California Zephyr Colorado Eagle Denver Zephyr
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
GAO-02-398 Intercity Passenger Rail: Amtrak Needs to Improve Its
United States General Accounting Office Report to the Honorable Ron Wyden GAO U.S. Senate April 2002 INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL Amtrak Needs to Improve Its Decisionmaking Process for Its Route and Service Proposals GAO-02-398 Contents Letter 1 Results in Brief 2 Background 3 Status of the Growth Strategy 6 Amtrak Overestimated Expected Mail and Express Revenue 7 Amtrak Encountered Substantial Difficulties in Expanding Service Over Freight Railroad Tracks 9 Conclusions 13 Recommendation for Executive Action 13 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 13 Scope and Methodology 16 Appendix I Financial Performance of Amtrak’s Routes, Fiscal Year 2001 18 Appendix II Amtrak Route Actions, January 1995 Through December 2001 20 Appendix III Planned Route and Service Actions Included in the Network Growth Strategy 22 Appendix IV Amtrak’s Process for Evaluating Route and Service Proposals 23 Amtrak’s Consideration of Operating Revenue and Direct Costs 23 Consideration of Capital Costs and Other Financial Issues 24 Appendix V Market-Based Network Analysis Models Used to Estimate Ridership, Revenues, and Costs 26 Models Used to Estimate Ridership and Revenue 26 Models Used to Estimate Costs 27 Page i GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking Appendix VI Comments from the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 28 GAO’s Evaluation 37 Tables Table 1: Status of Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions, as of December 31, 2001 7 Table 2: Operating Profit (Loss), Operating Ratio, and Profit (Loss) per Passenger of Each Amtrak Route, Fiscal Year 2001, Ranked by Profit (Loss) 18 Table 3: Planned Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions 22 Figure Figure 1: Amtrak’s Route System, as of December 2001 4 Page ii GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 April 12, 2002 The Honorable Ron Wyden United States Senate Dear Senator Wyden: The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is the nation’s intercity passenger rail operator. -
Next Stop Winter Park
next stop 6 As the valley 3 Approaching the widens, the small Front Range, the w i n ter pa r k community of Tolland railroad utilizes a pair of comes into view. To curves, known as Big the north, the Tolland and Little Ten curves, school house, built to add elevation. The in 1902, served the name comes from the small mining towns in the area. Higher on curvature which, at 10 the mountain side you may be able to spot degrees, is a tight curve for the railraod. Looking horizontal breaks in the trees. This is the old to the north, the wind turbines are near the site railroad grade, known as Rollins Pass, which of the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons Final Destination: Winter Park Resort! Not 8 snaked up the mountian side, up over the facility. a skier? Not to worry! Winter Park has a little Continental Divide, and down to Winter Park. something for everyone! Explore the Winter Park 2 North of the railyards, Village or use the free Lift bus service to explore 5 At Rollinsville the train enters an open valley the railroad turns west Fraser and Granby. Explore everything that the where it parallels South Boulder Creek as it and and rolls through Winter Park Area has to offer! nears the Continental Divide. suburban Arvada where Pgr oss da m the constant 2% uphill grade to the Moffat Tunnel fra ser tolla nd 5 begins. You may notice railroad track splitting off 6 Ptunnel district winter 7 rollinsville to the south. This is the BNSF track connection pa r k 8 to the Coors Brewery in Golden and the RTD resort moffat tunnel 4 G-line commuter rail connection to Wheat Ridge and Old Town 3 If you are skiing or Arvada. -
40Thanniv Ersary
Spring 2011 • $7 95 FSharing tihe exr periencste of Fastest railways past and present & rsary nive 40th An Things Were Not the Same after May 1, 1971 by George E. Kanary D-Day for Amtrak 5We certainly did not see Turboliners in regular service in Chicago before Amtrak. This train is In mid April, 1971, I was returning from headed for St. Louis in August 1977. —All photos by the author except as noted Seattle, Washington on my favorite train to the Pacific Northwest, the NORTH back into freight service or retire. The what I considered to be an inauspicious COAST LIMITED. For nearly 70 years, friendly stewardess-nurses would find other beginning to the new service. Even the the flagship train of the Northern Pacific employment. The locomotives and cars new name, AMTRAK, was a disappoint - RR, one of the oldest named trains in the would go into the AMTRAK fleet and be ment to me, since I preferred the classier country, had closely followed the route of dispersed country wide, some even winding sounding RAILPAX, which was eliminat - the Lewis and Clark Expedition of 1804, up running on the other side of the river on ed at nearly the last moment. and was definitely the super scenic way to the Milwaukee Road to the Twin Cities. In addition, wasn’t AMTRAK really Seattle and Portland. My first association That was only one example of the serv - being brought into existence to eliminate with the North Coast Limited dated to ices that would be lost with the advent of the passenger train in America? Didn’t 1948, when I took my first long distance AMTRAK on May 1, 1971. -
Performance Report FY19 Rider Profile CAPITOL Corridorticket JOINT Type POWERS AUTHORITY WORK/ BUSINESS 67%
Performance Report FY19 Rider Profile CAPITOL CORRIDORTicket JOINT Type POWERS AUTHORITY WORK/ BUSINESS 67% Ticket WithWelcome FY2019, the Capitol Corridor Aboard! celebrated five straight years of Type record-breaking ridership and revenue, with a new all-time high of 10-RIDE 1,777,136 riders and $38.03 million in revenue. ThisWORK/ growth is reflected 18% FAMILY/ BUSINESS OTHER 1% 67% REC/in the FareboxFRIENDS Ratio, which reached a previously unattained 60%. SCHOOL 3% LEISURE 15% 12% ROUND-TRIP/ To build upon this success, and to ensure the Capitol Corridor’s place as ONE-WAY a premier travel choice, the CCJPA is making progress on infrastructure 50% improvements, safety upgrades, customer service enhancements, MONTHLY and service expansion projects. These efforts aim to maintain Capitol 32% Corridor as a quality, convenient,OTHER 1% cost-effective, and flexibleFAMILY/ option for REC/ FRIENDS years to come. SCHOOL 3% LEISURE 15% Rider Profile Ticket Type 12% SHOP/VACATION 2% WORK/ BUSINESS 21 Years of Improvement* 67% SERVICE REVENUE-TO- LEVEL RIDERSHIP REVENUE COST RATIO +275% +284% +508% +100% Rider Customer Satisfaction Profile 10-RIDE WORK/ 18% FAMILY/ BUSINESS OTHER 1% 67% FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 REC/ FYFRIENDS 2019 30 DAILY 1,777,136SCHOOL 3% $38.03MLEISURE 60%15% TRAINS 12% ROUND-TRIP/ ONE-WAY 50% MONTHLY 90% 87% 90% 91% 89% 89% 87% 89% 88% 85% 90% 32% OTHER 1% FAMILY/ FY 1998 REC/ FRIENDS 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 SCHOOL 3% 2018 2019 (PRE-CCJPA) FY 1998 FY 1998 FY 1998 LEISURE 15% 8 DAILY (PRE-CCJPA) (PRE-CCJPA) (PRE-CCJPA) SHOP/VACATION 2% 12% TRAINS 463,000 $6.25M 30% *CCJPA assumed management of the service in 1998. -
November/December 2020
Nov. – Dec. 2020 Issue Number 865 Editor’s Comments The next Membership meeting will be a virtual Zoom meeting at 7:30 p.m. Thursday, January 7. Inside This Issue If you know someone who wants to view the meeting, either a visiting railfan or an interested person, it is okay to pass the Editor’s Comments 1 link onto them (but please do not send to large groups). Inside This Issue 1 Watch for an email with meeting sign-in details. Club Officers 1 President’s Comments You will notice that this issue is a bit longer than our normal. 2 We decided that it was time to better coordinate the issue Amtrak News 2 month with the calendar, so this issue is a one-time combina- Pictures from Many of the CRRC Steam Trips 3-6 tion of two months of H & M. In January, we will return to our typical monthly issue of 16 pages. In the meantime, Virtual Railfanning in Time of COVID-19 7 please enjoy this month’s articles and its many photos. Santa Fe, Ohio? 8-9 Happy Holidays! Let’s all have a safe and happy New Year! A Visit to Kentucky Steam Heritage Corporation 10-15 Railfan’s Diary 16-21 Do you have thoughts and questions that you’d like to Steam News 22-27 share in future Headlight & Markers? Meeting Notice 28 Send electronic submissions to: [email protected] Perhaps you’ve thought of submitting an article or two --- now would be a great time to do so! Dave Puthoff Club Officers Club Email: [email protected]. -
Mark Williams' Presentation California Zephyr
Three Railroads 2532 Miles Of Gorgeous Scenery Five Vista Domes The Most Talked About Train In America... Silver Thread to The West The History of the California Zephyr March 20, 1949 -March 20, 1970 Beginnings 1934 Pioneer Zephyr Streamlined Ralph Budd (CBQ) meets Edward Budd (Budd Corp.) Stainless steel and shotwelding Wildly successful = willing to take risks Beginnings Exposition Flyer – 1939 First through car train for CB&Q/DRGW/WP “Scheduling for Scenery” Dotsero Cutoff / Moffat Tunnel Traded time & distance for scenic beauty CZ Fun Fact #1 Beginnings 1940 Joint Meeting 1943 Informal Discussions Post-war RR's Awash With $ October 1945 Joint Contract First orders to Budd 1945 Revisions in 1946 & 1947 First deliveries 1948 Beginnings 1944 Cyrus Osborn's (General manager of EMD) grand idea 1944 trip Glenwood Canyon The Dome Car is born by rebuilding a standard Budd chair car (originally Silvery Alchemy) CZ Fun Fact #2 Dividing The Cost And Costs were dividedProfits by percentage of CZ route mileage (the Exposition Flyer route) CB&Q = 41% DRGW = 22% WP = 37% Profits were divided by percentage of short line route (the Overland Route), which cost WP 10% compared to CB&Q and DRGW share Dividing The Cost And Profits CB&Q owned 27 cars DRGW owned 15 cars WP owned 24 cars PRR leased 1 car Planning Menus Timing Governed by need to have the train in the Rockies and Feather River Canyon during daylight Layover time for through car was a casualty Staffing The Zephyrettes CZ Fun Fact #3 The Zephyrettes Planning -
Host Railroad Report Card &
Host Railroad Report Card & FAQ 1) What is a “host railroad”? Most of Amtrak’s network is on tracks owned, maintained, and dispatched by highly-profitable freight railroads, known as “host” railroads where Amtrak uses their tracks. Most of the trains on these rail lines are the freight railroads’ own freight trains. Because the freight railroads make all dispatching decisions about which trains have priority in using the rail line, the freight railroads have a tremendous amount of influence over Amtrak’s operations on their lines. Prior to Amtrak’s creation in 1971, the privately-owned railroads had a common carrier obligation to operate passenger trains themselves – an obligation that dated back to when the railroads were built in the 1800s. Because the railroads were losing money on their passenger trains, Congress created Amtrak and relieved the private railroads of their obligation to operate passenger trains. A very important part of the deal was that Amtrak would still have access to the railroads’ lines in order to operate passenger trains. Every year Amtrak pays host railroads $142 million for using their tracks and other resources needed to operate Amtrak trains. 2) What distinguishes hosts with good Amtrak performance? Hosts typically achieve good Amtrak performance through a combination of: a) Commitment to providing quality service for Amtrak’s passengers, b) An active partnership with Amtrak, where both sides work cooperatively and the hosts respect Federal law which protects the rights of our nation’s passengers, and c) A well-disciplined operation that benefits both Amtrak and freight customers alike. 3) What does “Delays per 10,000 train miles” mean? It is a measure of how much delay each host railroad causes to Amtrak trains. -
CALIFORNIA ZEPHYR ROSTER of CARS (All Car Names Carry the Prefix "Silver", Which Has Been Omitted Here) VISTA DOME
CALIFORNIA ZEPHYR ROSTER OF CARS CAR NAME OWNER NUMBER CURRENT DISPOSITION 10 ROOMETTE 6 DOUBLE BEDROOM SLEEPER (All car names carry the prefix "Silver", which has been omitted here) Point CB&Q 423 Scrapped 1977? Shore CB&Q 424 Rail Passenger Services, Inc. CAll IWm OWRER NUMBER CUllREKT DISPOSInON Butte CB&Q 425 ? Bchgrv. ,IN Cliff CB&Q 426 Canadian Pacific RR - Canada VISTA DOME CHAIR CARS Falls CB&Q 427 Bridle CB&Q 4716 Alaska RR? - Alaska Valley CB&Q 428 AMTRAK Lodge CB&Q 4717 Alaska RR - Alaska Crag CB&Q 429 AMTRAK Lariat CB&Q 4718 C. Burt Herme y - Chatsworth, CA Chasm CB&Q 430 AMTRAK Ranch CB&Q 4719 Salt Lake G&W Pass D&RGW 1130 Mexico Rifle CB&Q 4720 Project 2472 - San Francisco, CA Summit D&RGW 1131 Mexico Saddle CB&Q 4721 Scrapped Gorge D&RGW 1132 Mexico Stirrup CB&Q 4722 Alaska RR - Alaska Creek D&RGW 1133 Mexico Bronco D&RGW ll05 D&RGW - Denver Glacier D&RGW 1134 Mexico Colt D&RGW 1106 Alaska RR - Alaska Rapids PRR 8449 Dave Goodhart Mus tang D&RGW 1107 Alaska RR - Alaska Arroyo WP 861 Mexico Pony D&RGW 1108 Alaska RR - Alaska Canyon WP 862 Southern Pacific - Oakland, CA Dollar WP (Ill Anbel Corp. - Brownsv ille, TX Mountain WP 863 Mexico Feather WP ~12 Jim Stephenson, Houston, TX Palisade WP 864 Mexico Palace WP 813 Merle Haggard - Palo Cedro, CA Range WP 865 Mexico Sage WP 814 ?Ronald Buhro - Walbridge, Ohio Bay WP 866 Mexico Schooner WP 815 Surf WP 867 Mexico Scout' WP 816 Wilson Engineering - Cleburne, TX Thistle WP 817 Ralph Orlandella - Sacramento, CA 16 SECTION SLEEPER (Converted to chair cars 1963-64) Maple CB&Q 400 AMTRAK VISTA-DOME DORMITORY-BUFFET-LOUNGE Larch CB&Q 401 AMTRAK CA Cedar CB&Q 402 AMTRAK Club ' CB&Q 250 Wil lia~ Barmore - Rancho Palos Verd~, Lounge CB&Q 251 Charles Barenfanger - Vandalia, IL Aspen D&RGW 1120 Fantasia Trains, Colorado Roundup CB&Q 252 Wrecked 1970 Pine D&RGW 1121 C&NW ? Shop D&RGW 1140 D&RGW - Denver, CO Palm WP 871 ? - Florida Chalet WP 831 Dave Rushenburg - St. -
LOCOPIX Eugene M
LOCOPIX Eugene M. Lewis February 24, 2010 DMM DANSVILLE AND MOUNT MORRIS DMM 9 4- 6- 0 1937 DANSVILLE NY GORD65 140 DMM 304 2- 8- 0 GORD65 141 DMM 304 2- 8- 0 DANSVILLE NY GORD65 143 DMM 304 2- 8- 0 1953 DANSVILLE NY GORD65 141 DMM 304 2- 8- 0 1956 NY TR17-02 27 DMM 304 2- 8- 0 1956 NY RM 73-5 40 DMM 565 2- 6- 0 NY TR21-01 10 DMM 565 2- 6- 0 CUMMINSVILLE NY GORD65 140 DMM 565 2- 6- 0 1951 GROVELAND NY GORD65 143 DMM 565 2- 6- 0 1956 NY TR17-02 26 DW DANVILLE AND WESTERN ("Dick and Willie") DW 22 4- 6- 0 5-19-1940 DANVILLE VA LQ 9-4 68 DMSW DANVILLE, MOCKSVILLE AND SOUTHWESTERN DMSW 1 2- 6- 0 NG HILT90 542 DR DARDANELLE AND RUSSELLVILLE DR 4 2- 6- 2 8- -1994 NORTH DARDANELLE AR C TR54-12 44 DR 7 0- 4- 4T 1894 NORTH DARDANELLE AR TR53-04 61 DR 8 4- 4- 0 1-22-1992 WABUSKA NV C TR52-05 11 DR 8 4- 4- 0 7- 4-1996 CARSON CITY NV C TR56-10 30 DR 9 2- 6- 0 NORTH FREEDOM WI HUX90 19 DR 9 2- 6- 0 NORTH FREEDOM WI HUX90 21 DR 9 2- 6- 0 NORTH FREEDOM WI ZIEL67 190 DR 9 2- 6- 0 LARUE WI TR36-07 18 DR 9 2- 6- 0 LARUE WI HUX89 190 DR 9 2- 6- 0 1956 NORTH DARDANELLE AR C TR53-04 91 DR 9 2- 6- 0 1964 LARUE WI TR25-08 38 DR 9 2- 6- 0 1969 NORTH FREEDOM WI C TR59-01 10 DR 9 2- 6- 0 7- -1969 LARUE WI TR30-10 49 DR 9 2- 6- 0 10- 4-1970 NORTH FREEDOM WI C CT 8-1 37 DR 10 2- 6- 0 7-16-1948 RUSSELLVILLE AR LQ 27-3 63 DR 10 2- 6- 0 1956 NORTH DARDANELLE AR C TR53-04 91 DR 11 4- 6- 0 DARDANELLE AR COLLI72 90 DOS DARDANELLE, OLA AND SOUTHERN (Mt.Nebo Route) DOS 2 4- 6- 0 12-10-1907 DARDANELLE AR TR 7-10 61 DCC DARLINGTON CANAL COAL RAILROAD DCC ECONOMY 0- 6- 0 PA -
Southwest Multi-State Rail Planning Study Technical Background Report September 2014
