Good bye, Ski Train

The Denver Ski Train has been sold & the cars will be on the Algoma Central route.

Perhaps this should have been a state-supported train?

Would it be possible for some ski train riders to use the CZ instead?

While obviously not "luxo", the Ski Train's withdrawal marks the end of passenger train operation over a Class I other than for the account of a public agency.

Not that I ever had reason to ride it, 'sic transit gloria'.

Likely, Denver-Winter Park space will be controlled by the Amtrak reservation system so that such is sold on some kind of last minute basis. Even the railroad CZ controlled sales of both Coach and Pullman space so that a "short' would not deprive the roads of, say, a "bumper to bumper' sale.

Too bad. That was on my list of rides to take an it looks like that won't happen. Interesting that the cars are returning to a CN property and possibly CN ownership, where they started.

Any reason given why? Obviously the economy is quite poor, that would be my first guess.

Edit: Link to site:
http://www.skitrain.com/

And: "A subsidiary of the Anschutz Company has operated the Ski Train at a consistent loss over the past 21 years."

Looks like old Uncle Phil is tightening the purse strings.

what will happen to the f40's

i read it was because of uncertainty of platform space at union station . or rather that was the last straw .

Maybe Amtrak can add a observation car and a coach at denver , just not sure where they would take it off , as theyre already stretching to make this portion in daylight now .

free2rtmey wrote:what will happen to the f40's

I believe the F40s are rail world leasers.

Parallel topics with some more information are also posted:
in Western Railfan: http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 48&t=61065
...and in CN/IC and GTW: http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 50&t=61077

Perhaps it would be worthwhile for Amtrak to consider a second frequency along the D&RGW route, spaced opposite the California Zephyr. A combined Pioneer (trains #46/47) and Desert Wind (#32/33), combining at Salt Lake City and going thence to Chicago, would pretty well fit the bill.

David Benton wrote:i read it was because of uncertainty of platform space at union station . or rather that was the last straw .

Any further details? I haven't been there since the 90s, but I can't believe that one pair of Amtrak trains a day maxes out Denver Union Station's capacity.

From the narp hotline :
"A spokesman for the Denver based Anschutz Co. (owned by Phil Anschutz), which has owned and operated the Ski Train since 1988 when they purchase it from the Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad, cited a variety of reasons for the sale. While money had always been a problem, the specific reasons given ranged from an increase in liability costs, difficulties in operating the trains on Union Pacific owned rails, and uncertainty over the train’s place in the redeveloped Union Station. “The Denver Business Journal reported Jan. 16 that work at Union Station beginning later this year would reduce close-in parking and platform space that had been used by the Ski Train and its passengers.” (The Denver Business Journal, April 22) " .
link to full article , http://www.narprail.org/cms/index.php/h ... tline_601/

David Benton wrote:difficulties in operating the trains on Union Pacific owned rails

Anyone want to speculate on a connection between Phillip Anschutz no longer being a board member of Union Pacific (dating from the UP/SP merger) to the "difficulties in operating the trains on Union Pacific owned rails"?

TomNelligan wrote:

David Benton wrote:i read it was because of uncertainty of platform space at union station . or rather that was the last straw .

Any further details? I haven't been there since the 90s, but I can't believe that one pair of Amtrak trains a day maxes out Denver Union Station's capacity.

Well, the station itself can accomodate more, but the train sheds for multiple railroad operations (UP, CB&Q, D&RGW, ATSF, and CRI&P) long ago came down. There is a shed along Track 1 which shares the platform with the station doors, and there's a shed over Tracks 2 and 3. But that's it. 3 tracks.

Now, to be blunt, a 3 track station probably can handle 12-14 arrivals and departures daily, if they're staggered a little, but this station cannot handle the load it could back in the 60s anymore. The tracks are gone. For that matter, the coach yard is gone.

If Denver is going to tear down tracks 2 and 3, well, they don't need that big building for Amtrak anymore, they need about 3000 sq feet tops. Anyone for an Amshack in Denver?

John_Perkowski wrote:Well, the station itself can accomodate more, but the train sheds for multiple railroad operations (UP, CB&Q, D&RGW, ATSF, and CRI&P) long ago came down. There is a shed along Track 1 which shares the platform with the station doors, and there's a shed over Tracks 2 and 3. But that's it. 3 tracks.

Now, to be blunt, a 3 track station probably can handle 12-14 arrivals and departures daily, if they're staggered a little, but this station cannot handle the load it could back in the 60s anymore. The tracks are gone. For that matter, the coach yard is gone.

If Denver is going to tear down tracks 2 and 3, well, they don't need that big building for Amtrak anymore, they need about 3000 sq feet tops. Anyone for an Amshack in Denver?

Denver is planning to reconstruct the station as 5 tracks (IIRC, might have been 6), but much shorter tracks. This is in order to bring commuter rail into the station. There will be only one platform long enough for the current California Zephyr, and it was going to be a stretch to get the even longer Ski Train into it, though they kept promising it would be possible. That track will be in the middle of the station with somewhat clumsy access patterns. (Commuter rail east to DIA gets the best track next to the station building, and IIRC one of the other commuter rail lines gets the second-best track, with a wide waiting platform, on the other end of the station.)

This design has been widely panned for various reasons, but one is that it doesn't allow for longer trains. Longer trains are more efficient, so this seems kind of stupid. It's also been panned for moving the light rail station three blocks away (with a travelator connection) next to the Consolidated Main Line, and for failing to have any through tracks.

However, it will certainly increase the use of Denver Union Station to have half-hourly commuter trains running on two or more lines, so Amtrak certainly isn't going to move (they may downsize their operations by borrowing some functionality from the commuter service, however).

I dont believe that the F-40's every showed on the Amtrak roster but I do know for certain that they still carried Amtrak reporting marks on them! They would have the engine number and below it AMTK.This leads me to believe that they were possibly still owned by Amtrak but leased to Ski Train. I dont know if thats true but I do find it interesting that they retained AMTK reporting marks on them. Anyone know if Amtrak still owns them and they were being leased? It would be wonderful if Amtrak still owned them and sent them out on long hauls to supplement power needs. I miss running those old girls

I thought Amtrak runs into the lower levels of the station. Last time I was in Denver, the surface tracks were not through tracks, and the walkway to the trains was underground. Ski Train was stored above ground. And I saw the train leave the station and it was not on the surface tracks.

I checked it out and I was right. These engines are ex-Amtrak, sold to Rail World, and leased to the Ski train. Here is a list of ex-Amtrak F40s and where they went. http://www.on-track-on-line.com/amtkrinf-f40activ.shtml