Winter Park (Colorado) Express is back

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Steamboat Springs could be in a similarly advantageous position if trains ever returned to the old D&SL -- rails in place in walking distance of downtown hotels/condos, commercial airport 25 miles away in Hayden.

A considerably longer train ride from Denver. But considerably longer drive too.

Is that perhaps why this route has been advanced over Denver-Grand Junction in some recent conversations?

(No reason why you can't do both with minimal additional disruption to freight, either fleeting the westbound morning departures or running Steamboat and Grand Junction trainsets coupled together to Bond.)
 
Steamboat Springs could be in a similarly advantageous position if trains ever returned to the old D&SL -- rails in place in walking distance of downtown hotels/condos, commercial airport 25 miles away in Hayden.
Having a nearby commercial airport is an advantage for the ski resort, but not for rail service, as it would provide competition for any rail service. Actually dissimilar to Winter Park rail service, which has no air competition, and if the Ski Train would extend to the DEN airport, could benefit from code share traffic.
 
Having a nearby commercial airport is an advantage for the ski resort, but not for rail service, as it would provide competition for any rail service. Actually dissimilar to Winter Park rail service, which has no air competition, and if the Ski Train would extend to the DEN airport, could benefit from code share traffic.
What you read as "nearby" I intended as "far enough away from town that no hotel is running a shuttle to it and no public transit is likely to exist" (though I imagine there is somebody doing van rides at $50 or more a head during ski season.) And having looked just now, it does receive shockingly many passengers, enough there may well be someone running full buses and not just vans.

There used to be commercial air service right into Steamboat (on small prop planes) but it's been gone long enough for everyone to forget it.
 
Electrification of the entire Ski Train route is a hard sell, since most daily users on the route aren't dual mode or electric. If Class 1 railroads start adding that capability (for example if California mandates mainline electrification and West Coast class 1s begin adding pantographs on diesels) it becomes somewhat more viable. Note that this is a "maybe someday" situation. Adding parallel track for more frequent service is also hugely expensive but would get you closer to justifying overhead electrification, and light electric multiple units could accelerate faster for the sections of track that aren't sharp curves.

Honestly a more likely scenario for non Amtrak Superliner service is a DMU setup, but unless someplace else has a summer only use for them even that is doubtful.
 
What is RMR equipment doing this time of year ? Could any of their cars in the US or Canada configured as coaches and some sort of snack service be leased for this ?
Sitting in Kamloops, BC, their base, with the rest of their fleet for the winter. I seriously doubt RMR has any interest in leasing their equipment.

They've actually got quite a few spares and they all live in Kamloops.
 
Steamboat Springs could be in a similarly advantageous position if trains ever returned to the old D&SL -- rails in place in walking distance of downtown hotels/condos, commercial airport 25 miles away in Hayden.

A considerably longer train ride from Denver. But considerably longer drive too.

Is that perhaps why this route has been advanced over Denver-Grand Junction in some recent conversations?

(No reason why you can't do both with minimal additional disruption to freight, either fleeting the westbound morning departures or running Steamboat and Grand Junction trainsets coupled together to Bond.)
It's being driven by it being redundant when coal hauls end, and by US40, the Victory Highway, not being as easy a drive as I-70. Note that I'm referring to modeling used by transportation planners, not actual travel conditions.
 
A new article mentioned that the State of Colorado can add three round trips a day at no cost (for access). That doesn't including the Zephyr or Ski Train. This is potentially a very exciting development to have frequent (by US standards) rail service in the I-70 corridor. 4-5 trains a day out of Denver would be huge!
Maybe RTD could run a couple of commuter trains to Arvada, but it would parallel their light rail line, I suppose …
 
Last edited:
Cannot imagine a CZ, Ski Train, & Craig train all following one after another going up big ten. Smoke in Moffet tunnel might need to clear first. Cannot remember if it has any artificial ventilation?
 
Cannot imagine a CZ, Ski Train, & Craig train all following one after another going up big ten. Smoke in Moffet tunnel might need to clear first. Cannot remember if it has any artificial ventilation?
The ventilation fans are at the East Portal. It also has doors to aid in smoke evacuation, which could take 15 to 30 minutes, variably. I am not sure of the physics of why the doors aid in smoke evacuation...it would seem to be counter-productive to my thinking... 🤔
 
The ventilation fans are at the East Portal. It also has doors to aid in smoke evacuation, which could take 15 to 30 minutes, variably. I am not sure of the physics of why the doors aid in smoke evacuation...it would seem to be counter-productive to my thinking... 🤔
I don't know, but it could be with the doors open, lots of fresh air is sucked into the tunnel and mixes with the smokey air inside. All the air, both the original very smokey air and the less smokey air mixed with fresh air needs to be evacuated before the next train comes through, which takes longer. With the doors closed, more of the smokiest air is evacuated early in the process, reducing the pollution to acceptable levels more quickly.

Though for this to work, I think you would need doors and fans at both ends, and would want to close only one set of doors, depending on the direction of the most recent train. But maybe with the doors and fans both being at the East Portal, closing the doors there forces the air to come in the West Portal and out through the fans at the East Portal, assisted by the prevailing West to East winds. If the doors at the East Portal were open, the fans would preferentially suck in air through the nearby portal and the smokey air would just sit in the tunnel for much longer?

There are also other things to consider, including the trains acting as plungers, pushing clean air out and leaving the tunnel full of smoke. The next train, depending on direction, would either add to this or push the smokey air out but leave new smokey air in the tunnel. Lots of physical factors to consider.
 
Yes, the doors keep the fans from using the nearby portal. The fans are only at the east portal, you can clearly see the ducts on Google Maps.

I'm not sure which way it blows. Or maybe it depends on the weather. The east portal is at a lower elevation.
 
I seem to recall hearing this line through the Moffit Tunnel has very low utilization for freight like at most 4 trains a day. Certainly there's the tunnel exhausting issue but that it was no where near bumping into that limit. Would also likely explain the ease of adding the passenger trains to the route, as we all know that is usually the hardest part especially without enormous amounts of money for capacity improvements.
 
Back
Top