PDA

View Full Version : The most convoluted passenger train? (kinda long)


Dwightman
April 25th, 2001, 09:46 PM
I was just looking through a couple of books and came across something that was both interesting and puzzling. I was hoping that maybe somebody could help me out with some of it.

The California Special was the Santa Fe's train that served West Texas. It left Houston in the evenings and arrived at Clovis, NM, mid-morning the following day, where it connected with train #23, the southern section of the Grand Canyon and, starting in 1954, train #1, the San Francisco Chief. Here are the numbers this train carried in the early '50's:

GC&SF 165 Houston Union Station to T&NO Junction
T&NO 55 T&NO Junction to Tower 17, Rosenburg, TX
GC&SF 66 Tower 17 to Temple, TX
GC&SF 75 Temple to Sweetwater, TX
P&SF 94 Sweetwater to Texico, NM
AT&SF 97 Texico to Clovis, NM

GC&SF - Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe (north/south)
T&NO - Texas & New Orleans (Southern Pacific, east/west)
P&SF - Panhandle & Santa Fe (east/west)

Notice all the different timetable directions this train went (South/West are odd, North/East are even). Most of them I can explain, but I was wondering what other people's thoughts are for one of them.

The first leg traverses the Houston Belt & Terminal line to South Yard, most of which was built as the GC&SF Houston District north from Alvin. The second leg is trackage rights on the Sunset Route to avoid having to go all the way south to Alvin in order to go (actual) west (or north in the cases of the Texas Chief and Ranger). At Rosenburg, the train rejoins the GC&SF mainline headed north.

Temple is where things get strange. Why does a train headed north and west to the Coleman Cutoff suddenly become a Southbound train? The only thing I can figure is that the Santa Fe considered the Temple-Sweetwater line to be more of an extension of Ft. Worth-Temple than of Houston/Galveston-Temple (even though originally the mainline continued west from Temple to Lampasas and the Ft. Worth line was a branch). If anybody knows the actual reason for Temple-Sweetwater trains being Southbound (or if you can make up a better one smile.gif), I'd love to hear it.

Now, at first glance, it would appear that there is another strange situation on the P&SF (a timetable "Eastbound" actually headed west). But if you look at the history of the line, it makes perfect sense. In 1907, a branch was opened from Canyon,TX (17 miles west of Amarillo) to Plainview. Since this branch was served from Amarillo, it makes sense that a train from Plainview to Amarillo would be considered eastbound for the entire trip. This branch was later extended through Lubbock to a connection with the GC&SF at Sweetwater (opened 1911). Instead of changing the direction in the timetable, all trains headed for the west coast from Texas became "Eastbounds" between Sweetwater and Amarillo. When the line from Lubbock to Farwell, TX (about 100 feet east of Texico, NM) was built two years later, once again, the "Eastbound" timetable direction was kept (at some point in the mid- to late-50's, the timetable directions were reversed on this line).

Finally, upon entering the transcontinental main at Texico (and, coincidentally, reaching the rails of AT&SF), the train officially becomes a Westbound... for the final nine miles into Clovis (ok, so it was a westbound once before, but that was on a different railroad).

Of course, this is only part of the interesting story and operations of the California Special. If y'all would like to know more, just let me know. But I'm really hoping that y'all can help me with the Temple-Sweetwater part.

Dwight

Dwightman
April 25th, 2001, 09:47 PM
Here's a map that shows the route of the California Special.

http://home.houston.rr.com/texasboohers/tx-1948.gif


And to give proper credit where it's due:
This map is from the Rand McNally Handy Railroad Atlas - 1948 Edition, reprinted by Kalmbach Publishing Co. in the '80's, scanned by A. J. Kleipass, and modified by me. smile.gif

Dwight

P.S. For those of you that don't know, David Barrow's CM&SF is loosely based on the Brownwood to Lubbock portion of this line.

[ 25 April 2001: Message edited by: Dwightman ]

Maxwell Plant
April 27th, 2001, 08:03 AM
Very cool Map! If you follow the MP line Southeast out of San Antonio to Corpus Christi, this is roughly the route of my old Aransas Odessa & Western Railway, a ATSF and BN owned Railway that I was going to model. The complete AOW Railway ran from El Paso to San Angelo, then over to Brownwood. The CM&SF and the AOW would of shared this part of the route. The AOW would then turn south to Austin and then San Antonio, Corpus Christi and finally Aransas Pass/Port Aransas. Funny, I've been looking for such a map for years. Now that I've decided not to model that area, I find one here.

JCater
April 27th, 2001, 01:45 PM
Although this is a bit more twisted than usual, I have seen this kind of thing before. I am still quite confused by these things, but it was once explained to me that most railroads described train schedules in terms of either east/west bound, or (as in this case) as north/south bound. This made it easier for them to keep track of train schedules over the line, regardless of which way the track actually was oriented. I do not know how true any of this is, but it was told to me by a retired engineer...the only problem with the source is that he had a habit of "embellishing" stories!! Anyway, hope this helps.
John

Dwightman
April 27th, 2001, 04:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maxwell Plant:
If you follow the MP line Southeast out of San Antonio to Corpus Christi...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Brent,

Thought you'd like to know this interesting tidbit. The railroad that built this line was the "Sausage" (San Antonio, Uvalde & Gulf).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JCater:
Although this is a bit more twisted than usual, I have seen this kind of thing before. I am still quite confused by these things, but it was once explained to me that most railroads described train schedules in terms of either east/west bound, or (as in this case) as north/south bound. This made it easier for them to keep track of train schedules over the line, regardless of which way the track actually was oriented. I do not know how true any of this is, but it was told to me by a retired engineer...the only problem with the source is that he had a habit of "embellishing" stories!! Anyway, hope this helps.
John<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

John,

That's exactly right. Your source didn't "embellish" this one. The whole point of Timetable East/West (or North/South) is so everybody knows the general direction of travel. I just don't see how anybody could consider a train going from Temple to Sweetwater to be "generally headed south," especially since there is no historical reason to (at least not one that I can find).

Dwight

wig-wag-trains.com
July 22nd, 2007, 11:21 PM
Directions in some cases had more to due with company management than the compass.

SP described ANY train headed toward San Francisco as being westbound and ANY headed away from the San Francisco headquarters as being eastbound. That included any heading N-S in California.

I think any on ATSF were also referred to as E-W.