As the wheel turns, part 1

This post will end up with a hard-to-answer question. Eventually, I plan to write a string of posts about railroading in the 21st century, and what kinds of roles people fascinated by railroading might play in its dynamic and unpredictable future. Getting from here to there may be a bit of a wild ride. I hope you will hear me out. 

It may take a while to convince you, and the railroad industry, that Sunday's tragic Metro North derailment in the Bronx, along with the ghastly derailment and fire in Quebec; the recent tank car leakage in Willard, Ohio; Norfolk Southern's 21st Century Steam Program; and the continuing harassment of railroad photographers are all part of a fundamental realignment of the railroad industry and the public — or at least, that segment of the public that has some personal interest in railroading. There are a lot of dots to connect. But I see at least the outline of a picture.

I believe that positive good can come from reopening the kind of high-level conversation between railroading and railroad interest communities that hasn't existed for at least three decades. The railroad industry again seems willing to grasp that it exists in the messy, fraught, risky "real world" of public opinion, public engagement, uncontrolled incident, and public perception. 

It isn't always fair, but it is always harsh, and real. So far, the industry's attempts at a “rebranding” effort have been unimaginative. Repeating the fact that a gallon of fuel can move a ton of freight 400 miles by rail is a bit lame, even to public radio audiences. It is like asserting that a gallon of water weighs 8.3 gallons. And what is point? My strong sense is that soot-belching, honest, muscular steam locomotives (the politically correct be damned) are vastly more effective at capturing the imagination of the American public — and reformatting “The Railroad” as an authentic American presence and marketing platform.

The competing narratives are railroad incidents that involve derailments, explosions, releases of toxic chemicals, and the loss of life. These are always to be deeply regretted. I never suggest that they are anything less than catastrophes for the people involved, and a reminder that we exist in an astonishingly complex world of speed, technology, and risk. 

Today's railroading is safe, carefully managed, tightly regulated regarding operating practices and technology, and a bedrock system that the nation depends upon in ways it no longer fully comprehends. 

But relatively few people understand that. Risks we regard as perfectly routine, handling incredibly powerful substances, harnessing lethal electricity, tearing about freely at 70 mph in glorified tin cans, and traveling six miles above the earth at 600 mph, would have frozen even progressive Americans of a mere century ago in mortal terror. 

And that is part of the problem. It isn't simply that the public may be forming a negative view of railroading (freight, transit, and Amtrak, to the public, all are the same). It is that the public no longer has any functional context by which to assess the railroading they see in the news cycle. On the Thanksgiving weekend of the Metro North derailment, more than 300 people lost their lives in car crashes, most due to alcohol, distracted driving, or other preventable causes. But we regard those deaths as a simply cost of universal mobility by automobile. The train wreck was a sensational tragedy.

The immediate risk to railroading of the Metro North wreck is that Congress (that astute, wise deliberative body that represents all Americans, and places the best long-term interests of the country above any personal or partisan concern) will find it convenient to lean harder on Positive Train Control as the solution to a problem they have not taken the time or effort to really understand. 

In this case, as in the Chatsworth head-on collision in California in 2008, PTC may have averted the wreck. But politicians have no time to understand how railroads actually work, or the fact that PTC may be appropriate for Metro North, but not, at the moment, for much of the American railroad network. In today's utterly dysfunctional Washington climate, the risk is that a prominent accident such as the Metro North derailment will become a useful diversion, rather than an object lesson.  

Contemporary railroading is beginning to acquire something of an image problem. It may not be fair, and it may hinge on events taken out of context. But in the sensationalistic, shallow, partisan media world we live in, perceptions matter more than reasoned consideration and balanced judgment.

“Railroad Interest” folks might be able to help. They range from contemporary railroad photographers and digital simulators to historians, modelers, heritage railroad operators, and traditional railfans working for Class I carriers. We may only comprise a million or two individuals. But we represent a deeply engrained American tradition embracing railroading as part of out culture.

We comprise a substantial, widely dispersed, vocal, informed grassroots community potentially able to have a voice in a national conversation. Is railroading safe, efficient, and an important solution to problems ranging from urban mobility to energy independence? Absolutely.

Is the industry in danger of more knee-jerk regulation, demonization, and unreasonable meddling on the part of elected officials responding to their own logic and imperatives? Absolutely.

Could the big railroads think a little more clearly and creatively about how they are perceived, and be a little more reasonable, smart, and broad-minded? Perhaps. but they are, after all, big corporations.

Has the railroad industry understood that it has a million-or-so passionate advocates from all walks of life who are predisposed (for whatever reason) to express support in a variety of ways? Not since about 1980.

Are the Railroad Interest communities prepared to coordinate their efforts and think broadly and creatively about how to approach the railroad industry with the foundation for a new relationship? Is there a real opportunity to create a new understanding for cooperation between the railroad industry and the railroad interest communities?

Certainly. It seems like a good idea. But it would cost too much, be too difficult, no one wants to spend the time, the risk is too high, etc. etc. And who wants to be the first one to go? 

I've been poking at this idea for a decade or so, and the general response has been about the same as that to flatulence in church. Folks just sort of look the other way, and hope they are not the ones who have to deal with it.

At the moment, I don't know what our support of the railroad industry might look like, how it might be deployed, or what it might immediately accomplish. Should the National Railway Historical Society take the lead? Could it be a coalition? Could the railroad interest communities even agree to create a delegation to meet with the Association of American Railroads, Federal Railroad Administration, the American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association, and other industry leaders? We don't have a great deal of experience with cooperation or joint efforts.

Here are the immediate questions: What could railroad heritage and general enthusiasm for railways do to help the industry? And what could the industry do to foster interest and cooperation, and help create a new generation of committed supporters? 

How can we reengage with the railroad industry? I have a sense of what a “grand bargain” might look like, and of how the Big Wheel might be turning. The next few posts will explore those ideas. I welcome serious suggestions and comments.