Southwest Multi-State Rail Planning Study Technical Background Report September 2014 Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Overview .................................................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 What is a Multi-State Rail Plan? ................................................................................................................ 7 1.3 Why the Southwest?.................................................................................................................................. 8 1.4 Geographic Scope of Study ........................................................................................................................ 9 1.5 Study Stakeholders .................................................................................................................................. 10 1.6 Guiding Principles for Southwest Multi-State Rail Network Planning ..................................................... 11 Chapter 2. Planning Context ................................................................................................................................. 12 2.1 Overview of the Study Area ..................................................................................................................... 12 2.2 Population and Travel Demand .............................................................................................................. -
Was Organized Under the Conservancy Law of Colorado C.R.S
HISTORY AND STATUS OF THE PUEBLO CONSERVANCY DISTRICT as of June, 2014 The Pueblo Conservancy District (PCD) was organized under the Conservancy Law of Colorado C.R.S. 37-1-101 through 37-8-101 in response to the 1921 flood. The law was originally passed in 1921 (see Chapter CLXXIV of the Compiled Laws of Colorado of 1921, Subdivision III, entitled “Conservancy Districts” beginning with Section 9515 and ending with Section 9580), in direct response to the flood which ravaged Pueblo in 1921. The primary function of PCD is the continuing responsibility related to flood protection of its designated boundaries. The Statutes set forth the specific purposes of PCD as they related to floods and the methods of financing construction, maintenance and operations. In addition to this flood control purpose the Colorado Legislature amended the powers of the Conservancy Districts by expanding the purposes to include conservation of soils and other surface resources; studying correcting and controlling natural and artificial pollution of surface and ground waters; encouraging and participating in the development of parks and recreational facilities within its boundaries. This amendment became effective April 7, 1994. The District was created by decree of the Pueblo District Court on September 14, 1922 following hearing upon Petitions of the County of Pueblo, City of Pueblo, two school districts, two water districts and private citizens for organization of the District under the Act. Three directors were appointed by the Court under an Order of September 30, 1922 and the first meeting of the Board of Directors was held October 7, 1922 to organize the board. -
United States Securities and Exchange Commission Washington, D.C
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark One) [X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019 OR [ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from __________ to ____________ Commission File Number 1-6075 UNION PACIFIC CORPORATION (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Utah 13-2626465 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification No.) 1400 Douglas Street, Omaha, Nebraska (Address of principal executive offices) 68179 (Zip Code) (402) 544-5000 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each Class Trading Symbol Name of each exchange on which registered Common Stock (Par Value $2.50 per share) UNP New York Stock Exchange . Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes No . Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes No . Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.