What should the SWC do?

[BNSFboy]

I know everyone is tired of hearing about the SWC reroute but this is just to see what people think without long post.

 

[Peter KG6LSE]

Do what ever is needed to keep it running ..

. Yes some people wll loose there stop .My grandfather worked in Trinidad so its personal to me in a small way ..

But why should the LA to CHI people suffer .

 

[printman2000]

I understand your intentions, but there might be a flaw in this poll. Some people will vote for what they most want to happen, and some will vote for what they think would be best under the current SWC circumstances.

I suspect if there were no track issues, 99.9% of people would want it to stay on the current route.

Since there are track issues with no solutions, I am sure 100% of people would choose the reroute over being canceled.

 

[Ryan]

Voted Raton. I want to take the train to Philmont with my son one day.

 

[printman2000]

Voted Raton. I want to take the train to Philmont with my son one day.

That is exactly my point. Almost everyone would prefer the current route.

If the rail line continues to deteriorate without any maintenance, then the only options will be reroute or discontinuance. Then what would you choose?

 

[rusty spike]

I voted to contimue through Raton. Absent of freight interference, and fairly level. it could be easitly upgraded to high-speed 110- to 125-mph running, serving major cities like KC, Wichita, Albuquerque, and still be within a 2-hr dedicated Thruway bus for Denver, Phoenix. It should be able to do a 38-hour CHI-LAX run. Like the old Super Chief days which used to run the Kansas leg at 90+ MPH. It would have almost exclusive track usage from KCY to Lamy. But --SIGH-- I'm not holding my breath.

 

[rusty spike]

I voted to contimue

 

[rusty spike]

I voted to contimue

Sorry- duplicated

 

[AutoTrDvr]

I know everyone is tired of hearing about the SWC reroute but this is just to see what people think without long post.

Just curious, since I'm not up to speed on this SWC reroute... which section of the route are we talking about? Irrational of me, perhaps, but I would not favor altering any portion of the route that would subtract from the "Rt. 66" parallel (i.e Lamy & points west), or remove stops through Atchinson and/or Topeka, in deference to the original ATSF. Of course, I understand that's not how things work in re: BNSF's freight division, but...

UPDATE:

Nevermind! I'm Googling the original threads and articles. At this point, I'd still prefer the original Raton route if the scenery is better. AFAIC, it's one of the primary things that draw me to train travel (i.e. being able to enjoy the scenery in ways one can't when driving, etc.).

 

[printman2000]

Lamy through Newton would probably not be served. Wichita would so I assume Newton would transfer to Witchita.

 

[zephyr17]

I know everyone is tired of hearing about the SWC reroute but this is just to see what people think without long post.

Just curious, since I'm not up to speed on this SWC reroute... which section of the route are we talking about? Irrational of me, perhaps, but I would not favor altering any portion of the route that would subtract from the "Rt. 66" parallel (i.e Lamy & points west), or remove stops through Atchinson and/or Topeka, in deference to the original ATSF. Of course, I understand that's not how things work in re: BNSF's freight division, but...

The "route 66" portion is west of Albuquerque and the train has never gone through Atchison. The reroute would be between Dalies, south of Albuquerque where the old "northern" passenger main splits from the "Transcon" and roughly Newton, KS where it rejoins. BNSF has no traffic over a major portion of the route, basically between La Junta, CO and Lamy, NM, and has very light traffic local traffic from east of La Junta (Las Animas Jct) through Colorado and Kansas. The line up to Lamy is owned by the State of New Mexico now and is used for their RailRunner service, although it cuts away south of Lamy onto a new line they built into Santa Fe, and between that new junction and Lamy, New Mexico isn't exactly maintaining well, either. Not going into the whole tale where NM was contracted to buy the entire line up to the Colorado border, but is now trying to renege on.

Amtrak's stated preferences would be to stay on the line, but it needs major maintenance that BNSF is no longer willing to do and a decision must be made on the line by 2016. BNSF is likely to abandon the line between La Junta and Lamy entirely if a solution isn't found. The line between Newton and Las Animas Jct would be downgraded and maintained only for low speed local freight service.

