When RGRPC began rehabilitating the railroad in 2000, we retained Mike Kenyon as our "consulting chief engineer". Mike was a retired SP Regional Engineer, and formerly a DRGW Division Engineer working for MK Engineering. Together with Jim Ozment and Mike Davis, also former DRGW maintenance of way officers, Mike put together our original rehabilitation plans, which were focused on surface and lining, together with ballast and ties (plus a whole bunch of other things).
At one point Mike and I were talking about the long term objective, and he left me with the impression that that achieving the former running times of the San Juan was not an impossible dream. The underlying assumption was a series of EDA grants that would allow the whole line to be surface and lined, and probably some other things like selective replacement of old 70 lb. on curves.
This was just a casual discussion, so a lot of potential "details" were not discussed, nor was this ever adopted by RGRPC as any kind of goal. I'm guessing that passenger trucks under the passenger cars would be one prerequisites for any kind of decent ride, and probably a bunch of other things.
Achieving the former running times of the San Juan was mentioned in another thread, and it reminded me of this long ago discussion with Mike. I am not an professional engineer, much less a track train dynamics expert. But some other readers here may be and it would be interesting to hear their opinions.
RGRPC's plans came to naught when the FRA turned our priorities upside down and insisted that subgrade issues get priority.
Addendum. Frank Stapleton makes some good points about the schedule in another thread. I'm not suggesting that San Juan running times are needed, or are good, But having track good enough to achieve them would provide new alternatives
and at least ensure the existing slower schedules would be comfortable.
John West
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 06/27/2007 10:38PM by John West.
