Hi, Ken -
Thanks for posting the link. I'm no transportation engineer, but most of the plans described
in the application seem very well thought out and practical. I presume the underlying reason
for the offer of commuter service is to gain the overall proposal more public support in the valley,
and all-in-all most of the plans make a lot of sense, at least to me.
If the "inland port" train/truck interchange facility is built as planned, this should stimulate construction of some much-needed new motels and restaurants in Antonito and contribute to a general improvement to what is - let's be honest - not the most attractive introduction to the railroad for visitors coming from the north and east. And I heartily agree that the C&TS should be extended to the beautiful old stone depot in Antonito to allow both cross-platform transfer from an Alamosa commuter train and a reasonable walk from a passenger's overnight accommodations in town (hopefully one of the above-mentioned new motels).
The one objection I have - and I'm sure the following will generate a lot of flaming - is to the idea of reinstalling the third rail from Antonito to Alamosa. What benefit does this have? What need will it serve? For most non-railfan riders on the C&TS - and most of the riders ARE non-railfans - the ride is already too long. The last hour or so of the eastbound trip, especially, is a long-drawn-out letdown from the rest of the journey, and I'm pretty sure most of the passengers would be happy to leave the train at Lava Loop. I doubt that more than a handful each day would want to stay aboard a slow train all the way to Alamosa; these would better be accommodated by proper scheduling of the standard gauge commuter service (which could be, as it is from time to time at present, pulled by a steam locomotive).
Restoring narrow gauge service to Alamosa would not be a simple matter of laying down a third rail, but would also involve frogs, at least, for the several industrial sidings along these 29 miles. Some provision would also have to be made for narrow gauge sidings - one or two places where cars could be set out or high-value unit freights be run around a narrow-gauge train in an emergency. There is also the question of narrow gauge equipment for this service. Is one of the 85 year old K-36's going to be subjected to an additional sixty miles of running each day? These historic artifacts are somewhat overworked already. And if not a K-36, then what? The even older and none too speedy #463? An engine or two from South America?? A couple of brand-new engines from China???
As noted above, 90% - 95% of the plans outlined in the application seem sound to me, and I support them wholeheartedly. But, IMHO, reinstalling the third rail from Antonito to Alamosa should be left until last, and not done at all unless ridership of standard gauge trains between the two towns demonstrates that it would be worthwhile.
- Russ Sperry
p.s. For an example of current SL&RG "commuter" service, see [
ngdiscussion.net].
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2009 10:53AM by Russo Loco.
