Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Jay: I do not know if much has changed from when you were in the rate-making side of the business. If there are more sophisticated costing formulas, no one has shown them to me. The questions you pose are ones I wish I could answer! While much has been improved in track structure, the key in this case is the rail itself. The head-hardened rail now being used is much more sophisticated than what was available three decades ago. Also, railroads have moved up another increment in rail weight. As you probably recall, in the 1970s the standard heavy rail section was 136 lb. (or 132 lb. on some roads such as UP). Now, it's 144 lb. I think the extra weight is all in the head. We have an article on rail underway, from which I hope to learn a lot. As for concrete vs. wood, in general terms, unless damaged by dragging equipment, a derailment, or improper installation, the concrete tie should last virtually forever, or so I am told. The purchase price between wood and concrete favors wood -- even assuming you're buying oak ties out of Arkansas or Oklahoma -- but the installation cost for concrete is much higher, as is the cost to get them to the site because they are so much heavier. Moreover, it's and all-or-nothing proposition. You can't mix the two, and the concrete tie takes a different ballast section, so you have to replace the ballast at the same time. Concrete ties give a much stiffer track, which saves on fuel (the track depresses less under load, which means the locomotives are not always climbing out of a hole). Concrete also gives better gauge holding on curves.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag