# New (actually not) idea: The Desert Pioneer



## ParanoidAndroid (Jul 21, 2018)

I encountered an old thread (didn't bother to find it) that mentioned an overnight LAX-LVS, then daytime to Idaho, then overnight to Portland train.
LAX 11:10pm 7:15am
LVS 6:10a/6:30a 10:30p/11:15p
SLC 4:00p/4:20p 2:40p/3:00p
Boise 12:10am 6:30am
Pendleton 6:25am 10:30pm
PDX 11:00am 6:15pm
Based off of 1996 Pioneer & DW schedules.
Something like this would return service to Vegas, allow passengers to ride the train to SW Utah (via Milford to the various nat'l parks there), and it basically eliminates the problem that the train takes too long to go from LA to Vegas (cause you'd be asleep). Idaho is also served at a better time of day. Connections east/west are broken at SLC, which is the main downside.

If I can continue dreaming, then here's this connecting train east via Wyoming:
SLC 8:00pm 6:30am
DEN 9:00a/10:40a 3:45p/5:30p
OMA 8:29p/8:44p 7:25a/7:35a
CHI 6:20am 10:30pm

I wonder how popular this would be. This opens up a bunch of new possible riders if it can be done.

Another edit: If the tracks to Boise aren't open, then just serve Nampa (unfortunately).


----------



## GBNorman (Jul 21, 2018)

The LAX-CHI appears to be a "reincarnation" of UP #6. That was an unnamed "primarily Mail & Express", which within my memory, had an LAX-LVS Sleeper line.

By the time I got to ride #6 LVS-SLC during October 1968, the Mail was gone and the Express was handled as freight. All that remained was two Coaches.

At one time, there was a UP LAX-PDX train named "The West Coast", which predated even me. I think your proposed schedule resembles such.

The Butte Special was still around for me to ride during January 1969. That left SLC about 830P arriving Butte at the NP Station 830A (I had no idea that 18mo later, I'd be working for the MILW and would see more of that ----hole than I would ever care to).


----------



## railiner (Jul 21, 2018)

Interesting proposal, but I think it would be better to use the former Pioneer/Desert Wind schedules, with thru service to/from Chicago, if service was ever to be restored on those routes.

I don't think you would get much thru Los Angeles to Portland traffic on your proposal, other than a few railfans, or curious tourists, that have already 'done' the Coast Starlight route.


----------



## railiner (Jul 21, 2018)

GBNorman said:


> The LAX-CHI appears to be a "reincarnation" of UP #6. That was an unnamed "primarily Mail & Express", which within my memory, had an LAX-LVS Sleeper line.
> 
> By the time I got to ride #6 LVS-SLC during October 1968, the Mail was gone and the Express was handled as freight. All that remained was two Coaches.
> 
> ...


The first time I went to Butte, was on NP No. 25, the North Coast Limited. I remember it was a fantastic approach in the evening, coming down the mountain, seeing the lights of the city, as if in a landing airliner. I only spent one night there, so didn't get a chance to really get to know the city. Regarding the Butte Special...did you ride in the Pullman car, with its own grill for breakfast?


----------



## bretton88 (Jul 21, 2018)

railiner said:


> Interesting proposal, but I think it would be better to use the former Pioneer/Desert Wind schedules, with thru service to/from Chicago, if service was ever to be restored on those routes.
> 
> I don't think you would get much thru Los Angeles to Portland traffic on your proposal, other than a few railfans, or curious tourists, that have already 'done' the Coast Starlight route.


A better proposal would probably be bringing back the City of Everywhere. Chicago to SLC as one large combined train, then splitting the train at SLC/Ogden with one section going to Portland and one section going to LAX. I'd suggest sending them combined with the Zephyr to Denver with a split there, but I don't think Union Station could handle such a large train anymore.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Jul 21, 2018)

bretton88 said:


> railiner said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting proposal, but I think it would be better to use the former Pioneer/Desert Wind schedules, with thru service to/from Chicago, if service was ever to be restored on those routes.
> ...


If a train were to be split in Denver, a length issue could be solved by doing all station work while the train is in its separate segments.


----------



## CCC1007 (Jul 21, 2018)

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> bretton88 said:
> 
> 
> > railiner said:
> ...


The problem there is that Denver Union Station has only 2 tracks that can accommodate superliners at this time. All other tracks are high level to host commuter trains.


----------



## GBNorman (Jul 21, 2018)

railiner said:


> Regarding the Butte Special...did you ride in the Pullman car, with its own grill for breakfast?


I did, and I had Breakfast from the "Broiler Buffet". I don't think Dining was ever Pullman's strong suit.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Jul 21, 2018)

CCC1007 said:


> brianpmcdonnell17 said:
> 
> 
> > bretton88 said:
> ...


That's true, but the train would only require two tracks (one for the current route and one for the Wyoming route). If the current CZ schedule is kept and no other trains were added, the only times platform space would be an issue would be when the Ski Train is operating or there is an extremely late CZ, which is rare. The Ski Train could be scheduled so it arrives just prior to the CZ as it is unlikely to be significantly late due to its short route.


----------



## railiner (Jul 22, 2018)

bretton88 said:


> railiner said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting proposal, but I think it would be better to use the former Pioneer/Desert Wind schedules, with thru service to/from Chicago, if service was ever to be restored on those routes.
> ...


While it would be nice to service Wyoming again, by splitting off the Pioneer at Denver, I think it would be better at first, to run it all together and do the three way split at SLC, as was done in the eighties...


----------



## ParanoidAndroid (Jul 23, 2018)

If only there was a way to speed up SLC-CHI... it is regrettable that Salt Lake City is served at such poor times, especially eastbound. Also, Milford is a bit far and small to actually be a viable option for visiting the area. There is no rental car agency in Milford, nor Caliente. Perhaps a small shuttle would work. Those parks around there are popular.


----------



## Anderson (Jul 23, 2018)

If you reroute the train via Wyoming, you tend to get somewhat better times at SLC (IIRC the Overland Route is about 2-3 hours quicker than the Rio Grande line, so SLC would have WB times around 2100-2200 and EB times around 0600...not perfect, but at least not smack in the middle of the night.

If Amtrak had the equipment (ha!), there might be a case to be made for running a "stub" section to Grand Junction with several coaches, an SSL (perhaps with boxed meals for premium accommodation pax...this section does scream out for some sort of intemediate class of service between the sleeper and coach), and a through sleeper from Chicago, and an Ambus Grand Junction-Salt Lake...I can't speak to numbers, but IIRC Denver-Grand Junction and Denver-Glenwood Springs are major pairs while west of Grand Junction starts the "ridership crater" that continues to Reno.

With that being said...yes, the "City of Everywhere" approach is probably the best unless you could get the funding/support for a full-blown second CHI-West Coast train on the route...something not likely even under the best of circumstances.


----------



## railiner (Jul 23, 2018)

While it would be nice to have a second train across the middle of the country, serving different stations, agreed highly unlikely, when the SW Chief is itself struggling to stay alive...


----------



## dogbert617 (Aug 17, 2018)

railiner said:


> While it would be nice to have a second train across the middle of the country, serving different stations, agreed highly unlikely, when the SW Chief is itself struggling to stay alive...


I thought the big issue with the SWC, was the lack of positive train control plans to start installing that system on the western Kansas/SE Colorado/northern NM part of it? And THAT exact issue, is what threatens to reroute the SW Chief after December 2018. On a different thread someone proposed rerouting it west/south of Trinidad, and then relocating the Albuquerque station(a la Maricopa, AZ when Phoenix was ended as a stop on Sunset Limited due to the tracks getting in worser shape) to a different part of town. I wish I remembered which new northern NM cities it'd serve, in that person's proposal.


----------



## railiner (Aug 18, 2018)

dogbert617 said:


> railiner said:
> 
> 
> > While it would be nice to have a second train across the middle of the country, serving different stations, agreed highly unlikely, when the SW Chief is itself struggling to stay alive...
> ...


No cities of real significance in NM, in that re-route proposal...however it would serve Amarillo, Tx., which is.


----------



## railgeekteen (Aug 18, 2018)

I think that a pioneer should go through Wyoming and merge with the CZ at Denver.


----------



## railiner (Aug 19, 2018)

railgeekteen said:


> I think that a pioneer should go through Wyoming and merge with the CZ at Denver.


Sorry, like I've told some other's on this board....you were just "born too late"...






But don't let me discourage you from expressing your idea's....


----------



## ParanoidAndroid (Aug 19, 2018)

railiner said:


> railgeekteen said:
> 
> 
> > I think that a pioneer should go through Wyoming and merge with the CZ at Denver.
> ...


Yep... I'm in that group too. Born too late for trains. Even post-1971, there were passenger trains on Vancouver Island, up to Whistler, in Mexico, on Newfoundland, to Gaspé, more on Nova Scotia, and of course the Desert Wind, Pioneer, Int'l Limited, Floridian, Mountaineer, Sunset East, and more. All gone, unable to be appreciated.




Given the situation, we're lucky enough to have cross-country overnight trains at all.


----------



## jis (Aug 19, 2018)

Desert Wind and Pioneer were not part of the original Amtrak system. Nor was Sunset East or even the Lake Shore Limited. Then again several of the original system trains are gone too, like the Broadway, the National and the Lone Star.


----------



## railgeekteen (Nov 22, 2018)

ParanoidAndroid said:


> Yep... I'm in that group too. Born too late for trains. Even post-1971, there were passenger trains on Vancouver Island, up to Whistler, in Mexico, on Newfoundland, to Gaspé, more on Nova Scotia, and of course the Desert Wind, Pioneer, Int'l Limited, Floridian, Mountaineer, Sunset East, and more. All gone, unable to be appreciated.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sad that China is building tracks and we can't even serve Houston in the daylight.


----------



## ParanoidAndroid (Nov 22, 2018)

railgeekteen said:


> Sad that China is building tracks and we can't even serve Houston in the daylight.


Well, technically we do... 6 times a week... [emoji6]


----------



## railgeekteen (Nov 22, 2018)

ParanoidAndroid said:


> Well, technically we do... 6 times a week...


