Passenger Trains > Bring Back the Desert Wind and Cut the Southwest Chief?

Bring back the Desert Wind Amtrak 35&36 and Cut the Southwest Chief this Plan could save Amtrak Hundred of Millions of dollars every year. 1. Save Amtrak Millions of Dollars of One 1 train from Chicago to Salt Lake City then to Las Vegas and to LAX, CA. 2. Amtrak could buy time slot Now from UP the Main Line from Salt Lake to Vegas only see 6 to 12 trains a day instead of 30 train before the USA went down hill in 2007. 3. Amtrak would still have a Chicago to LAX, Ca train Daily Desert Wind 35&36 we could gain Las Vegas, NV back again. This Plan could Save Amtrak Hundreds of Million of dollars. This Plan is Win-Win for Amtrak? I know alot of people on this Board will have Baby over this Plan. We could save Amtrak Money by bring back the Desert Wind 35&36 just like the Old Days when 5,35, 25 was One Big train From Chicago to Salt Lake City, UT.

railcity Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bring back the Desert Wind Amtrak 35&36 and Cut
> the Southwest Chief this Plan could save Amtrak
> Hundred of Millions of dollars every year. 1. Save
> Amtrak Millions of Dollars of One 1 train from
> Chicago to Salt Lake City then to Las Vegas and to
> LAX, CA. 2. Amtrak could buy time slot Now from UP
> the Main Line from Salt Lake to Vegas only see 6
> to 12 trains a day instead of 30 train before the
> USA went down hill in 2007. 3. Amtrak would still
> have a Chicago to LAX, Ca train Daily Desert Wind
> 35&36 we could gain Las Vegas, NV back again. This
> Plan could Save Amtrak Hundreds of Million of
> dollars. This Plan is Win-Win for Amtrak? I know
> alot of people on this Board will have Baby over
> this Plan. We could save Amtrak Money by bring
> back the Desert Wind 35&36 just like the Old Days
> when 5,35, 25 was One Big train From Chicago to
> Salt Lake City, UT.

You know, UP tried this about 46 years ago. That's when the the City of Los Angeles, City of San Francisco and the City of Portland were all combined into the City of Everywhere at Salt Lake City.
If memory serves this didn't save those trains either...

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> railcity Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Bring back the Desert Wind Amtrak 35&36 and Cut
> > the Southwest Chief this Plan could save Amtrak
> > Hundred of Millions of dollars every year. 1.
> Save
> > Amtrak Millions of Dollars of One 1 train from
> > Chicago to Salt Lake City then to Las Vegas and
> to
> > LAX, CA. 2. Amtrak could buy time slot Now from
> UP
> > the Main Line from Salt Lake to Vegas only see
> 6
> > to 12 trains a day instead of 30 train before
> the
> > USA went down hill in 2007. 3. Amtrak would
> still
> > have a Chicago to LAX, Ca train Daily Desert
> Wind
> > 35&36 we could gain Las Vegas, NV back again.
> This
> > Plan could Save Amtrak Hundreds of Million of
> > dollars. This Plan is Win-Win for Amtrak? I
> know
> > alot of people on this Board will have Baby
> over
> > this Plan. We could save Amtrak Money by bring
> > back the Desert Wind 35&36 just like the Old
> Days
> > when 5,35, 25 was One Big train From Chicago
> to
> > Salt Lake City, UT.
>
> You know, UP tried this about 46 years ago. That's
> when the the City of Los Angeles, City of San
> Francisco and the City of Portland were all
> combined into the City of Everywhere at Salt Lake
> City.
> If memory serves this didn't save those trains
> either...


Desert Wind been gone for 14 or 15 years back in 97 or 98 it was cut. But it can been Done again in 2012 bring back the Amtrak 35&36.

What are you guys smoking? You know that the UP would require that the Los Angeles and Salt Lake RR be rebuilt as a four track main line so the daily passenger train would have its own tracks!!!!!!!!

railcity Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bring back the Desert Wind Amtrak 35&36 and Cut
> the Southwest Chief this Plan could save Amtrak
> Hundred of Millions of dollars every year. 1. Save
> Amtrak Millions of Dollars of One 1 train from
> Chicago to Salt Lake City then to Las Vegas and to
> LAX, CA. 2. Amtrak could buy time slot Now from UP
> the Main Line from Salt Lake to Vegas only see 6
> to 12 trains a day instead of 30 train before the
> USA went down hill in 2007. 3. Amtrak would still
> have a Chicago to LAX, Ca train Daily Desert Wind
> 35&36 we could gain Las Vegas, NV back again. This
> Plan could Save Amtrak Hundreds of Million of
> dollars. This Plan is Win-Win for Amtrak? I know
> alot of people on this Board will have Baby over
> this Plan. We could save Amtrak Money by bring
> back the Desert Wind 35&36 just like the Old Days
> when 5,35, 25 was One Big train From Chicago to
> Salt Lake City, UT.

Okay. Why not use standard English conventions to make your point?

