Two Questions about the Southwest Chief

[BNSF4ever]

Greyhounds brings up an interesting point about a direct government subsidy to run passenger trains. That was one idea floated in the 1960s when the Department of Transportation was studying how to save America's intercity passenger trains. I believe the reason why it gained no traction was a hesitancy for the government to subsidize private industry. Of course, that has happened probably before and after. But it's certainly an idea to consider that the government is contracting with a private company to provide a service. I think at that point, then the federal government would have to admit that providing intercity rail service is one of its roles and there has never been a consensus in Washington about that.

As pro-Amtrak as BNSF are, it's another thing to ask them to take upon the maintenance of rolling stock and employment of crews.

These reasons are why we have ended up with Amtrak. It's essentially a government run business that pretends not to be (it has a CEO and board, but all are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate). And in more bureaucratic way, Amtrak is contracting with BNSF as Amtrak is paying rent on its tracks while it handles equipment and crews.

[jeaton]

Early on, Gunn had the Mechanical and Operating people review power assignments, so whatever you see is planned. I guess it would be a combination of power requirements and service locations.

The Chief may also be used to rotate cars and engines in and out of LA for the Coast Starlight fleet. Anyway, it is not just a random thing.

Jay

[jchnhtfd]

As to the sleeper as the tail car -- it probably was a deadhead move, but it sometimes is in use -- I've ridden it that way a few times.

And the three engines -- as someone said above: Raton Pass and, to a certain extent, Glorieta. Which bits of line are dramatic -- either to ride or to watch. And which are the main reason why virtually the only freights on that line are ones with very high horsepower/tonnage ratios.

It's cost effective to run three engines all the way -- they don't burn a significant amount of extra fuel (a little, perhaps, but very little) and the per-mile maintenance isn't that bad -- and the cost of having engine servicing at La Junta or Trinidad on one end, and Belen on the other, would be considerable.

[Anonymous]

My wife and I rode the Chief from LA to Chicago about two years ago. At that time there was quite a bit of express behind us, and there was a sleeper at the end of the coaches. We were in the rear sleeper.

The car was newly refurbished. The crew even showwed us the "rebuilder plates" that showed the car was just out of Beech Grove. I was told that the reason for the extra car was the heavy demand for the accomodations. They also said that this was one of the first revenue runs for this car since its rebuilding, so the statement above about deadheading may be accurate.

[greyhounds]

Well, I made that trip five times.

Four when the ATSF was running the trains and once for old times sake on Amtrak just before they shifted the trains of the Santa Fe from Chicago to Galesburg. (we got on an off at Chillicothe when it was the ATSF passenger service. I've got good memories of that town.)

ATSF added a unit at La Junta for the grades. On Amtrak they shut off the electricity in the train to get over Raton. Glad it wasn't that hot and my radio was on batteries.

It's wasteful to add an expensive diesel to run across flat Illinois, Missouri and Kansas just to make the grades in Colorado and New Mexico.

Here's a thought. Why doesn't the government just contract with BNSF to run the varnish in the west. Except for the Coast Starlight. If you're going to do it, then do it right. BNSF would do a better job. And the Sunset could be put out of its suffering.

[Jack_S]

When the eastbound SWC went through Fullerton, CA on October 1st, it had, after the mail/express cars, 3 or 4 private excursion cars and the last was a beautifully restored Observation car. All the railfans present exchanged wild waves and shouts with the occupants of these cars.

Jack

[FThunder11]

Well, i have mede visits to see the SWChief in trinidad, CO and LAJunta,CO. Both time it had 3 locos, well one time i saw only 2 p42, and the 3rd loco was a dash-8, pretty neat, headed back to CA. And the last time i saw the SWChief, the end was an FRA test car t-16

[richardy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF4ever



2. On both the east and westbound S.C.s I saw that day, the normal Superliner consist of sleepers, diner, lounge, coaches was altered in that both trains had a sleeper at the very end of the trainset. Any ideas why this was the case?

Are you saying it had an extra sleeper or the normal consist was reversed?

[PBenham]

The reason for 3 P42s? Raton Pass. It is not practical to set the extra unit out en route so it goes all the way. As to the Superliner on the rear, it was deadheading back to Chicago from a charter move.

[eolafan]

Yes I do believe the SWC has some quite severe grades to handle west of NE but before CA. Can't help you with quesion 2.

[BNSF4ever]

1. Why does the Southwest Chief always seem to have three locomotives assigned to it? I know it once had a lot of mail/express, but not any longer. I saw the Westbound S.C. come into Naperville in August and it had three P42DCs...and no ExpressTrak cars whatsoever. Does it pick up additional cars elsewhere? Is there rougher grades on this journey?

2. On both the east and westbound S.C.s I saw that day, the normal Superliner consist of sleepers, diner, lounge, coaches was altered in that both trains had a sleeper at the very end of the trainset. Any ideas why this was the case?