Southwest Chief Track Conditions

[Eric S]

Recently Wichita Union Station was sold and the new developer has stated the intention to leave space for an Amtrak station if so desired.

 

[Amtrak George]

TEMPORARY STATION STOPS: I remember a few years ago when Central Station in Memphis was closed (along with the rail line) due to a sinkhole. The City of New Orleans was detoured on the freight route, the "belt line". They made a Memphis stop with bus connections to downtown, but passengers boarded and detrained (I witnessed this when I rode Newbern to Jackson, MS during the detour) on a temporary graveled area, very rudimentary, near the freight yard. There were absolutely no facilities at the location, and this detour lasted for months. I feel fairly sure Amtrak could do something like this temporarily in the event of a sudden reroute, while plans for permanent facilities progress.

 

[Amtrak George]

I just saw a news release that New Mexico's governor has reached an agreement with BNSF to scrap the deal about buying their line. Wonder if this will be a nail in the coffin of the Raton Pass route?

Get that mileage now if you don't have it!

 

[Nathanael]

I just saw a news release that New Mexico's governor has reached an agreement with BNSF to scrap the deal about buying their line. Wonder if this will be a nail in the coffin of the Raton Pass route?

Yes.
I found a report about the news release.

http://www.lcsun-news.com/dona_ana_news/ci_22805752/governor-nm-scrapping-deal-buy-bnsf-track

Sounds like BNSF was offered a tax break on locomotive fuel in exchange for making a full refund (BNSF was entitled to keep at least some of the 'earnest money', but has agreed to refund it).

With this ownership complication removed, BNSF is probably going to apply to the STB for abandonment relatively soon (within a year, if I were to guess). That starts a long procedure where organizations have the opportunity to offer to subsidize BNSF's operation of the line (unlikely), offer to buy the rail line (unlikely unless Colorado steps in), announce that they want to "railbank" it as a trail, call for a "public use condition" to prevent the corridor from being severed, claim that it serves an essential public purpose and must not be shut down, or various other things. It'll take a while.

Amtrak is the entity with the most ability to complain about an abandonment; and Amtrak has made it pretty clear that it's not worth it to Amtrak to own and maintain this long corridor if there's an alternative route. (Contrast short, essential corridors such as the Niagara Falls bridge and the Post Road Branch, where it was worth it to Amtrak to buy them; or the St. Charles Air Line in Chicago, where Amtrak exacted a "we will maintain this to your standards as long as you need it" contract from CN.)

The localities with stations may complain about abandonment to the STB. But the states didn't put up the needed money (after being given ample notice), and the localities with stations didn't/can't put up the needed money. Therefore if Amtrak goes along with BNSF the STB will probably go along too. The abandoment filing will therefore probably contain an explicit deal with Amtrak to use the other route, and is actually likely to have extra sweeteners for Amtrak. (Perhaps BNSF will renew the Albuquerque wye and give it to Amtrak, and/or give Amtrak money for station construction, for instance.)

At that point we'll see what happens to the abandoned rail ROW; I hope it gets a railbanking offer from the localities or gets bought by Colorado, rather than having houses built on it.

 

[railiner]

Any chance of some short line taking it over? Aren't there still several grain elevators along the route, that would at least warrant keeping it up to the minimum FRA standards?

Amtrak couldn't use it very well, if that happened, but at least the line would stay intact.....

 

[gswager]

Any chance of some short line taking it over? Aren't there still several grain elevators along the route, that would at least warrant keeping it up to the minimum FRA standards?Amtrak couldn't use it very well, if that happened, but at least the line would stay intact.....

Are you talking about in Colorado and Kansas? BNSF is keeping that line but at lower speed, mostly used for coal and ag freights. Line from Trinidad to ABQ is the one that BNSF sold to NM. It only uses by Amtrak, not freights. I hope NM know what they're doing despite at bargain price. If BNSF filed for abandonment, NM may have to take it again if shortlines are not interested.

 

[railiner]

Yes....I meant the line from Newton to LaJunta, and on to both Pueblo and Trinidad.

Glad to hear that line will stay intact, at least....

 

[Trogdor]

I feel fairly sure Amtrak could do something like this temporarily in the event of a sudden reroute, while plans for permanent facilities progress.

This reroute won't be sudden.

 

[SarahZ]

The Southwest Chief will continue going to Albuquerque. With the tracks from Belen to ABQ owned by RailRunner, the tracks are not currently at risk (unlike Phoenix). Even *with* the "backtracking" and wyeing around Albuquerque, the time along the Transcon route is less than the time along the current route, so it won't be seen as "too long a detour". It's cheaper to keep using the Albuquerque station than it is to build a new platform *and* crew reporting point *and* servicing and fuelling point at Belen. BNSF doesn't want the train blocking the mainline at Belen. This is all apart from the fact that Albuquerque is one of the highest-ridership stations on the route. The costs of recommissioning the wye and paying track usage fees to NMDOT are really low compared to the costs of *not* serving ABQ. No news report from Amtrak, BNSF, NMDOT, or anyone else in the know has ever suggested that Amtrak would stop serving ABQ.
Perhaps we can put a nail in the coffin of this particular rumor.

