Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe I initially didn't give a thorough description of the symposium out of the fear that my relatively limited rail knowledge would preclude me from catching some of the nuisances that make up Mark's position and unintentionally misrepresent Mark's position. But, it was a quality symposium and the forum deserves at least my attempt. So, here are the top 10 things I found most interesting at the symposium: (1) The Rock Island's old Memphis line (Sorry I don't know both ends of the line or the official name of the line) is still intact but getting it to the point it could run trains over it would be very difficult. However, BNSF REALLY wishes it had bought and maintained that line when it had the opportunity and they would not have to sink so much money into it. I found this particularly interesting, because SF bought the TPW in the 80s when they had a chance to get the Rock Island's Memphis line. I wish I had enough money (or confident investors) to start a short line over the old Rock Island Memphis line. It sounds as though BNSF would be interested in buying it if you were able to bring it to a certain point of development. (2) Mark's slides were nothing short of outstanding. They focused primarily on the Rio Grande (which I have always found a very photogenic railway). The night picture of a UP train going over the Salt Lake at night (giving the impression that it was rolling on water due to the subsidence of the ballast) was absolutely breathtaking. (3) Mark discussed a lot of things about Rio Grande's branch lines (sorry hard to sum this up). (4) One of the major thesis of Mark's presentation was that we (railroaders and the nation) are sitting on a legacy--if no railroads existed today, we could not afford to just build them. As this legacy ages and eventually has to be replaced there are going to be some major problems. (5) The other half of Mark's major thesis is that we have to determine what we want our rail system to be: a utility or a profit-making venture. As the rail legacy ages and is in need of replacement, this question will become more important, because we can't have both. (6) A lot of short line railroads exist with the idea that they are not trying to maintain the lines. The short line is just going to run trains on the line until the line breaks down, pulling as much money out of it as they can, and then abandon the line for scrap value. (7) The 186,000lbs car is going to cause a great deal of abandonment in the near future. (8) That the average Trains' reader is 70 years old = Gabe's age x 2.421. (9) A lot of the actual interactive discussion centered on high-speed rail. I am going to post something on this soon. (10) Santa Fe's sidings on double track main lines are being redesigned in a really cool way. Gabe [/quote] Gabe- Not taking a shot at you, but here's a little help and perhaps interpretation of your summary. (1) Not familiar with the Memphis line of the CRIP. Where did it begin and end? Who owns the property now? BNSF? (2) Slides sound great. (3) No problem DRGW is an expertise of Mark's judging by some of the past TRAINS magazine articles. (4) An excellent point. The time to roll up our sleeves (and the governments too) is now. Also, customers have to be stopped from their constant downward pressure on rates. This can actually cause abandonments where the traffic levels, if properly priced, could otherwise support rail service. (5) Profit making venture from my standpoint. See #4 above also. (6) This depends a great deal on the short lines involved. It was much more the case in past decades. The FRA and the public no longer puts up with this tactic as well and also, the Class 1s are more picky about who they will sell lines to nowadays with the understanding that if the line is truly let go by the new operator it will no longer contribute traffic to the Class 1. (7) It is 286,000 lbs, not 186,000. Also, there will be abandonments of non-286K capable lines where there is insufficient will on the part of the railroads involved (Class , regional or short line) and the commmunities and shippers to keep the rail service. Also, not every railroad truly needs to be 286K capable. There are a number of lines that don't move those bulk commodities that must have 286K (coal, grain, plastics, etc) There will be abandonments in lines that either require too much funding to upgrade to 286K from their current situation (Patrticularly some of the old grainger lines with 90# rail or less) and inadequate traffic to justify the upgrade. (8) There are quire a few of us here under 70, but the rail fraternity is graying, no doubt about it. (9) Hi speed rail is great, but how can we afford it when we can't even fund Amtrak? (10) Sidings sound interesting. LC
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