Scheduled passenger service? not in the life of anyone's grandchild.
Of course I guess 'freight train interference' would be a non-issue on the route at least as far as Minturn CO - the UP abandoned the line now almost ten years ago, but I understand the ROW remains intact.
notelvis Member # 3071
posted
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Here is a link to the excursion service noted by Mr. Spirit:
Scheduled passenger service? not in the life of anyone's grandchild.
Of course I guess 'freight train interference' would be a non-issue on the route at least as far as Minturn CO - the UP abandoned the line now almost ten years ago, but I understand the ROW remains intact.
It's remarkable really. The tracks are still there and looked like they could be used again tomorrow if need be......at least that was the case when I drove from Leadville to Salida in a rental car in 2004.
RussM Member # 3627
posted
I rode the Royal Gorge Route Railroad in September. I highly recommend the $ 99 cab ride in their F-7 locomotives. The Union Pacific was sharing the track as far as the rock quarry at Parkdale. With no freight service beyond that point, there is no hope for passenger service.
I always thought it would be great if it were possible to do special railfan excursions over abandoned rail lines, but with today's mania over legal liability, it is impossible.
palmland Member # 4344
posted
The line is indeed intact, at least the portion I observed this summer. Strangely there was relatively new rail on Tennessee Pass - mid 1990's.
The current issue of Trains magazine reports a ballast train in Sept. traveling about 10 miles down the line for grade crossing project as part of a development (this area is not far from Vail).
Mr. Norman is probably correct about regular passenger service, although I could see the tourist railroad extending operations up the very scenic Arkansas river valley.
RRCHINA Member # 1514
posted
To rehabilitate track and ancillary necessities to a status that complies with STB standards would be very expensive. The longer a line remains dormant the greater the rehab costs. There are current examples for those who wish to undertake the analysis: The former NP Stampede pass line in WA; and the SP-UP line in south TX that KCS is rebuilding.
Mr. Norman has it right, once again.
TwinStarRocket Member # 2142
posted
For those who may not be familiar with the line in question, we are talking about the former Denver & Rio Grande RR line from Pueblo, CO that connects to the CZ route at Dotsero near the eastern end of Glenwood Canyon. It used to be a very well maintained and speedy freight line running through some of the most beautiful scenery in America. I would say it rivaled, if not surpassed, the current route of the CZ.
From the current route of the Southwest Chief, the ex-Santa Fe line from La Junta to Denver would connect to this route at Pueblo.
Use of the line was discontinued when a section near a Tennessee Pass tunnel at it's northern end experienced some sort of cave-in or landslide. UP decided it was too expensive to repair. The rest of the line down to Pueblo was in good condition. I say that because freights passed me while I was driving. I believe this was Rio Grande's mainline before the Moffat tunnel was completed. The main problem as an east-west passenger route is that it bypasses Denver. If it ever could be opened as a through passenger line, it would be a treasure.
I think prior to the CZ, there was a Missouri Pacific - Rio Grande - Western Pacific transcontinental train that used this route.
palmland Member # 4344
posted
As late as the mid 90's, the SP had a hot Ford automotive train from KC to Oakland area. So you are right, TwinStar, this was a good piece of railroad in spite of grades and curves. No doubt very expensive to maintain.
However, in the days of Rio Grande's Royal Gorge, the running time from Denver to Grand Juntion was about 6 hours longer than the CZ. Not surprising given the circuitous routing via Colorado Springs and Pueblo. But I would gladly trade that for the climb up the front range on the CZ. When I took the Royal Gorge when in college, it made a 10 minute stop at the bottome of the Royal Gorge for everyone to get off and look at the awesome (one of the few times I think that overused word is accurate) scenery.
I think your suggestion of the SWC connection is the only way this route could conceivably be used. More likely is a train from LaJunta via Pueblo up to Denver.
By the way, you are correct that prior to the CZ in the late 40's, the MP also had a Royal Gorge from St.Louis with through sleepers connecting to Rio Grande's Royal Gorge at Pueblo for San Francisco. After the CZ, the Rio Grande still ran a through sleeper from Denver to Salt Lake on this route. Talk about getting your money's worth.
MetSox Member # 6035
posted
This reminds me of an idea I had for a weekend excusion several years ago. I would call it the "Colorado Zephyr" and it would require that the entire Royal Gorge route be reactivated. I would round up as many Budd "short" domes (maybe some UP ACFs as well) as I could with CZ observation "Silver Solarium" on the rear.
The train would run on select weekends between May and September, maybe about 6 times a year. On Saturday it would run from Denver to Grand Junction via the Moffatt tunnel. Passengers could have a choice of staying overnight in either Glenwood Springs or Grand Junction. Sunday it would return to Denver via the Royal Gorge. We can all dream if we want to.
Twin Star Rocket: I believe the train you're thinking of was the "Scenic Limited". The Rio Grande did use the Royal Gorge route from Denver to Salt Lake via Pueblo until 1934 when the Dotsero cutoff was completed, linking the D&RGW with the Denver & Salt Lake. The Moffatt tunnel had opened in 1928 on the D&SL, which terminated at Craig. The "Royal Gorge" train continued to run from Denver to Grand Junction (where it combined with the overnight "Prospector" to Salt Lake) until sometime in the 60s.