I would be for the reinstatement of the Desert Wind but not at the expense of the Southwest Chief. First, run the Desert Wind in day light from Salt Lake City to Vegas with early morning arrival in LA. Dedicated train sets, not set out cars or locomotives from the CZ.

I think it is more about just end point to end point "connectivity." Also, the issue with the Desert Wind running from Chicago to LA via Salt Lake City is that this journey would take at least an extra 12 hours at present and would require an extra train set, or at least a decrease in the number of cars being operated if the CA Zephyr and Desert Wind were combined to replace the Southwest Chief. The Chief has been known for its "afternoon departure westbound from Chicago and early morning arrival into LA, as opposed to a 5:00 p.m. arrival (if not later) of what would be the Desert Wind. The Southwest Chief presently is the fastest route from "Amtrak's hub" of Chicago to the West Coast (i.e. LA). And it has the capability of running quite fast over the route if some maintenance to the tracks or ROW was applied. Even "back in the day" the Southwest Chief thrived off of being the "fastest route" from the Midwest to West Coast. It can then be turned same day in LA and depart out at 6:00 p.m. or so and then arrive 2 days later into Chicago. The Desert Wind would operate on a much longer schedule. The other thing is that the Southwest Chief serves various markets aside from LA and Chicago along its route, including ABQ, which is a major turnover point. Yes, the Desert Wind would pick-up Las Vegas service, but I am not sure if that would be a big enough selling point when also considering the Southwest Chief's route that includes Flagstaff (i.e. Grand Canyon gateway), Kansas City and other towns. Out of all the Amtrak routes, the Southwest Chief has often been looked at as a route that *could* be an Auto Train as well from Chicago to at least the Southwest (i.e. ABQ).

I hate to say, but it would likely be best for Amtrak to buy the BNSF route over Raton Pass etc. and do the various maintenance. Amtrak did buy trackage outside of the NEC in its history, specifically mileage in Michigan. Even though it's only "one train a day" the long term payoff would likely be a sure thing. The route is still popular for the Boy Scouts as well. And personally, I'd like to see some sort of passenger friendly connection from Denver (CA Zephyr) to Trinidad or La Junta (Southwest Chief) be it train or bus. This would provide some descent interconnectivity between these two long distance trains on a north-south basis, something that Amtrak desperately needs.

The Pioneer and Desert Wind "used" to offer some sort of north-south interconnectivity from Denver to the Pacific Northwest and southern CA respectively.

But not no more. Ultimately, a nice north-south train from say San Antonio, La Junta, Denver and through Wyoming to a point in Montana along the Empire Builder route would be ideal. Again, I am just picking points on a map, but of course the freight RR's would have to have trackage in place to support this....

There won't be any new long distance trains. The maximum number is what we have now. I can see triweeklies everywhere down the road.

reindeerflame Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There won't be any new long distance trains. The
> maximum number is what we have now. I can see
> triweeklies everywhere down the road.

I would agree!

railcity Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bring back the Desert Wind Amtrak 35&36 and Cut
> the Southwest Chief this Plan could save Amtrak
> Hundred of Millions of dollars every year. 1. Save
> Amtrak Millions of Dollars of One 1 train from
> Chicago to Salt Lake City then to Las Vegas and to
> LAX, CA. 2. Amtrak could buy time slot Now from UP
> the Main Line from Salt Lake to Vegas only see 6
> to 12 trains a day instead of 30 train before the
> USA went down hill in 2007. 3. Amtrak would still
> have a Chicago to LAX, Ca train Daily Desert Wind
> 35&36 we could gain Las Vegas, NV back again. This
> Plan could Save Amtrak Hundreds of Million of
> dollars. This Plan is Win-Win for Amtrak? I know
> alot of people on this Board will have Baby over
> this Plan. We could save Amtrak Money by bring
> back the Desert Wind 35&36 just like the Old Days
> when 5,35, 25 was One Big train From Chicago to
> Salt Lake City, UT.


this suggestion is the most idiotic plan i've heard besides ending all LD trains

Out_Of_Service Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> railcity Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Bring back the Desert Wind Amtrak 35&36 and Cut
> > the Southwest Chief this Plan could save Amtrak
> > Hundred of Millions of dollars every year. 1.
> Save
> > Amtrak Millions of Dollars of One 1 train from
> > Chicago to Salt Lake City then to Las Vegas and
> to
> > LAX, CA. 2. Amtrak could buy time slot Now from
> UP
> > the Main Line from Salt Lake to Vegas only see
> 6
> > to 12 trains a day instead of 30 train before
> the
> > USA went down hill in 2007. 3. Amtrak would
> still
> > have a Chicago to LAX, Ca train Daily Desert
> Wind
> > 35&36 we could gain Las Vegas, NV back again.
> This
> > Plan could Save Amtrak Hundreds of Million of
> > dollars. This Plan is Win-Win for Amtrak? I
> know
> > alot of people on this Board will have Baby
> over
> > this Plan. We could save Amtrak Money by bring
> > back the Desert Wind 35&36 just like the Old
> Days
> > when 5,35, 25 was One Big train From Chicago
> to
> > Salt Lake City, UT.
>
>
> this suggestion is the most idiotic plan i've
> heard besides ending all LD trains

Agreed.