More interesting is the question of what will happen to Santa Fe service. Will the schedule allow for the RailRunner to provide "Thruway Bus" service to Santa Fe, or will Amtrak lay on buses, or will passengers simply be on their own? All of these are possibilities.

This is what I was getting at. I seriously, seriously doubt they'd refit Belen when there's a perfectly good station with a large passenger base 30 miles north.

 

[Amtrak George]

The Southwest Chief will continue going to Albuquerque. With the tracks from Belen to ABQ owned by RailRunner, the tracks are not currently at risk (unlike Phoenix). Even *with* the "backtracking" and wyeing around Albuquerque, the time along the Transcon route is less than the time along the current route, so it won't be seen as "too long a detour". It's cheaper to keep using the Albuquerque station than it is to build a new platform *and* crew reporting point *and* servicing and fuelling point at Belen. BNSF doesn't want the train blocking the mainline at Belen. This is all apart from the fact that Albuquerque is one of the highest-ridership stations on the route. The costs of recommissioning the wye and paying track usage fees to NMDOT are really low compared to the costs of *not* serving ABQ. No news report from Amtrak, BNSF, NMDOT, or anyone else in the know has ever suggested that Amtrak would stop serving ABQ.
Perhaps we can put a nail in the coffin of this particular rumor.

More interesting is the question of what will happen to Santa Fe service. Will the schedule allow for the RailRunner to provide "Thruway Bus" service to Santa Fe, or will Amtrak lay on buses, or will passengers simply be on their own? All of these are possibilities.

This is what I was getting at. I seriously, seriously doubt they'd refit Belen when there's a perfectly good station with a large passenger base 30 miles north.

Correct, and let's not forget, there is a precedent for this. For example, in order to serve Tampa, yet continue to Miami, the Silver Star makes a side trip of 31 miles in each direction from Lakeland.

 

[George Harris]

More interesting is the question of what will happen to Santa Fe service. Will the schedule allow for the RailRunner to provide "Thruway Bus" service to Santa Fe, or will Amtrak lay on buses, or will passengers simply be on their own? All of these are possibilities.

The RailRunner goes out of Albuquerque to Santa Fe now and will continue to do so. The state already owns all of the track it uses, so ending of the SWC north of Albuquerque will nto affect its operation. Therefore, so long as the SWC serves Albuquerque it will still be possible to do a rail to rail transfer.

 

[railiner]

The Southwest Chief will continue going to Albuquerque. With the tracks from Belen to ABQ owned by RailRunner, the tracks are not currently at risk (unlike Phoenix). Even *with* the "backtracking" and wyeing around Albuquerque, the time along the Transcon route is less than the time along the current route, so it won't be seen as "too long a detour". It's cheaper to keep using the Albuquerque station than it is to build a new platform *and* crew reporting point *and* servicing and fuelling point at Belen. BNSF doesn't want the train blocking the mainline at Belen. This is all apart from the fact that Albuquerque is one of the highest-ridership stations on the route. The costs of recommissioning the wye and paying track usage fees to NMDOT are really low compared to the costs of *not* serving ABQ. No news report from Amtrak, BNSF, NMDOT, or anyone else in the know has ever suggested that Amtrak would stop serving ABQ.
Perhaps we can put a nail in the coffin of this particular rumor.

More interesting is the question of what will happen to Santa Fe service. Will the schedule allow for the RailRunner to provide "Thruway Bus" service to Santa Fe, or will Amtrak lay on buses, or will passengers simply be on their own? All of these are possibilities.

This is what I was getting at. I seriously, seriously doubt they'd refit Belen when there's a perfectly good station with a large passenger base 30 miles north.

Correct, and let's not forget, there is a precedent for this. For example, in order to serve Tampa, yet continue to Miami, the Silver Star makes a side trip of 31 miles in each direction from Lakeland.

That's a good point. And to a lesser degree, the Pennsylvanian goes into 30th Street Station, rather than use the "New York and Pittsburgh Subway" bypass at Zoo Tower, which while not far, does take a lot of time, and necessitates reversing direction.

On the other hand, the SFZ bypassed Cheyenne. There are probably other examples of such moves that consume extra time, but the city served is too important to bypass....

 

[winterskigirl]

I've booked the Southwest Chief for this August. Never seen Raton Pass & don't want to take my chances.

http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/fred-frailey/archive/2012/09/03/where-is-the-southwest-chief-headed.aspx?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=trn_news_nonsub_120910_final&utm_content=

 

[Stephen]

I think AMTRAK, NMDOT, CDOT, KDOT, BNSF, and the cities involved should work together to keep on its current course. This would be the best option.

If the tracks repairs could not be made in full, I would recommend a different re-route. Rather than the Oaklahoma-Amarillo Reroute, find the money to keep Raton Pass from being abandoned first. Then, re-route the train further north, where Pubelo would replace La Junta, and pick up Colorado Springs and Denver, and then go into Kansas on the Union Pacific Line that goes east of Denver, adding Salina and a couple other stops on that line, and re-join the original route at Topeka.

 

[stntylr]

I will put this down as strictly a rumor but last week on the Texas Eagle. I talked to a station host who was ridding the train. He told me that an alternative proposal had been given for the Southwest Chief to be rerouted through Oklahoma City and Fort Worth then Lubbock.

That would add a couple of large cities to the route.

Again I'm not saying it's going to happen. It's just a rumor I heard.

 

[printman2000]

I will put this down as strictly a rumor but last week on the Texas Eagle. I talked to a station host who was ridding the train. He told me that an alternative proposal had been given for the Southwest Chief to be rerouted through Oklahoma City and Fort Worth then Lubbock. That would add a couple of large cities to the route.

Again I'm not saying it's going to happen. It's just a rumor I heard.

While it looks like there is certainly trackage to accomplish that, seems to me that would add significant time to the schedule for that routing. I would not be surprised at all if it is being considered, I just don't think it will happen. But who knows.

 

[jphjaxfl]

As has been mentioned a reroute through OKC and FTW would ad significant time to the Chicago to LA schedule. Many people choose the Southwest Chief because it has a faster schedule than most of the LD trains. Rerouting over the BNSF transcon freight lines would be a slightly shorter schedule. Any lengthy addition to the Southwest Chief's schedule would lose many through passengers.

 

[Bedford]

I rode the SWC and CONO round trip to New Orleans week before last from Raton. There was no rough track on the SWC to compare with the track south of Memphis.

 

[zephyr17]

Only thing I've ever heard was moving it to the Transcon, which would take it through Wichita, Amarillo, and Lubbock and would be just as fast as the current route (if not faster except taking it up to Albuquerque and back would likely eat up any savings).

 

[BNSFboy]

Only thing I've ever heard was moving it to the Transcon, which would take it through Wichita, Amarillo, and Lubbock and would be just as fast as the current route (if not faster except taking it up to Albuquerque and back would likely eat up any savings).

That's not entirely accurate. While the Transcon does go through Wichita and Amarillo it doesn't go through Lubbock but heads southwest to Hereford and then Clovis with both being considered station stops.

 

[zephyr17]

Only thing I've ever heard was moving it to the Transcon, which would take it through Wichita, Amarillo, and Lubbock and would be just as fast as the current route (if not faster except taking it up to Albuquerque and back would likely eat up any savings).

That's not entirely accurate. While the Transcon does go through Wichita and Amarillo it doesn't go through Lubbock but heads southwest to Hereford and then Clovis with both being considered station stops.

My bad.

 

[Nathanael]

I will put this down as strictly a rumor but last week on the Texas Eagle. I talked to a station host who was ridding the train. He told me that an alternative proposal had been given for the Southwest Chief to be rerouted through Oklahoma City and Fort Worth then Lubbock. That would add a couple of large cities to the route.

Again I'm not saying it's going to happen. It's just a rumor I heard.

This was a serious proposal, coming from Oklahoma. However, Oklahoma hasn't rounded up the money for the necessary upgrades. The reroute through Amarillo doesn't require additional track upgrades, just stations. That's why it seems so likely. If Oklahoma suddenly comes up with a pile of money then the Oklahoma City route might happen, otherwise not.

 

[henryj]

I will put this down as strictly a rumor but last week on the Texas Eagle. I talked to a station host who was ridding the train. He told me that an alternative proposal had been given for the Southwest Chief to be rerouted through Oklahoma City and Fort Worth then Lubbock. That would add a couple of large cities to the route.

Again I'm not saying it's going to happen. It's just a rumor I heard.

This has to be one of the stupidest ideas I have ever hear of. Even dumber than the Crescent Star thing or the reroute of the Sunset through Dallas.

 

[printman2000]

This has to be one of the stupidest ideas I have ever hear of. Even dumber than the Crescent Star thing or the reroute of the Sunset through Dallas.

While I do not think it is a good idea, I also do not think it is stupid. A Fort Worth reroute could potentially only miss the towns that a transcon reroute would miss while at the same time adding some new major stops. It would also give OKC two daily trains to/from Fort Worth. It could also satisfy those in Kansas and Oklahoma who have been trying to extend the Heartland Flyer.

So again, while I do not think it a wise idea, I also can not call it stupid either. It is worth considering, IMHO.

 

[Tennessee Traveler]

While we are "dreaming" I propose a totally different coast to coast route from New York/Washington - Richmond, VA - Roanoke, VA - Knoxville, TN - NASHVILLE, TN - Memphis, TN - Little Rock, AR - Oklahoma City, OK - Amarillo, TX - Albuquerque, NM - Flagstaff, AZ - Los Angeles. Much like the EB and the TE/SL, an additional segment could originate in Chicago and combine with this new train in Amarillo for the run from Amarillo to Los Angeles. If current SWC route to Albuquerque remains, the combining could take place in Albuquerque. My suggested name for this new combined train would be AMTRAK AMERICAN. Yes, it's a take off on the CANADIAN. It might be dumb but I would sure ride it.