Passenger Trains > Amtrak running on the Joint Line

There's talk of a break-off train to/from Pueblo CO from Amtrak 3/4.  Seems like a waste to me without the train going up to Colorado Springs and Denver via the Joint Line.
​We know coal traffic is down.  Given that, what's your opinion on the possibility of Amtrak running to Denver [ given the appropriate state funding, of course.]?

Why would they want to run a train from La Junta to Pueblo or CS or Denver when they already have better connections to Chicago via the CZ.  The better connection it seems to me would be at Raton for a connecton to the West Coast.  There is already a thruway bus connection there, but none to La Junta.  A bus connection to Pueblo with the CZ via I25 would seem more plausible and more cost effective.

There is a market from St Louis, Kansas City, and Topeka (Wichita) via the Chief up the Front Range.

Trains Mag says Amtrak was to produce a study of Pueblo service on July 8th.  I cannot find it on Amtrak's website.  Anyone know about it??

The proposal is not to run a separate train, but to simply route 3/4 via Pueblo.  This likely would require a backup move, esp.  if Pueblo Union Station is to be used, and the schedule would probably be about 2 hours longer than now. NARP reported on this a week ago.

Like many things Amtrak studies and writes about, this one most likely will amount to nothing.

I'm still waiting for the Thruway bus out of Atlanta, or Grand Forks/Winnepeg....both simple, low-cost projects that were the subject of previous Amtrak studies and remain, yes, unimplemented.

Here are the details, from the NARP Hotline:Amtrak released a study this week that shows that adding a stop in Pueblo, Colorado on the Southwest Chief route could attract 14,000 new passengers every year, bringing in $1.45 million in additional operating revenue.“This study shows that it can and will be a reality to have the Pueblo Union Depot become a passenger rail stop again,” said Pueblo County Commissioner Sal Pace. “This will be an economic driver for our community.”Currently, the Southwest Chief carries over 367,000 passengers annually, bringing in roughly $45 million in ticket revenue. Those hundreds of thousands of travelers could be a boon for the region; a 2014 study by Colorado State University-Pueblo discovered that the economic impact of a stop in Pueblo would exceed $3.4 million per year.The next step in enacting the new stop will be to obtain infrastructure and engineering cost estimates to support the service from host railroad BNSF.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/12/16 15:50 by reindeerflame.

I believe this is to tap the Colorado - LA market. It's to connect to the westbound Chief, and from the eastbound Chief.

If it adds 2 hours running time in either direction, that means a 6th trainset, since it won't be able to do a same day turn in LA. That seems terribly inefficient for a bus load of passengers up and back to Pueblo each day.  If that is the only proposal, Pueblo is not going to happen.

<I'm still waiting for the Thruway bus Grand Forks/Winnipeg....both simple, low-cost projects that were the subject of previous Amtrak studies and remain, yes, unimplemented. >

Jefferson Lines quit that market several years ago., mostly due to their own foolishness They dropped 1 of 2 frequencies that best connected at Grand Forks with the Empire Builder to/from Chicago, would not go 9 miles to West Grand Forks to meet Amtrak, nor have the connection at Fargo, and also moved the Winnipeg downtown stop to the Airport. Is flying out of Winnipeg what northeastern North Dakotans do ?

Jefferson Linesalso got sick of Customs. On Canada Day in 2003, I was one of 2 people on the bus, had to go inside the office, show evidence of when I was leaving Canada, and for the first and only time ever with Canada, stamped my Passport. Even the Glacier Park Shuttle van from East Glacier to Waterton Park is subject to Customs hassles. I had to open my bad on the way back. He even questioned my rfid CTA Chicagocard I had loosely packed, asking what it was.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/12/16 16:16 by joemvcnj.

reindeerflame Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The proposal is not to run a separate train, but to simply route 3/4 via Pueblo. . . .
> Like many things Amtrak studies and writes about, this one most likely will amount to nothing.

This proposal is part of the "deal" to keep the Southwest Chief on the Raton routing that involved contributions from BNSF, Amtrak, the States of Kansas, Colorado and New Mexico, and most importantly, TIGER grants from the Federal government.  Sufficient political support in Colorado for the deal depended on a promised re-route via Pueblo.  While there are good economic arguments against it (small number of passengers, longer schedule, higher operating costs, line capacity improvements LaJunta-Pueblo-Walsenburg-Trinidad, possible need for a sixth trainset, etc.), there are good political reasons for it.  If you've calculated what percentage of overall national TIGER funding has gone toward keeping this one train operating via Raton, and noticed that every TIGER application for the route has been approved, you might think the chances are pretty high the Pueblo re-route will happen.  Pueblo County will be the lead agency on next year's TIGER grant, btw.  That tells you a lot right there.

It's still possible they'll get a stub train to/from LaJunta as in Santa Fe days (which continued on to Colorado Springs and Denver), which has also been discussed in Colorado.  The Santa Fe's train was oriented to traffic from the west, not the east, and connected from the eastbound Chief to Denver, and the westbound Chief from Denver.
 



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/12/16 17:32 by illini73.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is a market from St Louis, Kansas City, and
> Topeka (Wichita) via the Chief up the Front Range.

​I'd like to see your source for that statement.  I hope it's based in reality, because I'm all for adding to connectivity between city pairs.
 

I am thinking of population. St Louis + KC + Topeka/Wichita vs. Omaha & Lincoln - no comparison. Brock Adams in the The Carter administration wanted to combine the SF Zephyr and Super Chief. He at first proposed an "Everywhere Chief" with Denver cut cars and San Joaquin cut cars to Oakland (We wound up with the opposite - the Desert Wind, then someone ran in and saved the SW Chief as well).