If the route is to be kept, funds must be found to maintain it, most likely from the states and Amtrak. The towns in eastern Colorado and western Kansas have been pushing to fund it and keep the train where it is. If funds aren't found, it really isn't Amtrak's choice, since they'd have to assume financial responsibility for all maintenance on the line which is only used by them. In the long run, BNSF cannot be forced to keep a line they don't want and Amtrak can't run a train without tracks.

The line through Topeka is a branch, but not in danger of losing service. Atchison was never on any mainline. Not one of AT&SF's namesake cities were on their mainlines.

That being said, I far prefer to keep it on the traditional route over Glorietta and Raton passes. That line is very scenic and is one of my very favorite Amtrak routes. The Transcon through Amarillo is much less so. Once it gets out of Abo Canyon east of Belen, it is in basically flat country. Which is why it is the freight main, BTW.

 

[zephyr17]

Lamy through Newton would probably not be served. Wichita would so I assume Newton would transfer to Witchita.

Lamy would not be served at all. If the reroute happens, the most likely scenario is they would run up to Albuquerque and back from Belen and wye the train. Don't know if they would be using the current cutoff between Isleta and Dalies, think that might be on the block, too. But they wouldn't go past Albuquerque either way.

 

[BNSFboy]

I understand your intentions, but there might be a flaw in this poll. Some people will vote for what they most want to happen, and some will vote for what they think would be best under the current SWC circumstances.

I suspect if there were no track issues, 99.9% of people would want it to stay on the current route.

Since there are track issues with no solutions, I am sure 100% of people would choose the reroute over being canceled.

That was my intentions, so people can see what the trend is. The track situation is also what I intended to be a factor in this poll

 

[AutoTrDvr]

That being said, I far prefer to keep it on the traditional route over Glorietta and Raton passes. That line is very scenic and is one of my very favorite Amtrak routes. The Transcon through Amarillo is much less so. Once it gets out of Abo Canyon east of Belen, it is in basically flat country. Which is why it is the freight main, BTW.

Thanks. I just finished Googling up on the old threads/articles. I would prefer to maintain the original Raton route as well, for scenic reasons. How we pay for it, I don't know. Then again, I'm famous for spending money I don't have.

 

[Paulus]

Reroute it, there's no business sense in maintaining the line just for a single train each day per direction, especially when that reroute would probably gain passengers and revenue.

 

[user 1215]

The problem with the reroute is the sheer amount of traffic. Now, I realize that with the entire route double tracked, that isn't as big as an issue as it was before they completed the pass in the Southern Manzanos. But there WILL be track maintenance and the P speeds are higher than the F speeds. I can't imagine BNSF wanting Amtrak leap frogging their freights, making the average speeds closer to the 45-50 MPH vs 65-70 MPH average speeds. Then there is the dreaded Wye to get into ABQ. All these introduce delays into the ABQ area. Amtrak gets priority on BNSF, but NOT over the NM Railrunner. The schedule is tight weaving in between the commuter trains. An Amtrak delay can snowball quickly.

 

[Nathanael]

Lamy would not be served at all. If the reroute happens, the most likely scenario is they would run up to Albuquerque and back from Belen and wye the train. Don't know if they would be using the current cutoff between Isleta and Dalies, think that might be on the block, too. But they wouldn't go past Albuquerque either way.

Those 15 miles between Isleta and Dalies are probably within Amtrak's capabilities to buy and maintain if necessary (unlike the Raton Pass line), and it does add significant flexibility to dispatching.

I have to agree with the "whatever serves through passengers best" opinion; keep the LA-Albuquerque-Kansas City-Chicago service running as reliably speedily as possible.

I will say that if the train *is* rerouted, it would be really shameful to reroute it *without* adding a stop in Amarillo, but without funding, that could happen.

 

[printman2000]

I am fairly certain Amarillo will be a crew change point to replace La Junta. At least it has been on temporary rerouts.

I would not rest until Amarillo did whatever to get a passenger stop!

 

[BNSFboy]

The problem with the reroute is the sheer amount of traffic. Now, I realize that with the entire route double tracked, that isn't as big as an issue as it was before they completed the pass in the Southern Manzanos. But there WILL be track maintenance and the P speeds are higher than the F speeds. I can't imagine BNSF wanting Amtrak leap frogging their freights, making the average speeds closer to the 45-50 MPH vs 65-70 MPH average speeds. Then there is the dreaded Wye to get into ABQ. All these introduce delays into the ABQ area. Amtrak gets priority on BNSF, but NOT over the NM Railrunner. The schedule is tight weaving in between the commuter trains. An Amtrak delay can snowball quickly.

