Amtrak Southwest Chief Discussion

Don_ wrote:

Rockingham Racer wrote:

MBTA3247 wrote:

dowlingm wrote:How is ABQ "in doubt" (per one of the articles above) or is this FUD for the defenders of the status quo?

A reroute to the Southern Transcon would require the Southwest Chief to make a backup move of at least 1.5 miles from Albuquerque to the nearest wye, assuming that wye is suitable for turning it in the first place, and possibly all the way back to Belen (if the wye isn't usable and/or the line between Isleta and Dalies gets embargoed along with the route over Raton Pass).

Your backup move to Belen will never happen. A 1.5 mile backup move is not the end of the world. And if the wye is not in good shape but is needed for the service, then put it in good shape. Shouldn't be a deal breaker. Right now, I believe there is no connecting track at Belen between the Railrunner and the BNSF. The station seems to have a stub end track on its east end.

The ABQ wye is inferior for passenger reverse moves.
During the 2010 washout north of Wagon Mound, I photographed No. 4 wyeing there to be turned to return east that evening after passengers rode on a "bridge" bus from ABQ to LaJunta.
Looking over my shots, I see the wye turn required a laborious 40 mins. from the train's arrival @ the wye until it backed into ABQ station.

BNSF crews didn't seem prepared for the backup and it appears the wye wasn't constructed for train reversals.

The backup wasn't anywhere smooth as the backups required daily for No. 91 & 92 for the 2-3 mile reverse move east of Tampa Union Station.

So the wye can't be upgraded to provide a smooth and short operation? Just because it's not in great shape doesn't mean it can't be improved.

Only if Warren Buffet pays for the wye upgrade, as well as the other upgrades needed for the new route, which hasn't seen passenger service in nearly 4 decades.
It's BNSF's problem, not Amtrak's.

While not in the greatest of shape,the Abajo wye is useable for turning the chief,there's been some chatter of
rebuilding the wye for everyday use with power switches at all legs as well, inside the wye legs is Abajo Lift
the intermodel yard with heavy UPS use,and the former tie plant yard is near by for Auto rack unloading..
There is a need for a couple of seasons of tie gang work between Trinidad and Lamy soon,with exception of washout repairs done
last year and 2012,most of the ties are close to replacement age

That wye was designed for turning small units, like freight engines. It's not a wide-angle wye, like the one in Tampa, Fla., where 91/92 turn every day of the year in a lot less time.
Trust me, 40 mins. to turn a train is unreasonable and delay-prone.

BNSF appears to not have done its homework nor prepared for the forced reroute, which isn't necessary.

As Trains mag. recently reported, as posted on page 21 of this here discussion, forcing Amtrak off the traditional route will end up costing Amtrak more than refurbishing the existing route.

gokeefe wrote:Another commentary published on the website of RailPAC, the Rail Passenger Association of California & Nevada discusses the Southwest Chief:

It is unbelievable that Mr. Boardman would really mean cutting amenities would raise the $100 million the BNSF has demanded for preservation of that route. It is and always has been a national system responsibility, and it is up to Amtrak to settle the issue with the railroad using Amtrak money, and the states should only pay a very small amount. Otherwise, Amtrak will have the precedent it can use to blackmail the states along all its long distance routes by having them face the elimination of their trains, just as they are doing with the corridor trains.

In Trains magazine Fred Frailey revealed that the cost to Amtrak of moving to the BNSF’s “Transcon” line would be as much as preserving the old route.

It is claimed elsewhere that New Mexico has money designated for the Abajo Wye - does that ring a bell with anyone?

The Inspection train finally arrived at 10:50 tonight, and is turning on the wye now,
reportly heading back east on #4(12) tomorrow,145+822,View-I sleeper,Beech Grove and American View with the markers.
Reportly Mr Boardman, Senator Henrich, Head of NMDOT on board.
Local Media to meet with Mr Boardman and ABQ Mayor Barry in the AM

At times the contract "Honey Wagon" service meets the empty train at the wye, for waste tank flushing.
Due to the water hoses for Fresh Water are next to the tracks used to lay up the turned train.

Rockingham Racer wrote:

MBTA3247 wrote:

dowlingm wrote:How is ABQ "in doubt" (per one of the articles above) or is this FUD for the defenders of the status quo?

A reroute to the Southern Transcon would require the Southwest Chief to make a backup move of at least 1.5 miles from Albuquerque to the nearest wye, assuming that wye is suitable for turning it in the first place, and possibly all the way back to Belen (if the wye isn't usable and/or the line between Isleta and Dalies gets embargoed along with the route over Raton Pass).

Your backup move to Belen will never happen. A 1.5 mile backup move is not the end of the world. And if the wye is not in good shape but is needed for the service, then put it in good shape. Shouldn't be a deal breaker. Right now, I believe there is no connecting track at Belen between the Railrunner and the BNSF. The station seems to have a stub end track on its east end.

The station track at Belen is a stub track, but there is a connection a few hundred feet north of the platform to the Transcon:


The trick is arranging new connections and platforms for passenger service over the Transcon tracks there. From what I observed when I was there in 2012, BNSF has directional running around either side of Belen Yard (westbounds on the west side, eastbounds on the east side)

The Belen station track ends at a bridge support ,CP Ross is on the upper right of the photo,
East Belen Jct(BNSF) is on the left of the photo,the reported direct route thru Belen yard is #6 lead,
normally a WB track,but allows access to the Transconn or the El Paso sub at the east end of the yard.
the former passenger station has been converted to office space and next to the WB fuel racks.

Mark my words:

1) 3 and 4 will move to the Transcon in 2016 OR

2) We will see discontinuance notices for 3 and 4, and the dismantling of the LD network will begin.

I think it's interesting to contrast our positions here - some state that we can't run on the transcon because the wye is not good enough, others say we should run on the Raton main and use $XXX million to support it. Why not use a fraction of that $XXXmillion to upgrade ABQ facilities like the wye in order to make it useful for a backing move into ABQ and use of the transcon?

Also worth noting - ABQ-LAQ and CHI-Wichita both are above the 700-mile threshold for long distance federal support. Perhaps it's worth having two trains?

Tadman wrote:I think it's interesting to contrast our positions here - some state that we can't run on the transcon because the wye is not good enough, others say we should run on the Raton main and use $XXX million to support it. Why not use a fraction of that $XXXmillion to upgrade ABQ facilities like the wye in order to make it useful for a backing move into ABQ and use of the transcon?

Also worth noting - ABQ-LAQ and CHI-Wichita both are above the 700-mile threshold for long distance federal support. Perhaps it's worth having two trains?

You're being much too much logical.

Nothing to do with logic.Whichever way it goes, it will be a political solution. Then they choose the logic to suit.

John_Perkowski wrote:Mark my words:

1) 3 and 4 will move to the Transcon in 2016 OR

2) We will see discontinuance notices for 3 and 4, and the dismantling of the LD network will begin.

There is no alternative. It's going to be option 1. The loss of service for some communities may spur a movement to start state sponsored passenger trains in affected areas. Could be interesting to see how that plays out.

gokeefe wrote:

John_Perkowski wrote:Mark my words:

1) 3 and 4 will move to the Transcon in 2016 OR

2) We will see discontinuance notices for 3 and 4, and the dismantling of the LD network will begin.

There is no alternative. It's going to be option 1. The loss of service for some communities may spur a movement to start state sponsored passenger trains in affected areas. Could be interesting to see how that plays out.

In Kansas?

Ain't. Gonna. Happen.

They lost any shot at HSR monies by not following the rules back in 09-10. They neither care about nor want service. The conservatives of Kansas are beyond ridiculous.

I'm glad I live in Missouri.