TwinStarRocket Member # 2142
posted
So, while we are dreaming, let's bring back and extend the National Limited through KC, Royal Gorge, and Salt Lake City, then split it and run to LA and Seattle. With at least 5 short domes and an open platform on the rear.
palmland Member # 4344
posted
Reserve a drawing room for me!
rresor Member # 128
posted
Rode through the Royal Gorge and over Tennessee Pass on a hi-rail in November 1994. What an awesome trip! The high point was meeting a loaded coal train somewhere above Minturn, on the 3.25% grade on the west side of the pass. Twelve locomotives! The ground shook as he went past.
As to maintenance, I do remember a lot of 112-lb. bolted rail between Minturn and Dotsero, so worn that the joint bars were shiny from wheel flange strikes. Maybe that's the rail somebody reported having been replaced in the 1990s. It needed it!
While the Royal Gorge is spectacularly scenic, I think the climb out of Denver to the Moffet Tunnel is even more so. I wouldn't trade one for the other.
George Harris Member # 2077
posted
quote:Originally posted by rresor: As to maintenance, I do remember a lot of 112-lb. bolted rail between Minturn and Dotsero, so worn that the joint bars were shiny from wheel flange strikes. Maybe that's the rail somebody reported having been replaced in the 1990s.
And the 112 lb/yd wasn't that great a section to begin with. This (worn 112 lb. rail with shiney topped joint bars) was the condition of a lot of the old ICRR main between Memphis and Jackson MS before they put the City of New Orleans on the freight line through Yazoo City - and they were still running 79 mph on it! It takes between 5/8 and 3/4 inch vertical head wear to get consistent flange contact on the joint bar.
palmland Member # 4344
posted
quote:Originally posted by George Harris:
quote:Originally posted by rresor: As to maintenance, I do remember a lot of 112-lb. bolted rail between Minturn and Dotsero, so worn that the joint bars were shiny from wheel flange strikes. Maybe that's the rail somebody reported having been replaced in the 1990s.
And the 112 lb/yd wasn't that great a section to begin with. This (worn 112 lb. rail with shiney topped joint bars) was the condition of a lot of the old ICRR main between Memphis and Jackson MS before they put the City of New Orleans on the freight line through Yazoo City - and they were still running 79 mph on it! It takes between 5/8 and 3/4 inch vertical head wear to get consistent flange contact on the joint bar.
Although I have a nice ride on the CONO in January via Yazoo City, it didn't compare with a trip 40 years earlier on the Panama Ltd - which, I suspect, was going a whole lot faster than 79.
While I am sure welded rail is quieter and more cost effective, you can't beat standing at an open dutch door on well maintained jointed rail at track speed.
By the way, the relatively new rail I saw on Tennessee Pass was 132lb. But of course that may not have been done over the entire route.
George Harris Member # 2077
posted
Yes, we are off topic here. Back in the 1960's when ICRR was still very proud of their passenger trains, the 79 mph limit was regarded as government interference in how a railroad should be properly run and ignored in quite a few areas. I was a regular on the northbound City of New Orleans out of Memphis in the 1962-1965 time frame, unfortunalely only as far north as Fulton KY. North of Dyersburg TN, you could freqently watch the mileposts go by at 40 second intervals down to 36 second intervals. At the time, north of Memphis the line was double track, for the most part, and had 132lb rail.
tarheelman Member # 6095
posted
quote:Originally posted by George Harris: Yes, we are off topic here. Back in the 1960's when ICRR was still very proud of their passenger trains, the 79 mph limit was regarded as government interference in how a railroad should be properly run and ignored in quite a few areas. I was a regular on the northbound City of New Orleans out of Memphis in the 1962-1965 time frame, unfortunalely only as far north as Fulton KY. North of Dyersburg TN, you could freqently watch the mileposts go by at 40 second intervals down to 36 second intervals. At the time, north of Memphis the line was double track, for the most part, and had 132lb rail.
How was the ride at that speed on 132lb rail, George?
palmland Member # 4344
posted
quote:Originally posted by tarheelman:
quote:Originally posted by George Harris: North of Dyersburg TN, you could freqently watch the mileposts go by at 40 second intervals down to 36 second intervals. At the time, north of Memphis the line was double track, for the most part, and had 132lb rail.
How was the ride at that speed on 132lb rail, George?
For those of us challenged by higher math, a 40 second mile equals 90 mph. Using mileposts to calculate speeds is the traditional way for an engineer (or train crew without benefit of a speedometer) to know the speed. Most older employee timetables had a table to show the equivalent mph - as did the ACL one I looked at.
George Harris Member # 2077
posted
And 36 seconds per mile is 100 mph. At the time still the true speed limit on one ICRR division in Illinois. AS to ride quality: Guess it was good. I have no particular memories either way on this issue. Hey, it has been over 40 years. One thing I do remember, the ICRR train crews would not let you open the dutch doors or hang out in the vestibule, while in nice weather on the Frisco, at least between Memphis and Birmingham they were normally left open, and didn't say anything to a high-school age passenger hanging out there, but then at that time the KC-Florida Special was normally 2 or 3 coaches and the speeds were 70 mph maximum with much a lower limits.
Hmmm, we seem to have wandered off-topic.
DesertSpirit Member # 3848
posted
Thats ok, I think I had my answer a few days ago
posted