Freight speeds on the Transcon is 70 MPH not 40 or 55. It would actually be easier for BNSF dispatchers because Amtrak will hold a slot instead of leaving then coming back at a different point.

 

[pebbleworm]

Albuquerque has the Rail Runner- I don't see a real reason for Amtrak to keep stopping there. The Transcon seems to go through more places with people than the existing route. People always say "what about the boy scouts?", but they are just a mormon church group these days. If they want to take a train to summer camp, the Rail Runner can take them.

 

[Eric S]

The problem with the reroute is the sheer amount of traffic. Now, I realize that with the entire route double tracked, that isn't as big as an issue as it was before they completed the pass in the Southern Manzanos. But there WILL be track maintenance and the P speeds are higher than the F speeds. I can't imagine BNSF wanting Amtrak leap frogging their freights, making the average speeds closer to the 45-50 MPH vs 65-70 MPH average speeds. Then there is the dreaded Wye to get into ABQ. All these introduce delays into the ABQ area. Amtrak gets priority on BNSF, but NOT over the NM Railrunner. The schedule is tight weaving in between the commuter trains. An Amtrak delay can snowball quickly.

Freight speeds on the Transcon is 70 MPH not 40 or 55. It would actually be easier for BNSF dispatchers because Amtrak will hold a slot instead of leaving then coming back at a different point.

Freight speed limit may be 70mph, but the comment was regarding average speeds, not maximum speeds.

 

[Eric S]

Albuquerque has the Rail Runner- I don't see a real reason for Amtrak to keep stopping there. The Transcon seems to go through more places with people than the existing route. People always say "what about the boy scouts?", but they are just a mormon church group these days. If they want to take a train to summer camp, the Rail Runner can take them.

I hardly think that having commuter rail service means that intercity rail service is no longer necessary. ABQ provides a significant portion of the SWC ridership, probably the largest mid-point ridership (although I need to break out KCY's MoRR vs SWC ridership to be sure on that one). Now, other than ABQ, then certainly there is more population (with Amarillo and Wichita) along the southern vs northern route.

As far as the Boy Scouts, I'm not sure what the religious comment has to do with anything. And, it should be noted that the New Mexico Rail Runner Express does not serve Raton.

Regardless what happens, some method of accommodating ABQ ridership should be preserved, probably through direct service, a la Tampa with the Silver Star.

 

[greatcats]

Albuquerque has the Rail Runner- I don't see a real reason for Amtrak to keep stopping there. The Transcon seems to go through more places with people than the existing route. People always say "what about the boy scouts?", but they are just a mormon church group these days. If they want to take a train to summer camp, the Rail Runner can take them.

Rail runner goes nowhere near Raton. However, I found your remark about the Mormon church group very funny. :giggle:

 

[greatcats]

Albuquerque has the Rail Runner- I don't see a real reason for Amtrak to keep stopping there. The Transcon seems to go through more places with people than the existing route. People always say "what about the boy scouts?", but they are just a mormon church group these days. If they want to take a train to summer camp, the Rail Runner can take them.

Rail runner goes nowhere near Raton. However, I found your remark about the Mormon church group very funny. :giggle:

 

[cirdan]

Freight speeds on the Transcon is 70 MPH not 40 or 55. It would actually be easier for BNSF dispatchers because Amtrak will hold a slot instead of leaving then coming back at a different point.

Some freight maybe? I'm not even sure whether all freight cars are allowed to be run at such speeds.

And what would happen if BNSF needed to run further trains on the Transcon? Could they squeeze the SWC out? With no alternative route, that could be the end of things, or alternatively it could be the beginning of a slow death agony, like the Sunset Limited. And if we're honest, it's fairly obvious UPRR wants to kill that train, and unless something big happens, it will one day have its way. Okay, I know BNSF has a more positive attitude to Amtrak. But management can change. Nothing is set in stone. So in my opinion its a dangerous gamble.