"If you've calculated what percentage of overall national TIGER funding has gone toward keeping this one train operating via Raton"

TIGER grant was to preserve the route's status quo and keep the track usable. It remains to be seen if it can produce a net add of Pueblo requiring a 6th train set from Beech Grove wreckage, which California did to make 7 Superliner coaches into Surfliner coaches. God knows Amtrak has no western LD train procurement in mind. Amtrak added Topeka and time to the route when Carter killed the Texas train, so they have stretched the limit on 5 train sets.This is like saying the Empire Builder's Seattle section ought to run via Yakima and Ellensburg. Sounds nice, but there is no 6th train set, among other things.

 

Adding Pueblo is almost a no-brainer if they can work out the logistics with BNSF.  There's nearly 1 million people within an hour's drive of the Pueblo station, because virtually all of Colorado Springs lives within a 30-55 minute drive of Pueblo.  A lot more people are willing to drive 45 minutes to Pueblo than 2 hours to Trinidad or La Junta.  Probably would increase tourist ridership from SoCal, too.

Though Denver is further away and thus a smaller percentage would consider driving to Pueblo, it also has more than 3 million residents.  Reducing the drive to catch a train to LA from 2.5-3.5 hours to 1:15-2:15 will increase patronage from the Denver area.

Amtrak would be better off running a stub train - Superliner coach (or two coaches) with a locomotive from Denver to Raton/Trinidad. Southbound from Denver connects early morning with the westbound Chief and then returns back north from Raton/Trinidad to Denver in the evening.

The whole front range population has expanded greatly,  than when Santa Fe ran their little stub train.
Amtrak is missing a huge market here, plain & simple!  I-25 is a disaster with traffic, especially it seems,
always thru Colorado Springs.  To me, running just to Pueblo, although it's a start, and maybe with a thruway
connection to Denver,  just lacks from a bold & decisive planning process.  It would be like running a train
only to Fond du Lac from Milwaukee, and not going all the way to Oshkosh, Appleton, & Green Bay!  Dumb!

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is a market from St Louis, Kansas City, and
> Topeka (Wichita) via the Chief up the Front Range

Not really.  The MOPAC ran the Colorado Eagle and the UP ran the City of St Louis.  Both discontinued long ago.  Would be a terrible option to run the SWC via Pueblo and add over two hours to the schedule..

jfrank39 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> joemvcnj Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There is a market from St Louis, Kansas City,
> and
> > Topeka (Wichita) via the Chief up the Front
> Range
>
> Not really.  The MOPAC ran the Colorado Eagle and
> the UP ran the City of St Louis.  Both
> discontinued long ago.  Would be a terrible
> option to run the SWC via Pueblo and add over two
> hours to the schedule..

That was then.  This is now.  And I thought the re-route thru Pueblo was dropped in favor a stub train to the city. 

• A thru train means an entire 6th set of equipment, including 2 extra locos
• A stub train (thru coach + loco) means 1 loco and 3 coaches from either Chicago or LA
• A shuttle train means 1 loco and 1 coach, but could make 2 round trips per day to connect with #3 in the AM, and #4 in the PM, and capture Pueblo market from both Chicago and LA, and with further connections along the way, San Joaquin, San Diego,  and St Louis.

I think the last option is the most efficient and useful, much like changing to Grand Canyon trains or buses at Williams.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >

• A thru train means an entire 6th set of
  > equipment, including 2 extra locos
  >
• A stub train (thru coach + loco) means 1 loco
  > and 3 coaches from either Chicago or LA
  >
• A shuttle train means 1 loco and 1 coach, but
  > could make 2 round trips per day to connect with
  > #3 in the AM, and #4 in the PM, and capture Pueblo
  > market from both Chicago and LA, and with further
  > connections along the way, San Joaquin, San
  > Diego,  and St Louis.
  >
  > I think the last option is the most efficient and
  > useful, much like changing to Grand Canyon trains
  > or buses at Williams.
•  
• Actually the most efficient option is to run a bus.  If you get to where you need more buses then you can think train.

Simply stated: The proposed Pueblo service addition on 3/4 adds a population center the size of Pittsburgh to the SWC.  The fact that the Colorado front range is growing rapidly and will continue to grow, supports the possibility for increased ridership on 3/4.  Combine such points with a well-organized and focused marketing strategy with the cities of Pueblo and Colorado Springs and the ridership on 3/4 will increase year to year. 

The new connection virtually opens up seamless rail service to/from Central/Southern Colorado and Kansas, Missouri, New Mexico, Arizona and California.  Add an upgraded Newton/Wichita, KS to Ft Worth Heartland Flyer connection and Texas comes in line.  Think about it... If such a service and an aggressive marketing strategy was implemented 10 years ago how far along would the SWC be today? 

 

jfrank39 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> joemvcnj Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There is a market from St Louis, Kansas City,
> and
> > Topeka (Wichita) via the Chief up the Front
> Range
>
> Not really.  The MOPAC ran the Colorado Eagle and
> the UP ran the City of St Louis.  Both
> discontinued long ago.  Would be a terrible
> option to run the SWC via Pueblo and add over two
> hours to the schedule..

Things where very different back then......It would be a good thing now.....auto traffic is 3 to 5 times more now.....

The best option iis  a connecting train to Denver to La Junta or Raton to meet #3 southbound and #4 northbound. 1 loco and 2 coaches, one with a snack bar will do it, more cars later if it becomes popular. The backup move in and out of Pueblo would inconvenience through customers from LA to Chicago. Denver is better equipped to service and store a train.