station stop there. Another advantage to continuing to use Albuquerque, the easy cross platform connection to the Railrunner there for Santa Fe passengers.
It'll be interesting to see BNSF take on this.
Posts: 2397 | From: Camden, SC | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Getting the Chief off the main line at Belen is not a significant issue. After all it will have on the busy Transcon after leaving Newton and will continue on it westward from Belen, as it now does west from Alb. Competing with the Roadrunner between Belen and Alb. will have to be worked out if the Chief should go to Alb. There are many adjustments to be made with a reroute, perhaps most significant will be creating locations at the designated stops so that passengers can safely get on or off.
Posts: 467 | From: Prescott, AZ USA | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I imagine that Amtrak would approach communities along the new route asking if they desire a passenger stop and, if so, then asking for those communities interested to provide a paved parking lot, lighting, and an ADA compliant platform.
Amtrak probably still has a few temporary mobile 'amshacks' on hand that could be deployed for indoor waiting until something more permanent can be arranged.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I realize that the sentiment here would be to have the the Chief continue to serve Albuquerque should the reroute move forth. But the fact remains that it is simply more economical and efficient to establish an Ambus connection through Belen.
Need all of the operational considerations, especially the contingent ones such as a derailment or Grade X-ing intrusion, which are magnified when a train is operating in a reverse direction, become Red Meat for Rep. Mica at a future "Dog and Pony" show?
Just stick with the Ambus; nobody could be THAT inconvenienced by such a transfer.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: I realize that the sentiment here would be to have the the Chief continue to serve Albuquerque should the reroute move forth. But the fact remains that it is simply more economical and efficient to establish an Ambus connection through Belen.
Need all of the operational considerations, especially the contingent ones such as a derailment or Grade X-ing intrusion, which are magnified when a train is operating in a reverse direction, become Red Meat for Rep. Mica at a future "Dog and Pony" show?
Just stick with the Ambus; nobody could be THAT inconvenienced by such a transfer.
Except the Native Americans selling trinkets at the Albuquerque Station!
Posts: 510 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Remember Albuquerque is the largest city in the state and it generates plenty of revenue all by itself. A Bus from Belen would be like the Bus from Borie that dried up the ridership from that station. Let us all learn from other mistakes from the past so we don't allow them to happen again. Plus Albuquerque is the Amtrak Crew Base. good luck trying to move that.
Chris
Posts: 711 | From: Santa Ana | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe that bypassing Albuquerque might jeopardize the support Amtrak as a whole (as opposed to just Raton Pass) generally receives from New Mexico's elected officials.
Chris, you make a valid point in reminding us of how things turned out when Amtrak left Cheyenne.
Regardless of how the Albuquerque question is ultimately resolved, I believe that the SWC reroute is going to happen and perhaps sooner than many people believe that it will. The biggest question in my mind is whether the reroute occurs before or after the 2014 Boy Scout Jamboree season.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have a friend who works at BNSF corporate Headquarters in FT Worth. He doesnt think there will be a reroute of the chief, thinks that something will be done, if even at the last minute, to keep the chief on its current route.
Posts: 416 | From: St. Albans, Vermont | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The cost to maintain track that is solely used by 3 and 4 is not that great,this is between La Junta and Alb. However all three states, but especially NM and CO, are currently rationing their receipts until the economy improves. The major work that is currently needed is upgrading the track in western KS were speeds have been reduced and may be further reduced. This can be incrementally improved, I believe, so that the large numbers we have seen may not all be needed right away. I am inclined to think the Raton route will be retained but may never again see the high speed running of the Santa Fe's trains.
Posts: 467 | From: Prescott, AZ USA | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by RRCHINA: The cost to maintain track that is solely used by 3 and 4 is not that great,this is between La Junta and Alb.
Not quite true. The issue is past the point of low cost fixes. the cost of maintaining the track up to this point was comparatively not that great, however it has now reached the point of needing major work to maintain a reasonable speed. This is exactly the situation that occured on the Phoenix Line and on the ICRR's Grenada Division.
I can say this from observation: Back when the Panama Limited was still running on the Grenada Division, I walked a couple of pieces of it just to see how things were. (All tresspasing lectures will be duly ignored.) The line was in well worn 112 lb jointed rail with justg barely class 4 tie conditions, plus having a lot of wood trestles that were near the end of their useful life. When I say worn rail, I mean that to the point that the tops of the joint bars were shiney from wheel flange contact.
I would suspect that the same is true for La Junta to lamy at the least, if not for quite a bit of the rest of the line. It is to the point of needing major rail replacements and replacement of a significant percentage of the ties.
This work will not be cheap. Unless Daddy Warbucks comes around and decides he wants to run fast passenger trains on it, the line's days as a passenger route are probably numbered.
Now, it is certain that on a bisis dollar spent per passenger mile carried to have spent it here would have made a lot more sense than spending it on a near complete rail replacement on the Vermonter route, but that was where the political clout got the money spent.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
While both Mr. Harris and I have seen worse track than the reported condition of Lamy-LaJunta during our professional lives, could this ONR video be the state of that BNSF line?
I haven't been over the LMY-LAJ line since 1991, so this is an "enquiring mind wants to know" moment.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
South (West) from LJ the SWC is currently running at 79 MPH and perhaps 90 MPH where ATC is in place. The track is well ballasted and there are some locations with CWR. Hot box -draging equipment dectectors are in place and functioning. BNSF left it in excellent condition and they are currently providing maintenance of the signal system and minor track repairs. With no heavy trains using the track it is fine now.
I just drove from Alb. to LJ last week and did not attempt to keep pace with either #3 or #4 even though the speed limit on I-25 was 75 MPH.
Posts: 467 | From: Prescott, AZ USA | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Trains.com reported today on a couple articles from the Hutchinson and Wichita, KS newspapers.
The Hutchinson paper reports BNSF has arranged for a special train to show local officials the deteriorating track conditions on the SWC route through Kansas in this article.
Meanwhile city officials in Wichita are endorsing Amtrak service through their city in this article. While they want an extension of the Heartland Flyer, a reroute of the SWC would also affect that city.
Good for BNSF for pressing the issue. Don't think some other Class ! roads would show similar initiative. Hopefully it will result in some timely decisions and avoid last minute angst when the deadline approaches.
Posts: 2397 | From: Camden, SC | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