12k trains in the mix will make on time performance beyond dismal (not intentional). Major capital upgrades for capacity is needed for passenger service. I doubt the tax payers want to shell out the cash for a few trains a day.

BTW - more than 12 trains a day run on the LA&SL between Daggett and SLC.

Axy

This plan could Save Amtrak Millions of Dollars a year. again having 1 big train from Chicago to Salt Lake City, UT then to Las Vegas and into LAX, CA. We had the Desert Wind train back back 80s and 90s. It no new train.

reindeerflame Wrote:

> There won't be any new long distance trains. The
> maximum number is what we have now. I can see
> triweeklies everywhere down the road.

Didn't Amtrak try less-than-daily service on the Zephyr, Empire Builder, and Starlight in the mid-90's and discover that the anticipated cost savings didn't materialize? Not that a bad idea ever goes out of style...

railcity Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This plan could Save Amtrak Millions of Dollars a
> year. again having 1 big train from Chicago to
> Salt Lake City, UT then to Las Vegas and into LAX,
> CA. We had the Desert Wind train back back 80s and
> 90s. It no new train.


Why in the world would that even work! Besides, what one of the guys posted is actually be best case scenario, 3 and 4 is and always will be the fastest LD Train outside the NEC, ridership is pretty steady on it, and your suggestion to me actually think you just came out of the Twilight Zone! I'd say bring the Desert Wind back, not with the expense of the Chief, besides, there's no room in Salt Lake anymore to do the switching Amtrak did back in the 80s-90s when the Desert Wind/Pioneer/Cal Zephyr were doin' that maneuver night in and night out!

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> reindeerflame Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There won't be any new long distance trains.
> The
> > maximum number is what we have now. I can see
> > triweeklies everywhere down the road.
>
> I would agree!

Keep dreamin' you two, Amtrak did that before and it backfired, besides, that also led to the elimination of the Desert Wind and Pioneer in the 1ST Place! They go 3 times a week, that'll make you guys happy since it'll be the end of the LD Network and the corridors will die a slow and painful death!

Oh, goody. An argument between railcity and ProAmtrak. Break out the popcorn. Or Midol.

Me too.

If you eliminated all LDT's:

What would they blame losses, budget increases, etc. on?

Do you think, in your wildest dreams, Amtrak's budget request would decrease as a result?

Do you think there would be a reduction in workforce and operating/overhead costs equal to what's charged against LTD's presently?

Will it gain Amtrak new friends in congress, impressed by the new found austerity, and delighted to rid their states of those old trains?

Next time the ax falls what gets sacrificed?

So what's to be gained?

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jp1822 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > reindeerflame Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > There won't be any new long distance trains.
> > The
> > > maximum number is what we have now. I can
> see
> > > triweeklies everywhere down the road.
> >
> > I would agree!
>
> Keep dreamin' you two, Amtrak did that before and
> it backfired, besides, that also led to the
> elimination of the Desert Wind and Pioneer in the
> 1ST Place! They go 3 times a week, that'll make
> you guys happy since it'll be the end of the LD
> Network and the corridors will die a slow and
> painful death!

First of all one would hope that the long distance network would expand and not contract. And we all have our "wish lists" for expansions. However, we've been faced with essentially the same national system since around 2006 (after the loss of the Three Rivers). Am I "happy" to see these trains go (particularly the Three Rivers)? NO! Do I want to see LDT go to a 3 day a week schdule? NO! None of this would make me HAPPY.

But unfortunately, one needs to consider a) LDT network is not LIKELY to expand and b) to preserve Boardman's statements that he will "preserve the LDT system" that doesn't necessarily mean that they have to operate on a daily basis.

So one may need to prepare for the fact that frequencies *could* be reduced. Do most want to see that happen, including myself? NO. But don't be blind to the peripheral picture depending on who is President of Amtrak and how they are swayed by government officials.

So let's no jump to conclusions and "absolutes," ProAmtrak.

We all know the story of the famous "Mercer Report" and its suggestion that trains should perhaps operate on a reduced frequency. But I think Graham Claytor said it best - something along the lines of, if you are going to run a train, it should run every day or there is no sense in running it.

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> So one may need to prepare for the fact that
> frequencies *could* be reduced. Do most want to
> see that happen, including myself? NO. But don't
> be blind to the peripheral picture depending on
> who is President of Amtrak and how they are swayed
> by government officials.

Methinks who is the President of the Country and who controls Congress will have much greater impact on what happens than who is the President of Amtrak. To a large Amtrak the President of Amtrak is but a pawn in the overall scheme of things. It is not like any President of Amtrak can outright defy Congress and the President and survive for more than 3 seconds. OTOH in a more favorable climate s/he can make a significant difference, but my crystal ball at present is not indicating favorable climate in the immediate future necessarily, though things could change.