Trains.com

Passenger Service to return to Wyoming?

3909 views
17 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Rock Springs Wy.
  • 1,967 posts
Passenger Service to return to Wyoming?
Posted by miniwyo on Thursday, April 9, 2009 5:43 PM

Just caught this on the news. It seems that there may be hope for economical travel here after all. I know I would use it to get ot Laramie to see the Pokes play.

From the Casper Star Tribune:

 

Cheyenne on board with Amtrak route restoration


RJ

"Something hidden, Go and find it. Go and look behind the ranges, Something lost behind the ranges. Lost and waiting for you. Go." The Explorers - Rudyard Kipling

http://sweetwater-photography.com/

  • Member since
    September 2007
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • 6,099 posts
Posted by Phoebe Vet on Thursday, April 9, 2009 6:53 PM

Here in North Carolina, the State DOT has partnered with Amtrak to increase the number of trains serving our cities.  One of the trains is, in fact, owned by NCDOT.

http://www.bytrain.org/passenger/ 

 

Dave

Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • 7,486 posts
Posted by ndbprr on Friday, April 10, 2009 8:04 AM

And how much will that cost me as a taxpayer in a different part of the country that will never have a use for it?  What's another trillion dollars here or there?  Soon the new simpler tax form will be, "how much did you make last year? Send it."

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Boone Iowa
  • 520 posts
Posted by cnwfan51 on Friday, April 10, 2009 9:41 AM

Thumbs Up  Thats Great but i am confused. Does that mean Amtrak will reroute the Zepher Away from the current route west out of Denver?  Or are they considering a completley different train from Cheyenne to Sa;t Lake City?   As an employee of Union Pacific I cant see the U.P. wanting this train on the main Line   Just a thought Larry

larry ackerman
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Friday, April 10, 2009 9:53 AM
Larry, what they're talking about is additional service (Zephyr would be unaffected) from Seattle via UP to either Salt Lake City or (what Wyoming prefers) Denver, via Cheyenne. I know I'd prefer a separate train all the way to Chicago, but I'm with you--I don't see the UP exactly bending over backwards to accommodate any of it.

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Friday, April 10, 2009 10:13 AM

The linked article states that the Seattle-Cheyenne-Denver route is the same that Amtrak's Pioneer ran on from 1991-1997, when it was discontinued.  Back then I was hoping to schedule a trip out west to ride it in the near future, but a bunch of things happened to postpone that - and then it was withdrawn.

Previously, the Pioneer had run on a different route from its inception in 1977 until 1991 - would that have been the Salt Lake City route instead ?

- PDN.

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    November 2007
  • 2,989 posts
Posted by Railway Man on Friday, April 10, 2009 10:40 AM

cnwfan51

Thumbs Up  Thats Great but i am confused. Does that mean Amtrak will reroute the Zepher Away from the current route west out of Denver?  Or are they considering a completley different train from Cheyenne to Sa;t Lake City?   As an employee of Union Pacific I cant see the U.P. wanting this train on the main Line   Just a thought Larry

 

Three concepts have been floated:

  1. Independent train Denver-Cheyenne-Granger-Pocatello-Portland-Seattle, with direct service to Cheyenne instead of the bus shuttle to Borie as was done previously.
  2. Independent train Denver-Salt Lake City-Pocatello-etc. via the Moffat Tunnel.
  3. Independent train Salt Lake City-Pocatello, etc.

RWM

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Friday, April 10, 2009 10:47 AM

(1) The great god Omaha is gonna get his armour yellow shorts all in a bunch.

(2) As long as they're gonna gonna screw things up; why not keep going? Add Denver-Colorado Springs-Pueblo-Trinidad-Raton-Albuquerque-El Paso to the train and ****-off the other Class 1?

Railway Man

cnwfan51

Thumbs Up  Thats Great but i am confused. Does that mean Amtrak will reroute the Zepher Away from the current route west out of Denver?  Or are they considering a completley different train from Cheyenne to Sa;t Lake City?   As an employee of Union Pacific I cant see the U.P. wanting this train on the main Line   Just a thought Larry

 

Three concepts have been floated:

  1. Independent train Denver-Cheyenne-Granger-Pocatello-Portland-Seattle, with direct service to Cheyenne instead of the bus shuttle to Borie as was done previously.
  2. Independent train Denver-Salt Lake City-Pocatello-etc. via the Moffat Tunnel.
  3. Independent train Salt Lake City-Pocatello, etc.

RWM

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Ontario - Canada
  • 463 posts
Posted by morseman on Friday, April 10, 2009 1:01 PM

back in 1995 or 1996, my wife and I booked a return trip on the Empire Builder Chicago-Seattle.    A few weeks after booking, we received a call from Amtrak asking if we would consider our return leg on the Pioneer.     Same fare.    Would arrive in Chicago in time to catch the Capitol to Washington.       Was a great trip.    Just wondering how many other similar phone calls Amtrak made to boost ridership on the Pioneer,

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Rock Springs Wy.
  • 1,967 posts
Posted by miniwyo on Friday, April 10, 2009 1:50 PM

The idea of the DOT contributing to costs might work here. Also if there were a way to work out a package deal to buy UW Sports tickets and Amtrak tickets to get there that would definitely boost ridership especially for the winter seasons. Maybe this is something that I will begin speaking to my officals about.