Arrrrg! I meant daily.


----------



## ParanoidAndroid (Nov 22, 2018)

railgeekteen said:


> Arrrrg! I meant daily.


Yeah... even daily is way below adequate, but we can't even do that. Even three-a-week is way below adequate, but we can't even do that for a lot of America's large cities. Oh well. It's hard to establish rail in rural areas because yes, indeed, a once a day dinky train isn't that useful. But a multiple departures a day, state-supported route is robust and useful. But one has to go through the dinky useless phase first, which few like to do. California and Illinois, for example, did this, and now have nice state-supported routes. A lot of other states haven't, and so they don't have trains. Some are just lucky (if you call it that) to have long distance trains.


----------



## frequentflyer (Jan 2, 2019)

City to Everwhere is a bad idea. Have you seen Amtrak's ontime record lately? Imagine the delays of trying to have three trains arrive on or near on time.


----------



## dumboldboy (Jan 4, 2019)

frequentflyer said:


> City to Everwhere is a bad idea. Have you seen Amtrak's ontime record lately? Imagine the delays of trying to have three trains arrive on or near on time.


Seems to me City to Everywhere would be the one time the host railroad would see to it the train didn't get stabbed.  "Gentlemen, we'd love to run a combined train, but if we can't make it work we'll just have to take more slots on your railroad...."


----------



## sttom (Feb 8, 2019)

railiner said:


> Interesting proposal, but I think it would be better to use the former Pioneer/Desert Wind schedules, with thru service to/from Chicago, if service was ever to be restored on those routes.
> 
> I don't think you would get much thru Los Angeles to Portland traffic on your proposal, other than a few railfans, or curious tourists, that have already 'done' the Coast Starlight route.


Just to ask, how many people take the Starlight from LA to Seattle? From my cursory readings of transit planning, its more important to serve trips in the middle of the route rather than someone taking the train from end to end. If I am remembering correctly the Amtrak line the article used as an example showed that only 5% or so of people took the train from its starting station to its terminating station. So the bigger market, at least my assumption would be to get people from LA to Vegas, Vegas to Salt Lake, Salt Lake to Idaho and Boise to Portland rather than the odd tourist who might ride from LA to Portland for the scenery.


----------



## jis (Feb 8, 2019)

The relevant thing to consider is are there more people wanting to go from Las Vegas to Idaho rather than Las Vegas or Idaho to Denver, in a manner of speaking. I have no idea.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider (Feb 9, 2019)

Unlike a lot of people here, I think that a Utah-SoCal train would do quite well. Despite the reputation of the state, the casino's on the borders of Utah do quite well with Utahans and with the growth in the, what's it called, Wasatch Front, a train to Vegas would probably do fairly well, in addition to the travel between LA and Utah and Vegas.

Now whether this is worthy of investment over such a train that would or could serve, say, oh, lets say for arguments sake, St. Louis, Effingham, Terre Haute, Indy, Dayton, Columbus, etc is another question.

(note to/on the first paragraph, do well assuming good times, speed and reliability)


----------



## neroden (Feb 9, 2019)

jis said:


> The relevant thing to consider is are there more people wanting to go from Las Vegas to Idaho rather than Las Vegas or Idaho to Denver, in a manner of speaking. I have no idea.


The number of people who want to go to or from Idaho is vanishingly small.

Salt Lake - Vegas would do good business, though.  Not good enough to *justify* a train given that, say, Ithaca-Syracuse NY would do more business and we don't have a train.


----------



## jis (Feb 10, 2019)

Yeah, I was merely musing about the LD possibilities to the north and east from Las Vegas rather than just the Los Angeles - Vegas thing. Afterall the LAX - Vegas portion should be more than adequately covered by Virgin Trains USA, and I think Amtrak is unlikely to be able to compete against hourly 12 to 16 runs per day anyway.

On the LD side of things, my impression is that there will be more demand for Vegas - SLC - DEN than Vegas - SLC - Idaho. If that is true then it is doubly difficult to justify this new old idea that this thread is about.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider (Feb 10, 2019)

jis said:


> On the LD side of things, my impression is that there will be more demand for Vegas - SLC - DEN than Vegas - SLC - Idaho. If that is true then it is doubly difficult to justify this new old idea that this thread is about.


I think (based on relatives and friends who've lived in that area - obviously anecdotal) there is a lot of regional contact and road traffic between the SLC region and SE Idaho, but whether enough for a train, even a regional one, I can't answer.

That said a train from SLC to the NW, either Portland or Seattle via Boise might do "ok" but again, there are more people in the east in bigger cities that need service first.


----------



## sttom (Feb 11, 2019)

jis said:


> The relevant thing to consider is are there more people wanting to go from Las Vegas to Idaho rather than Las Vegas or Idaho to Denver, in a manner of speaking. I have no idea.


There are plenty of Mormon missionaries that might want to take the train. It is the Mormon Corridor after all. But on a serious not, I could see a Vegas-Salt Lake train working as a corridor service. With a trip or two into eastern Idaho. All the way to Oregon? You'd have to entirely bank on their being enough demand within Idaho and to Portland to justify it.


----------

