Search
You searched for the word(s): userid:326787
[quote user="HarveyK400"] What is disturbing are the proposed orders for Viewliners and baggage cars as I mentioned in a separate thread and the study for a return of the North Coast Hiawatha. If long distance routes are to be considered at all, what priorities and parameters are there? It would seem to me that a more successful and expanded base of regional corridors would need to be developed before long distance services might be added. I have heard the argument that long distance routes
I'm trying to change the title of this thread, I don't know how the software will handle that. I'd bet that 261 will never steam again unless/until it passes from NRM ownership. Given what has happened, I just can't conceive of anyone agreeing to accomplish the work necessary for the federally mandated rebuilding without being able to control the long term future. I wish someone from the NRM would jump into this thread and explain their position. I just can't see the logic that
[quote user="schlimm"] HarveyK400: Do you know why Talgos were ordered for the flat, straight CHI-MIL service? Was nothing else available? [/quote] My answer to that is that Wisconsin is extremely concious of the potential for creating employment in their state by hosting the Talgo assembly shop for all North American orders.
[quote user="htgguy"] Can you provide a link to the story about the Chinese airlines that are suffering from the competetive HSR projects? [/quote] It is in the Trains Newswire for November 13th.
About a year ago someone (perhaps Greyhound) discussed TOFC out of the beef plant at Dakota City NE, which is the Sioux City area. My impression is that it was a eastbound daily train on what is now the CN. It was ordered ended by the ICC.. That plant is still there, producing more than ever; but the product is now boxed beef. It moves to both the east and west coasts by refer trucks. Would that not be an attractive market for the railroads? Obviously, something is restraining them. Is the problem
It is on the Newswire today that the Museum has made a final (take it or leave it) offer with a short time frame for response.
A quote from the article above: " Under the proposal, the U.S. Department of Transportation would do for transit what it does for airlines and Amtrak: set and enforce federal regulations to ensure that millions of passengers get to their destinations safely." Perhaps having Transportation oversee these subway and light rail systems would increase the chances of passengers getting somewhere safely, but they can not ensure it. Remember Chatsworth.
$3 mil to overhaul each locomotive? I'm having a very hard time with that number. After all, that is in the same price range as a brand new freight locomotive. While I can appreciate different features are needed for passenger service, the comparison remains valid in my mind. Also, if an overhaul is avoided, are there any savings other than the parts not replaced? Specifically, does it cause a decrease in service facilites or personnel? I have my doubts. Finally, this is New Jersey, which has
A couple of years ago those locomotives were on (what I thought of as) the unrestored deadline at the National Railroad Museum at Green Bay. I suppose it is a good thing that they are going somewhere thnat they will get some TLC.
As a gesture in furtherance of the public good, Murphy and I volunteer personally to pay the bill to electrify all the routes routinely used by Amtrak in South Dakota.