RJ

"Something hidden, Go and find it. Go and look behind the ranges, Something lost behind the ranges. Lost and waiting for you. Go." The Explorers - Rudyard Kipling

http://sweetwater-photography.com/

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Boone Iowa
  • 520 posts
Posted by cnwfan51 on Friday, April 10, 2009 2:06 PM

I would like to see Twincities/Omaha/KansasCity/Dallas/Fort Worth sernice There has been talk of Chicago /DesMoines and Omaha sevice been looked into on the Iowa Interstate railroad, but this only a pipe dream I am sure. But knowing the managment of our employer Carl, Jeff and I know that the Union Pacific will never allow Amtrak across Iowa or anywhere else if they have their way, and its their railroad so you know how that will come out Larry
larry ackerman
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Friday, April 10, 2009 3:55 PM

Paul_D_North_Jr

Previously, the Pioneer had run on a different route from its inception in 1977 until 1991 - would that have been the Salt Lake City route instead ?

The original Pioneer  route was Salt Lake City-Pocatello-Portland-Seattle; my wife and I made a round trip trip SLC-Portland in 1979. I don't remember the exact dates of the changes, but in 1982 the route was Seattle-Ogden (where it was combined with the California Zephyr and the Desert Wind), and the combined train went to Chicago via Borie and Denver. After the Rio Grande quit operating the Rio Grande Zephyr in 1983, the trains were combined in Salt Lake City, and this held until 1991.

Johnny

Johnny

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Friday, April 10, 2009 4:08 PM

ndbprr

And how much will that cost me as a taxpayer in a different part of the country that will never have a use for it?  What's another trillion dollars here or there?  Soon the new simpler tax form will be, "how much did you make last year? Send it."

  About the same as it will cost me, a taxpayer living in a state with no Amtrak at all,  and probably less than it will cost me to help fund interstate highways in your state that I may never have a use for.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    September 2007
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • 6,099 posts
Posted by Phoebe Vet on Friday, April 10, 2009 4:11 PM

miniwyo

The idea of the DOT contributing to costs might work here. Also if there were a way to work out a package deal to buy UW Sports tickets and Amtrak tickets to get there that would definitely boost ridership especially for the winter seasons. Maybe this is something that I will begin speaking to my officals about.

I have never heard of Amtrak being involved in such a bundling, but our light rail and bus system does it from time to time with events in city center.

Dave

Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: South Dakota
  • 1,592 posts
Posted by Dakguy201 on Saturday, April 11, 2009 6:13 AM

What happened here is that some Congresscreature snuck an earmark into legislation that commanded Amtrak to make this study, so Amtrak is doing as it is required. 

I don't see anything in the above comments that lead me to believe the states of Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Idaho, Oregon and Washington will agree to form any kind of a compact to run these trains.  Who wants to explain that to the people of Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Missouri, California or North Carolina? 

Or is the reverse now true -- that we have acknowledged that trains fundamentally are a national concern to be dealt with by the federal government?  If that is now the model, do we not owe it to the people of Illinois, etc., to relieve them of the burden they are bearing? 

 

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Chicago, Ill.
  • 2,843 posts
Posted by al-in-chgo on Sunday, April 12, 2009 7:48 PM

As I'm sure you know, NC DOT now owns most of the exx-Southern main line (roughly Greensboro/High Point down to Charlotte), and probably some CSX too.  One solution to Amtraks getting bumped by freight -- buy 'em out!   And I'm guessing that most of the freight runs at night, like on the NEC.  Is that the case, phoeb? 

al-in-chgo
  • Member since
    September 2007
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • 6,099 posts
Posted by Phoebe Vet on Sunday, April 12, 2009 8:52 PM

 

http://www.bytrain.org/corridor/stateowned.html 

In 1988, the NCDOT purchased the former Southern Railway's 67-mile Murphy Branch (part of which has since been purchased by the Great Smoky Mountains Railroad), setting the precedent for other acquisitions that followed. NCDOT now holds title to more than 100 miles of rail to be preserved for future use.

http://www.ncrr.com/map.html 

North Carolina Railroad, the remaining private shares of which were bought by NCDOT in 1998, ownes the corridor shown on that map in blue.

Built more than 150 years ago, this 317-mile corridor opened up the state to settlement and growth. . Today, freight trains operated by Norfolk Southern carry products into and out of the state. Amtrak runs eight passenger trains, including the Piedmont and the Carolinian, along its corridor. There are plans for regional mass transit operations along NCRR’s rails in several North Carolina metropolitan areas.

Dave

Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: West Coast
  • 4,122 posts
Posted by espeefoamer on Saturday, April 18, 2009 4:35 PM

Last season,Amtrak had a package deal with the San Diego Chargers.One could take Amtrak to San Diego,take the trolley to the stadium,see the game,then return.

Ride Amtrak. Cats Rule, Dogs Drool.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy