Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
AMtrak Moving the Southwest Chief Rroute through Texas
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p>[quote user="greyhounds"]</p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <div><img src="/TRCCS/Themes/trc/images/icon-quote.gif" /> <strong>DwightBranch:</strong></div> <div> <p> </p> <p> </p> <blockquote>No, just a very clear memory and a subscription to Trains through the nineties. I recall very clearly two articles, in one it was mentioned that at the time CSX was removing their St. Louis line UP was routing a new double stack train and contacted CSX about using their St Louis line, which was still on the system map but was being torn up even as UP was talking to them (<a href="http://www.wvrail.railfan.net/bridgeportsub.html">here is a mention of the UP trains that I first heard in Trains</a>). Another was in the context of the Conrail split-up, that the main reason that CSX was interested in Conrail was because they need ed to replace the St. Louis line, the latter was a Don Phillips article as I recall. None of the articles from the nineties are available online so I cannot link to them, and my back issues from that time period are back in my parent's house.</blockquote> <p> </p> <div style="clear:both;"></div> <p> </p> </div> </blockquote> <p> </p> <p>Well, your "clear memory" needs an upgrade. You can easily do this by reading a book. Try it. You can learn a lot from books.</p> <p>Try reading "The Men Who Loved Trains" by Rush Loving Jr. He details the CSX/NS bidding war for Conrail. It had nothing to do with St. Louis. (You just made that one up, didn't you.) CSX and NS both wanted Conrail. They wanted it because it would give them access to northeast markets. They both already went to St. Louis.</p> <p>They had negotiated over a joint purchase of Conrail but it came to naught when Conrail told both it wanted to remain independent. Latter, Conrail and CSX reached a merger agreement that was approved by both boards of directors and signed. NS realized that this would marginalize them to a great extent. They didn't want to be marginalized. So a good old fashioned bidding war for a railroad materialized. It was great. This winners in the war were: 1) folks who owned Conrail stock (they paid off mortgages, took dream vacations, put children through college, all kinds of good stuff) and, 2) the American people who got a better integrated, more competitive rail system. Again, service to St. Louis wasn't a significant consideration.</p> <p>It wouldn't pay to keep a rail line in place for one stack train a day. And please don't cite railfan websites as an authoritative source. (I'm a railfan and I like to speculate as much as any of us. But railfan speculation isn't worth spit.)</p> <p>One thing you and that yoho guy need to realize is that there are always limited resources. If the money is spent retaining an unneeded rail line, it can't be spent maintaining or upgrading a needed rail line. I worked on abandonment analysis at the ICG. When it's time to get rid of a line, the company needs to do it. Otherwise the enterprise will sink in to a hole and not be able to serve its customers and earn its living.</p> <p>One other thing you two need to realize is that even the government doesn't have unlimited resources. For every $1.00 put in, you have to get at least $1.01 out. Countries can go broke, just like railroads. If either a railroad company or a government wastes money retaining unneeded rail lines, they're bringing themselves closer to going broke.</p> <p>Every rail line that has been taken up has gone through some type of analysis. Sometimes this analysis is as sofisticated as possible, sometimes it's less. But somebody with information that you don't have made the decision. For you to label the people who made the decision as "Idiots" without knowing the particulars is nothing but arrogance on your own part. [/quote]</p> <p>I too read "The Men Who Loved Trains". It is a great read. Although it has been approximately six months since I finished it, my recollections square with yours. Loving did a great job in gather and presenting his historical facts.</p>
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
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy